Understanding Charlotte Mason's Philosophy of Education

Charlotte Mason’s 20 Principles

Charlotte Mason’s philosophy, forged over decades and crystallized in her six volumes, is no mere method—it’s a way of seeing children, education, and life itself. Throughout her life she sought to answer one central question: How do we best educate children in a way that respects both their personhood and their capacity for growth? These 20 Principles serve as her answer, a guiding framework distilled from years of thought and practice. This page unfolds her vision as she presented it: principle by principle, each a thread in the tapestry of her life’s work. For parents and educators prepared to engage deeply with her ideas, this exploration offers the full measure of her thought—complete and undiminished, a path to raising whole persons. 

Table of Contents

1. Children are born persons.

From birth, each child bears the image of God, uniquely endowed with a distinct personality, mind, and soul. A child is not a half-formed adult or blank page waiting for us to fill; they have their own thoughts and feelings right from the start. We should approach them as individuals with potential for growth, not as projects to mold. This foundation means we owe children the same respect for their personhood that we would give to anyone else, recognizing their innate dignity and capability.

“This is how we find children––with intelligence more acute, logic more keen, observing powers more alert, moral sensibilities more quick, love and faith and hope more abounding; in fact, in all points like as we are, only much more so; but absolutely ignorant of the world and its belongings, of us and our ways, and, above all, of how to control and direct and manifest the infinite possibilities with which they are born.”

How we perceive the child is the critical hinge on which all education turns, setting it on one course or another. Get it wrong, and everything that follows is flawed. As Mason wrote, “Now one of the secrets of power in dealing with our fellow-beings is, to understand that human nature does that which it is expected to do and is that which it is expected to be.”

2. They are not born either good or bad, but with possibilities for good and for evil.

Charlotte Mason challenged the assumption that a child’s nature is fixed, arguing instead that each one carries the potential for both good and evil. This principle is often misunderstood, particularly by those who take a surface-level view of her teachings, leading some to mistakenly believe she rejected the Christian doctrine of Original Sin (the inherent fallen nature of humanity.) In truth, Mason did not deny Original sin; rather, she asserted that each child, despite this nature, has the capacity to grow in character and virtue by God’s grace. Her assertion directly challenged certain prevailing beliefs of her time.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, some segments of society held deterministic views, influenced by emerging theories such as eugenics. These views suggested that moral qualities and criminal tendencies were inherited and immutable. Such beliefs could lead to fatalism about a child’s prospects, suggesting that a child born in adverse circumstances or from certain backgrounds was destined for delinquency with no hope for change.

Charlotte Mason staunchly opposed these deterministic views. She believed that education should not limit children but rather nurture the inherent potential within each child. Her educational methods aimed to cultivate virtue and good character through loving guidance, structured discipline, and exposure to enriching ideas.

3. The principles of authority on the one hand, and of obedience on the other, are natural, necessary and fundamental; but––

Mason makes a crucial distinction: authority is not self-derived but entrusted by God Himself. She asserts that parents and teachers exercise authority as a divine trust, not as a personal right or preference. This means that their role is not to assert power for its own sake but to guide children according to divine law and moral order.

Because authority is given by God, it carries both responsibility and limits. Parents and teachers are not free to govern arbitrarily; they must rule justly, with wisdom and humility, recognizing that they themselves are also under authority. Likewise, obedience is not a mindless submission but a training in righteousness, helping the child to grow into self-governance under God’s law.

Mason warns against two errors—one, a rigid, authoritarian rule that disregards the child’s personhood, and two, a lax approach that abdicates authority altogether. True authority is firm yet gentle, commanding respect without provoking rebellion. Obedience, properly cultivated, is a habit that enables a child to later submit to higher truths—not just to earthly authorities but ultimately to God Himself.

This divine ordering of authority and obedience is fundamental to education because it trains children to live within a moral and spiritual framework that will guide them throughout life. 

(Mason will qualify this authority in the next principle.)

4. These principles are limited by the respect due to the personality of children, which must not be encroached upon whether by the direct use of fear or love, suggestion or influence, or by undue play upon any one natural desire.

While authority and obedience are fundamental, Charlotte Mason warns against any practice that compromises a child’s personhood. This means that a parent or teacher should not manipulate or overpower a child’s will through excessive fear, undue affection, subtle suggestion, or by exploiting natural inclinations like ambition, curiosity, or the desire for approval.

Fear can create outward obedience, but it does not cultivate true moral strength. A child who obeys merely to avoid punishment may lack inner conviction and could become deceitful or rebellious when fear is removed. Likewise, love should not be used to control a child. Mason warns against an emotional dependence where a child obeys only to please a parent or earn affection, rather than because it is right.

Charlotte Mason distinguishes between servile fear—the fear of punishment or external consequences—and the fear of the Lord, which is a reverent awe and deep respect for God. She would never advocate for a fear-based approach to education that intimidates or coerces children, but she does affirm that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Proverbs 9:10).

This kind of fear is not about being terrified of God but about recognizing His authority, goodness, and justice. It shapes a child’s conscience, helping them to understand that obedience is not just about pleasing parents or teachers, but about living rightly before God. True reverence for God fosters a sense of duty, humility, and love rather than anxiety or dread.

Mason warns against manipulating children into obedience through fear of earthly consequences, yet she upholds that a child should learn accountability to God. This means teaching children that their actions matter—not because they might get caught, but because they live before a holy, loving, and sovereign God who calls them to faith in Christ, from which true righteousness flows as a work of His grace.

Suggestion and influence, though often more subtle, can also undermine the child’s integrity. If a teacher or parent constantly hints at what a child should think or do, rather than allowing them to reason and choose, it weakens their ability to make independent moral decisions. Similarly, playing too much upon any single natural desire—such as a child’s ambition, pride, or even their love of praise—distorts their motivations and can lead to unhealthy character development.

True education respects the child as a person, training their will rather than manipulating their responses. The goal is not to produce blind compliance but to cultivate an individual who chooses what is right freely and intelligently.

5. Therefore, we are limited to three educational instruments––the atmosphere of environment, the discipline of habit, and the presentation of living ideas. The P.N.E.U. Motto is: “Education is an atmosphere, a discipline, and a life.”

Rather than relying on rigid systems, Charlotte Mason emphasizes three essential instruments that shape the whole person.

Atmosphere of environment means that children learn from the world around them—the home, the relationships they observe, and the culture in which they are immersed. This does not mean creating a child-centered environment where everything is tailored to them, but rather allowing them to live in a rich and wholesome atmosphere where truth, beauty, and goodness are naturally present.

Discipline of habit recognizes that much of a child’s character is formed by the habits they develop—habits of attention, truthfulness, obedience, and diligence. Rather than relying on constant correction, parents and teachers train children through consistent, thoughtful practice, shaping virtues that will serve them for life.

Presentation of living ideas means that education is not just about critical thinking and memorizing facts but about feeding the mind with ideas that inspire thought and action. This happens through living books, which engage the imagination and invite the child into great thoughts, and through direct contact with nature, art, and real-world experiences.

Together, these three instruments form Mason’s vision of education, summarized in the P.N.E.U. motto: “Education is an atmosphere, a discipline, and a life.”

6. When we say that “education is an atmosphere,” we do not mean that a child should be isolated in what may be called a ‘child-environment’ especially adapted and prepared, but that we should take into account the educational value of his natural home atmosphere, both as regards persons and things, and should let him live freely among his proper conditions. It stultifies a child to bring down his world to the child’s’ level.

Charlotte Mason rejects the idea of an artificial, child-centered environment where everything is simplified and adapted to suit the child. She argues that children should grow up in the natural atmosphere of the home, immersed in the realities of daily life, relationships, work, and ideas.

Mason warns that bringing the world down to a child’s level stultifies them—it hinders their growth by limiting their exposure to the richness and depth of real life. Children should not be surrounded only by “educational” toys, carefully worded lessons, or an environment designed solely to entertain or instruct them. Rather, they should be immersed in an atmosphere where they freely interact with both persons and things as they naturally exist, absorbing truth and wisdom from their surroundings.

This means that instead of artificially simplifying language, thoughts, or experiences, we should let children reach up to great ideas. They should hear the natural conversations of adults, be surrounded by worthy books, real beauty, and the habits of a well-ordered life. The home itself should be a place where knowledge, virtue, and faith are naturally present—not a staged environment designed to “teach” but a living atmosphere where learning happens organically.

Children must also be protected from influences that could harm their moral and intellectual development. She does not advocate for an artificial or overly sheltered upbringing, but she does warn against exposing children to crass, lurid, or debased influences that could dull their sensibilities and weaken their character.

The key distinction is that shielding children from corruption is not the same as bringing the world down to their level. They should encounter the richness and complexity of life, but in a way that strengthens their moral imagination and fosters virtue. Just as we would not feed a child spoiled food, we must guard against feeding their minds and souls on base entertainment, coarse speech, or sensationalized stories that distort truth and beauty. Instead, they should be nourished by noble ideas, worthy literature, and an atmosphere of goodness and sincerity.

7. By “education is a discipline,” we mean the discipline of habits, formed definitely and thoughtfully, whether habits of mind or body. Physiologists tell us of the adaptation of brain structures to habitual lines of thought, i.e., to our habits.

Charlotte Mason emphasizes that character is built through consistent training in both thought and action. Habits shape who we become, and modern science confirms what Mason recognized—the brain adapts to repeated patterns of thought and behavior. Whether it’s attentiveness, truthfulness, obedience, or diligence, the habits we form early lay the tracks for future character and decision-making. Because habits become second nature, a child who is trained in good habits will find virtuous living easier, just as a child left to bad habits will struggle against ingrained tendencies.

Mason sees habit-training as one of a parent’s most solemn responsibilities because it influences not just outward behavior but the heart and will of the child. However, this training should not be mechanical or oppressive but guided by love and consistency, helping the child grow in self-discipline and moral strength.

8. In saying that “education is a life,” the need of intellectual and moral as well as of physical sustenance is implied. The mind feeds on ideas, and therefore children should have a generous curriculum.

Just as the body needs nourishment, so too does the mind and soul, thriving on ideas that inspire and cultivate wisdom. Education is not about stuffing the mind with dry facts but about feeding it with living ideas that inspire thought, shape character, and cultivate wisdom.

She insists that children need intellectual, moral, and physical sustenance. The mind does not live on mere information but on ideas that awaken curiosity, imagination, and love for truth. Because of this, education must be rich and generous, exposing children to a wide curriculum of literature, history, science, poetry, art, and Scripture—not a narrow focus on rote learning or utilitarian skills.

A living education nourishes the whole person. Just as junk food weakens the body, a diet of shallow, disconnected lessons or dry textbooks starves the mind. Instead, children should engage with living books, great thoughts, and real-world experiences that provide the intellectual and moral nourishment they need to grow in knowledge and virtue.

9. We hold that the child’s mind is no mere sac to hold ideas; but is rather, if the figure may be allowed, a spiritual organism, with an appetite for all knowledge. This is its proper diet, with which it is prepared to deal; and which it can digest and assimilate as the body does foodstuffs.

Charlotte Mason rejects the notion that a child’s mind is like an empty vessel, waiting to be filled with pre-packaged facts. Instead, she insists that the mind is a living, active organism, designed to engage with and grow through rich ideas. This means education is not about programming a type of computer or mechanically transferring facts into a child’s mind. Rather, the mind has an innate capacity and desire for knowledge, and it thrives when fed with living ideas—rich, meaningful truths that spark curiosity, imagination, and reflection.

Because the mind is a living, spiritual entity, it cannot be nourished by dry facts alone. It needs a generous, living curriculum full of great books, real-world experiences, and ideas that lead to contemplation and growth. Just as the stomach instinctively knows how to process good food, the mind is prepared to engage with and make sense of worthy knowledge without the need for artificial simplification or spoon-feeding.

10. Such a doctrine as e.g. the Herbartian, that the mind is a receptacle, lays the stress of education (the preparation of knowledge in enticing morsels duly ordered) upon the teacher. Children taught on this principle are in danger of receiving much teaching with little knowledge; and the teacher’s axiom is,’ what a child learns matters less than how he learns it.”

Charlotte Mason critiques Herbartian educational theory, developed by Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776–1841), which treats the child’s mind as a passive receptacle. By Mason’s time, Herbartianism had gained significant influence in educational circles, particularly in teacher training, where it emphasized carefully structured lesson plans, systematic sequencing of knowledge, and the teacher’s role in shaping a child’s thinking through controlled associations. This approach, she warned, leads to much teaching but little real learning, as it prioritizes the mechanics of instruction placing too much focus on the teacher’s role rather than the child’s natural ability to learn.

She argues instead that children are born persons, capable of digesting rich, meaningful ideas on their own. They do not need knowledge to be artificially broken down for them; rather, they need direct access to living books and real knowledge, which they can naturally absorb and connect with through narration and the ongoing dialogue of ideas.

11. But we, believing that the normal child has powers of mind which fit him to deal with all knowledge proper to him, give him a full and generous curriculum; taking care only that all knowledge offered him is vital, that is, that facts are not presented without their informing ideas. Out of this conception comes our principle that,––

Charlotte Mason insists on offering children a broad, rich education, trusting their innate ability to engage with real knowledge. Because of this, she advocates for a full and generous curriculum, exposing them to a wide range of subjects rather than limiting their education to what is deemed ‘age-appropriate’ or merely ‘practical.

A full and generous curriculum means that children should be offered the best in literature, history, science, art, music, mathematics, and foreign languages, rather than a narrow focus on only reading, writing, and arithmetic. It also means rich exposure to nature study, hands-on work like handicrafts, and meaningful discussions on philosophy and theology. Education should not be reduced to merely <strong”>functional skills or preparation for a career; it should cultivate a love for truth, beauty, and goodness, nourishing the child’s mind and spirit for life.

The key distinction she makes is that all knowledge must be vital—connected to living ideas rather than presented as isolated facts. For example, a child studying history should not just memorize dates and names but should engage with narrative history, biographies, and primary sources that bring the past to life. Instead of simply learning that the Magna Carta was signed in 1215, the child might read an engaging historical account of the barons’ struggle against King John, gaining a deeper understanding of the principles of justice and liberty.

This approach allows children to form organic connections between subjects. A lesson on medieval history might lead naturally into an exploration of heraldry, the evolution of government, or even a discussion of biblical principles of justice. A child reading living books about the natural world will not just learn isolated scientific facts but will develop a sense of wonder and relationship with creation, making science a lifelong delight rather than a subject to be tested on and forgotten.

From this foundation arises one of Mason’s core principles: Education is the Science of Relations—the belief that when given a rich intellectual feast, children will naturally form meaningful connections between ideas, subjects, and life itself.

12. “Education is the Science of Relations”; that is, that a child has natural relations with a vast number of things and thoughts: so we train him upon physical exercises, nature lore, handicrafts, science and art, and upon many living books, for we know that our business is not to teach him all about anything, but to help him to make valid as many as may be of––

Charlotte Mason’s Principle 12, that “Education is the Science of Relations,” expresses her belief that a child’s education should not be about memorizing isolated facts but about forming living connections with a broad range of subjects and ideas​.

She argues that children are born with an innate ability and desire to form relationships with knowledge. They naturally have an “appetency,” as she puts it, for history, science, literature, art, and the world around them. Education should not restrict or narrow their opportunities to engage with knowledge but should instead help them establish as many meaningful relationships as possible​.

Mason emphasizes that our role as educators is not to decide which subjects children should learn while excluding others. She strongly opposed an education that limited children’s exposure to certain areas of knowledge based on their perceived abilities or social class. Instead, she believed that all children should be given access to the full breadth of human thought and experience. This means exposing them to great literature, scientific discoveries, historical events, nature, music, and art, allowing them to engage deeply with knowledge rather than merely accumulating information​.

She also cautioned against overly teacher-centered education, where lessons are spoon-fed through lectures or rote memorization. Instead, children should interact directly with living books, real experiences, and original sources. They should be encouraged to think for themselves, make their own connections, and develop relationships with the material they study​.

Ultimately, Mason’s vision of education is one where children leave school not merely with knowledge but with lifelong relationships with ideas, people, and the world. This, she argues, is the true goal of education—to equip children to continue learning, growing, and engaging with life long after their formal schooling ends​.

13. In devising a SYLLABUS for a normal child, of whatever social class, three points must be considered:
(a) He requires much knowledge, for the mind needs sufficient food as much as does the body.
(b) The knowledge should be various, for sameness in mental diet does not create appetite (i.e., curiosity) 
(c) Knowledge should be communicated in well-chosen language, because his attention responds naturally to what is conveyed in literary form.

In principle 13, Charlotte Mason is emphasizing the fundamental principles of what a child’s education should include, regardless of their social class or background. She argues that all children deserve access to a generous and nourishing curriculum, and she gives three essential criteria for designing such a syllabus.

(a) “He requires much knowledge, for the mind needs sufficient food as much as does the body.”
Charlotte Mason believed that the mind, like the body, needs real and substantial nourishment. Just as a child would suffer from physical malnutrition if given too little food, a child’s mind is starved when given only a narrow or limited education. She rejected the idea that only children of privilege should receive a broad education while others should only learn practical skills. Instead, she insisted that all children are capable of handling real knowledge and should receive an abundant intellectual feast.

In Mason’s time, many educational systems provided only a minimal or utilitarian education to working-class children, preparing them mainly for labor, while wealthier children received a broader, more intellectual education. Mason fought against this inequality, arguing that every child, regardless of background, is born with a mind capable of great thought and should be given a rich education that introduces them to history, literature, science, the arts, and nature.

(b) “The knowledge should be various, for sameness in mental diet does not create appetite (i.e., curiosity).”
Just as a monotonous diet weakens physical appetite, a repetitive or narrow curriculum dulls intellectual curiosity. Charlotte Mason insists that education should expose children to many different areas of knowledge, including literature, history, science, mathematics, art, music, and nature study. She believed that a child has natural relationships with a vast number of things and ideas, and education should help foster and strengthen those relationships​.

This principle is central to her idea that education is the science of relations—that children must not only be introduced to a broad array of subjects but should also be encouraged to make their own meaningful connections between them. By allowing children to explore multiple disciplines, they develop a deeper and more personal love for learning that lasts a lifetime​.

(c) “Knowledge should be communicated in well-chosen language, because his attention responds naturally to what is conveyed in literary form.”

Charlotte Mason insists that knowledge should be communicated in well-chosen language because children’s attention responds naturally to what is conveyed in literary form. She believed that children should never be given dry, lifeless textbooks that reduce knowledge to mere facts and summaries. Instead, they should receive living books, written by authors who are passionate about their subjects and who use rich, expressive, and inspiring language.

Mason observed that children have a natural appetite for beautifully expressed ideas. She warned that modern education often fails in this regard, favoring instruction that is dull, overly simplified, or filled with twaddle—books that talk down to children instead of engaging them with real thoughts and great writing​. She emphasized that children can handle worthy thoughts, well put and should never be given watered-down material just because they are young​.

She also stressed that words are powerful, both to inspire and to delight. The way something is said matters as much as what is being said. She noted that great ideas, beautifully expressed, remain in the mind and shape a child’s thoughts long after a lesson is over​.

Mason rejected the idea that education should be a matter of simply conveying information. She argued that true education is about nourishing the mind with ideas, and those ideas must be presented in a way that stirs a child’s imagination and interest. The mind, she said, does not feed on dry facts but on living thought​. This is why narration—where children tell back what they have learned in their own words—is so effective. When a child processes a well-told story or idea, he makes it his own.

Ultimately, she believed that literature, history, science, and all subjects should be presented in a way that respects the child’s intelligence. A well-chosen book or lesson sparks curiosity, sustains attention, and allows knowledge to become personal and meaningful​.

14. As knowledge is not assimilated until it is reproduced, children should ‘tell back’ after a single reading or hearing: or should write on some part of what they have read.

Charlotte Mason’s assertion is grounded in her belief that true learning occurs when a child processes knowledge and makes it their own. This happens not through mindless parroting, but through active reproduction—what she called narration.

Narration is not merely a technique but an essential cognitive process. When a child reads (or hears) something and then narrates it back in their own words, they:

  • Engage with the text personally – The child must actively listen or read with focus, knowing they will need to recall and retell the material.
  • Organize their thoughts – In restating ideas, they make connections, structure information, and develop clarity in expression.
  • Develop attention and retention – Because there is no rereading or prompting, the child naturally cultivates a habit of concentrated focus over time with consistency.
  • Synthesize – Rather than memorizing isolated facts, they process meaning, sequence, and relationships between ideas and existing knowledge.
Charlotte Mason insisted on a single reading before narration—not to make things difficult, but to honor the mind’s natural capacity. When we trust children with living ideas, their minds can fully grasp and hold them. Multiple readings, fill-in-the-blanks, or leading questions disrupt this process, implying the child needs help rather than trusting their natural comprehension.
 

Critics of narration may say it only works with literature since some knowledge is fixed—2+2 is always 4, Paris is the capital of France. Yet these truths should not be reduced to rote memorization. Instead of memorizing rules, the child should first meet these truths as ideas—vibrant and meaningful—then build mastery through practice.

Narration isn’t confined to books—it works for nature walks, picture study, music appreciation, Bible readings, anywhere ideas come alive. By narrating, children don’t just repeat; they dig into those ideas, giving them life and shape in their own words. It’s not a test but a chance to think. Over time, retelling what they’ve grasped builds depth, comprehension, and clear expression.
 

Charlotte Mason’s emphasis on narration is more relevant than ever in an age of fragmented attention. In place of passive consumption, narration restores active engagement with knowledge. It respects the child’s mind as capable, fosters independence in learning, and equips them with the ability to think, remember, and communicate effectively. With narration we do not merely teach them what to think, but how to think—a gift that lasts a lifetime.

15. A single reading is insisted on, because children have naturally great power of attention; but this force is dissipated by the re-reading of passages, and also, by questioning, summarising. and the like.

Acting upon these and some other points in the behaviour of mind, we find that the educability of children is enormously greater than has hitherto been supposed, and is but little dependent on such circumstances as heredity and environment.

Nor is the accuracy of this statement limited to clever children or to children of the educated classes: thousands of children in Elementary Schools respond freely to this method, which is based on the behaviour of mind.

Charlotte Mason’s 15th principle rests on her deep trust in the child’s mind, which she saw as created in the image of God, naturally equipped to learn much like the stomach is designed to digest. She insisted on a single reading because she believed children possess a great power of attention that, when fully engaged, enables them to take in and retain what they hear or read with striking clarity. Yet, she observed that this strength falters when scattered by re-reading passages, excessive questioning, summarizing, or similar practices, which interfere with the mind’s natural work rather than support it.

From this faith in the mind’s design, Mason held that children’s educability far exceeds what was typically assumed. She dismissed the notions of her time that learning depends heavily on heredity or class, arguing instead that the mind comes ready to function, regardless of such factors. This wasn’t a theory limited to the gifted or the privileged—she saw it proven in thousands of elementary school children, who responded freely to a method built on the mind’s inherent tendencies. To Charlotte Mason, the child’s ability to learn is not something to be imposed from without, but a living capacity, already present, waiting to be trusted.

16. There are two guides to moral and intellectual self-management to offer to children, which we may call ‘the way of the will’ and ‘the way of the reason.’

Charlotte Mason believed that education isn’t just about filling a child’s mind with facts, but about equipping them to govern themselves—both morally and intellectually. The 16th principle highlights two key faculties she saw as essential for this self-management: the will and the reason. These aren’t abstract concepts, but practical “guides” that children can learn to use to navigate life’s choices and challenges. She saw them as God-given capacities, part of the child’s nature which educators and parents must help cultivate rather than override.

The Way of the Will

  • The “way of the will” refers to a child’s ability to choose and direct their actions deliberately, even against inclinations or distractions. Mason viewed the will as the faculty that governs moral behavior and personal discipline. It’s not about stubbornness or blind force, but about training the child to align their choices with what is right or good. It’s the moral compass, the power to say “I will” or “I will not,” shaping character through intentional decisions.
  • She believed that without a strong, trained will, children (and later adults) would be at the mercy of whims, habits, or external pressures. For example, a child might want to dawdle instead of finishing a task, but the way of the will enables them to choose effort over ease.
  • Charlotte Mason suggested presenting children with opportunities to exercise their will—giving them real choices (within boundaries) and letting them experience the consequences. She often tied this to moral training, like resisting temptation or pursuing duty, and saw it as foundational to character. In Ourselves (Volume 4), her book for children on self-knowledge, she devotes significant space to the will, calling it “that power within us which, we know not how, has the ordering of the rest.”

The Way of the Reason

  • The “way of the reason” is the child’s capacity to think logically, discern truth, and make sense of the world. Mason saw reason as a guide for intellectual self-management, helping children evaluate ideas, avoid fallacies, and form sound judgments. 
  • She was wary of children being swayed by faulty reasoning—whether their own or others’. In an age of opinions and propaganda (even in her time), she wanted them to value reason, but not to trust it alone. She taught that reason often bends to the will, justifying whatever a child (or adult) has already decided. For example, if a child wills to avoid a task, their reason might supply excuses to support that choice. She wanted children to recognize this tendency and not lean on reason as an unchecked authority.
  • Charlotte Mason advocated exposing children to a wide range of ideas through living books and experiences, then letting them wrestle with those ideas without over-explaining. She cautioned against spoon-feeding conclusions, trusting that the mind, when fed good material, naturally reasons. For instance, after narrating a story, a child might ponder why a character acted a certain way—reason at work. She stressed that reason must be trained to serve truth, not just confirm prior inclinations.

Together, these two guides, the will and reason, form a balanced approach to self-governance. Mason meant that children should be guided to manage themselves morally and intellectually by strengthening their will (to choose rightly) and their reason (to think rightly). These aren’t imposed from outside, but developed from within, reflecting her belief in the child’s divine endowment.

17. The way of the will: Children should be taught,
(a) to distinguish between ‘I want’ and ‘I will.’
(b) That the way to will effectively is to turn our thoughts from that which we desire but do not will.
(c) That the best way to turn our thoughts is to think of or do some quite different thing, entertaining or interesting.
(d) That after a little rest in this way, the will returns to its work with new vigour.
(This adjunct of the will is familiar to us as diversion, whose office it is to ease us for a time from will effort, that we may ‘will’ again with added power. The use of suggestion as an aid to the will is to be deprecated, as tending to stultify and stereotype character, It would seem that spontaneity is a condition of development, and that human nature needs the discipline of failure as well as of success.)

Charlotte Mason’s 17th principle expands on her concept of “the way of the will” from the 16th principle. Here, she provides a practical framework for teaching children to strengthen and manage their will. She believed the will isn’t just about brute determination—it’s a skill that can be trained through understanding, strategy, and practice. Each subpoint offers a step in that process, while her closing remarks warn against shortcuts that undermine genuine growth.

(a) To distinguish between ‘I want’ and ‘I will.’
Mason draws a line between desire (“I want”) and intention (“I will”). “I want” is a passive feeling—something a child might crave, like playing instead of working. “I will” is an active choice—deciding to act, like finishing a lesson despite the pull of play. She saw this distinction as foundational to self-control.

Children often confuse fleeting wants with purposeful decisions. Teaching them to separate the two helps them recognize that not every desire should govern their actions.

(b) That the way to will effectively is to turn our thoughts from that which we desire but do not will.
When a child wants something they shouldn’t pursue (e.g., avoiding work), Mason says the key to willing rightly is to shift focus away from that desire. The will grows stronger not by wrestling with temptation head-on, but by redirecting attention.

Obsessing over a forbidden or unwise want weakens resolve. By turning thoughts elsewhere, the will regains control. This reflects her view that the mind is active, not passive—its direction shapes behavior.

(c) That the best way to turn our thoughts is to think of or do some quite different thing, entertaining or interesting.
Mason suggests a specific tactic: replace the unwanted thought with something engaging—reading a book, observing nature, or tackling a fun task. It’s not just distraction; it’s redirection to something worthwhile.

(d) That after a little rest in this way, the will returns to its work with new vigour.
After stepping away via diversion, the will rebounds stronger. Mason saw this as a natural rhythm: effort, rest, renewed effort. She likens it to a muscle that benefits from a break. She recognized that willpower isn’t infinite—it fatigues. A short, intentional shift (not mindless avoidance) restores it, enabling the child to “will” again effectively.

She warns against using ‘suggestion’ (e.g., playing on fear or love) to prop up the will. Why? It overrides the child’s agency, fostering a rigid, dependent character rather than one that’s resilient and self-directed. She valued struggle—including failure—as part of growth, echoing her belief in the child as a person with inherent capacity.
 

The subpoints (a-d) form a cycle:
     a) Recognize the difference between want and will.
     b) Shift focus from unhelpful desires.
     c) Engage in something positive to aid that shift.
     d) Return stronger to the task at hand.

18. The way of reason: We teach children, too, not to ‘lean (too confidently) to their own understanding’; because the function of reason is to give logical demonstration
(a) of mathematical truth,
(b) of an initial idea, accepted by the will. In the former case, reason is, practically, an infallible guide, but in the latter, it is not always a safe one; for, whether that idea be right or wrong, reason will confirm it by irrefragable proofs.

This principle builds on the 16th and 17th, rounding out Charlotte Mason’s view of self-management by addressing reason’s role—and its limits. It reflects her conviction that reason, though a vital faculty, carries inherent limits. She invokes Proverbs 3:5—“Lean not unto thine own understanding”—to underscore the need for humility in a child’s intellectual growth.

She delineates two roles: first, of mathematical truths, and second, of initial ideas accepted by the will. In mathematics, reason acts as a nearly infallible guide, offering clear and reliable outcomes. Yet, when applied to ideas chosen by the will, it proves less dependable. Mason warns that, whether the idea is right or wrong, reason will bolster it with arguments that seem unassailable.

This forms her key insight for parents: if a child’s will adopts an erroneous notion, reason will craft a compelling defense. She cites Shakespeare’s Macbeth as an example, noting how Macbeth, having willed to pursue ambition through murder, finds his reason supplying “irrefragable proofs” to justify the act—proofs that hold logically within his mind, yet lead him astray from moral truth.

Charlotte Mason aims to cultivate in children a discerning use of reason. She esteems its accuracy in objective fields, such as arithmetic or scientific study, which anchor her educational approach. Yet, she emphasizes that in matters of personal conviction or moral choice, reason demands caution. It serves the will rather than governs it, requiring alignment with a well-formed conscience or higher principles.

Parents might see this principle at work in daily scenarios. When a child correctly solves a math problem, reason’s dependability is evident. However, if a child’s will settles on a flawed idea—perhaps “retaliation is justified”—reason might build a case, such as “they wronged me first.” Mason would urge parents to guide the child to examine the initial choice, not merely the logic that follows. Her method, rich with literature fosters reasoning skills while teaching children to question their conclusions.

Charlotte Mason’s view portrays children as whole persons, endowed with reason as a tool rather than an ultimate authority. Rooted in her Christian perspective, she subordinates human understanding to divine wisdom, preparing children to reason soundly while avoiding the trap of self-justification.

19. Therefore, children should be taught, as they become mature enough to understand such teaching, that the chief responsibility which rests on them as persons is the acceptance or rejection of ideas. To help them in this choice we give them principles of conduct, and a wide range of the knowledge fitted to them. These principles should save children from some of the loose thinking and heedless action which cause most of us to live at a lower level than we need.

Charlotte Mason believed that one of the most vital lessons children must learn is how to govern their own thinking. She recognized that ideas are powerful—they shape character, influence actions, and ultimately direct a person’s life. Therefore, she taught that children must be trained to carefully assess ideas and discern the ideas they accept or reject.

To aid in this, Mason emphasized two key supports: principles of conduct and a broad and rich education.

  • Principles of conduct—such as truthfulness, kindness, diligence, and reverence—serve as a moral compass, helping children evaluate ideas based on their goodness, truth, and impact.
  • A wide-range of the knowledge fitted to them, filled with living books, history, science, literature, and the arts, provides the knowledge necessary for discernment.

Through these, children meet ideas and learn to weigh them against enduring standards. With these tools, children develop in wisdom and the ability to assess ideas carefully, and make discerning choices rather than being led by impulse, societal trends, or faulty reasoning.

Charlotte Mason warned against loose thinking and heedless action, which can arise when people do not carefully examine the ideas that influence them. Without training in discernment, many tend to drift through life, unreflective and easily swayed by passing influences. Teaching children to examine ideas with care helps them live with purpose, wisdom, and integrity.

20. We allow no separation to grow up between the intellectual and ‘spiritual’ life of children, but teach them that the Divine Spirit has constant access to their spirits, and is their Continual Helper in all the interests, duties and joys of life.

Charlotte Mason’s 20th principle focuses on the spiritual nature of children and their education. She taught that children are born persons, created in the image of God, and that education must nurture their whole being—mind, body, and spirit. However, she rejected the modern tendency to divide education into “secular” and “religious” realms. Instead, she saw all knowledge as divinely inspired, with the Holy Spirit acting as the supreme Educator of mankind​.

Central to her philosophy is what she called the “Great Recognition”—that God, through the Holy Spirit, is the ultimate source of all knowledge and the child’s personal teacher, not only in spiritual matters but in every subject and area of life. Education, then, is not merely the transfer of information but a sacred partnership between God, the child, and the teacher​.

Mason firmly rejected the idea that subjects like science, literature, or history could be detached from a child’s spiritual life teaching that every fruitful idea originates from God. Whether a child studies mathematics, parses a sentence, reads Shakespeare, or observes nature, the Holy Spirit is always present—ordering all things by His sovereign fatherly hand down to leaf and blade. 

She taught that children should be aware of and responsive to the Holy Spirit’s guidance in their daily lives. This does not mean that education is simply about moral instruction or religious lessons, but rather that children must come to understand that God is intimately involved in their learning. Education, therefore, is not solely the work of teachers and parents. Instead, it is an act of divine cooperation, in which the Holy Spirit is the unseen yet ever-present guide of both student and teacher​.

This partnership ties into Mason’s larger educational philosophy, particularly her belief that “education is the science of relations.” She argued that children must be given the opportunity to form meaningful connections—with ideas, knowledge, the universe, man, and, most importantly, God​. Unlike modern systems focused on standardized testing and rote memorization, Mason’s view of education was deeply personal. She believed that the goal of learning was not merely to fill a child’s mind with facts but to cultivate a life rich in relationships, intellectual curiosity, and spiritual depth​.

Ultimately, Mason’s philosophy offers a profoundly spiritual vision of education—one in which children are not left to navigate life alone. Instead, they are guided at every step by the presence of God Himself, who instructs their minds, nurtures their spirits, and draws them ever closer to truth​.

Together, these twenty principles form the backbone of Charlotte Mason’s philosophy of education

🔝 Back to Top

A Few Salient Points

In addition to her 20 Principles, Charlotte Mason outlines key practices that distinguish her approach, honed over 30 years of successful work with thousands of children through the Parents’ National Educational Union (P.N.E.U.). These “salient points” highlight how her philosophy plays out, emphasizing the child’s responsibility, the power of living books, and a rejection of conventional motivators. While distinct from her foundational 20 principles, they reveal what she cared enough to single out as significant.

(a) Children, not teachers, are the ones primarily responsible for learning.

In Charlotte Mason’s classrooms, the students carried the responsibility to pay attention, to think, and to perform the “act of knowing” by their own effort. Education isn’t something done to a child—it’s something they do.

This doesn’t mean the teacher abandons them—rather, it means the child is an active agent in their education. It’s a guided self-education, where adults set the table with “mind-stuff”—quality books, nature, art—but the child must learn by their own effort, synthesizing through narration, reflection, or application.

One thing at any rate we know with certainty, that no teaching, no information becomes knowledge to any of us until the individual mind has acted upon it, translated it, transformed, absorbed it, to reappear, like our bodily food, in forms of vitality. Therefore, teaching, talk and tale, however lucid or fascinating, effect nothing until self-activity be set up; that is, self-education is the only possible education; the rest is mere veneer laid on the surface of a child’s nature.

~Towards a Philosophy of Education (Vol.6) p.240

(b) The teachers give sympathy and occasionally elucidate, sum up or enlarge, but the actual work is done by the scholars.

This means the teacher does not intrude upon the child’s intellectual labor. Instead, they act as a steady, sympathetic presence—offering encouragement, acknowledging effort, and ensuring the child feels their work is valued.

At times, the teacher will clarify, connect, or expand—defining a complex idea, summarizing a difficult passage, or tracing broader connections. Yet, Mason warned against over-explanation, as it weakens the mind’s natural engagement. True learning happens when children wrestle with ideas themselves, not when they are over-fed information.

Mason’s principle rests on a key truth: education is an act of self-effort. Teachers do not serve up answers, nor do they bear the weight of a child’s understanding. Instead, they set the feast of ideas, trusting that the child’s own mind will take and digest what it needs. As Charlotte Mason declared, “There is no education but self-education” (Vol. 6, p. 289).

Thus, the teacher’s greatest task is restraint—to guide without overshadowing, to offer just enough support while ensuring the child remains the true laborer in their education.

(c) These read in a term one, or two, or three thousand pages, according to their age, school and Form, in a large number of set books. The quantity set for each lesson allows of only a single reading; but the reading is tested by narration, or by writing on a test passage. When the terminal examination is at hand so much ground has been covered that revision is out of the question; what the children have read they know, and write on any part of it with ease and fluency, in vigorous English; they usually spell well.

Charlotte Mason is describing a distinctive and rigorous approach to learning that emphasizes wide reading, single exposures, narration, and deep retention—a method that contrasts with traditional rote learning and revision-heavy education.

1. Students Read a Large Volume of Books Across Subjects
Mason’s students read between 1,000 and 3,000 pages per term from a wide selection of books across many subjects. Instead of relying on a single textbook, they engaged with rich, living books that provided depth and variety.

2. Each Lesson Allows for Only One Reading
Students were expected to pay full attention because they were only given one opportunity to engage with the text before narrating or writing about it. There was no re-reading or cramming.

3. Understanding Is Tested by Narration or Writing, Not Drills or Memorization
After reading, students narrated (retold in their own words) or wrote about a passage, demonstrating true comprehension rather than regurgitating memorized facts.

4. By Term’s End, Students Retain What They’ve Read Without Revision
Because of deep engagement and narration, students remembered their lessons months later and could write fluently on any topic they had studied—without last-minute review sessions.

5. This Is Not “Mere Book Learning”
Mason defends her method against critics who dismiss book-based education as passive or superficial. She argues that no other system has ensured students retain so much knowledge from a single reading, proving that books—when used rightly—can shape deeply informed, articulate thinkers.

(d) There is no selection of studies, or of passages or of episodes, on the ground of interest. The best available book is chosen and is read through perhaps in the course of two or three years.

Charlotte Mason is making a strong statement about the integrity of a child’s education—it should be broad, whole, and substantial, not fragmented or watered down to cater to passing interests.

1. No “Cherry-Picking” Based on What Seems Interesting
She rejects the idea of selecting only the most exciting parts of a subject or book to capture a child’s attention. Instead, students should encounter the full richness of knowledge, not just highlights that appeal at the moment.

2. Whole, High-Quality Books Over Time
Rather than using textbooks with summaries or skipping around from excerpt to excerpt, Mason insists on choosing the best complete books and reading them slowly and thoughtfully over years.

3. Education Is About Feeding the Mind, Not Just Amusement
She challenges the idea that children need to be entertained to stay engaged. Instead, she trusts that if given the best books, their natural curiosity and capacity for serious thought will emerge.

True learning isn’t about catering to fleeting interests—it’s about exposing children to great ideas and trusting that they will develop a love for knowledge.

(e) The children study many books on many subjects, but exhibit no confusion of thought, and ‘howlers’ are almost unknown.

Charlotte Mason is emphasizing the clarity of thought and depth of understanding that result from her method of education, even though children are exposed to a broad curriculum with many books and subjects. Her students read many books across many disciplines, from history and literature to science and poetry. Despite this, they do not become confused or overwhelmed.

The mind, like the body, is designed to take in nourishment—when fed with high-quality ideas, it naturally organizes knowledge without strain. Just as people can follow multiple TV shows or storylines without confusion, children can handle many books when the material is meaningful and well-structured. Because of narration, attention, and real engagement, children process and retain what they read in an orderly way. They don’t mix up facts or struggle to make sense of subjects.

By ‘howlers,’ Mason means glaring factual errors or absurd mistakes that often occur in poorly understood learning. In traditional schools, students who cram disconnected facts often produce hilarious but incorrect answers—for example, saying that Napoleon was a Roman emperor.

(f) They find that, in Bacon’s phrase, “Studies serve for delight”; this delight being not in the lessons or the personality of the teacher, but purely in their ‘lovely books,’ ‘glorious books.’

Charlotte Mason is pointing out that the joy of learning comes from the books themselves, not from entertaining lessons or a charismatic teacher. She is referencing Francis Bacon’s idea that studies should bring delight, but she clarifies that in her method, this delight is not because:

  • Lessons are made artificially fun (no gimmicks, games, or unnecessary dramatization).
  • The teacher is entertaining (children are not drawn in by a dynamic or overly engaging teacher).

Instead, the delight comes purely from the living books—books that are well-written, rich in ideas, and capable of sparking curiosity and wonder.

Books Themselves Are Enough – Children don’t need constant stimulation; if given high-quality material, they will naturally find joy in learning.

Authentic Engagement Over Artificial Excitement – The goal is not to make education “fun” through tricks but to let children form their own relationship with knowledge.

A Love of Learning That Lasts – When a child learns to love books, that love continues for life—unlike lessons that depend on an engaging teacher.

Charlotte Mason’s method contrasts with today’s education trends, where learning is often made “fun” through cartoons, games, and rewards. She argues that when children are given great books, they will love learning for its own sake, without needing entertainment.

(g) The books used are, whenever possible, literary in style.

In this principle, Charlotte Mason is emphasizing the of using well-written, engaging, and thoughtfully composed books in education.

She strongly opposed what she called “twaddle“—books that talk down to children, oversimplify ideas, or reduce knowledge to mere lists and summaries. Instead, she insisted that lesson books should be written with literary power, meaning they should be rich in language, beautifully crafted, and capable of igniting a child’s imagination and interest.

Mason believed that when children are raised on excellent books, they develop a lifelong love of reading and learning, and they will naturally reject poor-quality literature as they grow. This principle extends beyond fiction to all subjects—history, science, geography—where the best books should be chosen based on their literary merit rather than being mere collections of dry facts.

Children deserve the best books, not simplified, watered-down “pablum.” Give them worthy, well-written books, and they will thrive.

(h) Marks, prizes, places, rewards, punishments, praise, blame, or other inducements are not necessary to secure attention, which is voluntary, immediate and surprisingly perfect.

Charlotte Mason is making a profound point about the nature of attention and motivation in learning. She asserts that external motivators—marks, prizes, punishments, or even praise—are unnecessary because attention, when cultivated properly, is voluntary, immediate, and surprisingly perfect.

She believed that children naturally have an appetite for knowledge, and when their education is properly structured—with short lessons, engaging material, and meaningful work—they will give their full attention without needing artificial incentives.

when children are taught to learn for the sake of marks, prizes, or competition, they begin to focus on external rewards rather than on the intrinsic joy of learning. Over time, they lose their natural curiosity because their motivation becomes tied to external validation rather than the subject itself.

Instead of manipulating behavior through rewards and punishments, Mason advocates for developing the habit of attention—teaching children to focus deeply and find satisfaction in the work itself.

For Mason, the secret of securing attention is not in making lessons artificially entertaining or in applying pressure but in trusting that children will respond to ideas that are truly worth their time. She calls on teachers and parents to resist coercion and bribery and instead cultivate a learning environment where children engage voluntarily, out of genuine interest and intellectual appetite.

(i) The success of the scholars in what may be called disciplinary subjects, such as Mathematics and Grammar, depends largely on the power of the teacher, though the pupils’ habit of attention is of use in these too.

At first glance, this might seem discouraging to a parent who struggles with math or grammar. Does Charlotte Mason mean that only a skilled teacher can ensure success in these subjects? Not quite. While she acknowledges that some subjects—particularly those requiring structure and precision—depend more on the teacher’s ability than others, she does not suggest that an unsure parent is incapable of teaching them.

Mathematics and grammar differ from idea-based subjects like literature and history. Most children cannot simply narrate a math lesson and come to understanding. These subjects require logical progression, clear explanations, and precision. Mason states that a teacher who excels in presenting them well can make abstract concepts more tangible, guiding the child through structured reasoning.

That said, Mason never believed a parent must be a subject-matter expert to provide a solid education.

She reassures parents that what matters most is the method, not the parent’s own knowledge:

Method implies two things—a way to an end, and step-by-step progress in that way… The parent who sees his way—that is, the exact force of method—to educate his child, will make use of every circumstance of the child’s life almost without intention on his own part, so easy and spontaneous is a method of education based upon Natural Law.

~Home Education, p. 8​

This means that even if a parent struggles with math or grammar, they can still teach effectively by using the right methods and resources. 

Mason’s P.N.E.U. schools allowed for correspondence lessons, where students submitted work to outside tutors. Similarly, today’s homeschoolers can use online courses, co-op classes, or private tutors to supplement areas where a parent feels unprepared.

Charlotte Mason never suggested that a child’s education is limited by a parent’s weaknesses. Instead, she would likely say: Success depends on the teacher’s power, but that power comes from method and resources, not personal mastery. A parent who provides a structured path, good books, and patient guidance can still lead their child to success—even in subjects they themselves once found difficult.

(j) No stray lessons are given on interesting subjects; the knowledge the children get is consecutive.

Charlotte Mason’s point here emphasizes order and continuity in education rather than fragmented or disjointed learning. She believed that lessons should be structured to build upon one another, forming a connected and cohesive body of knowledge. This means that:

  • Subjects should be taught in a sequential, logical order rather than as isolated topics chosen just because they seem interesting at the moment.
  • Knowledge should be cumulative—each lesson should reinforce and expand upon what came before, allowing the child to make natural connections.
  • Education should not be based on novelty—jumping from one exciting topic to another without depth leads to superficial knowledge rather than real understanding.

Does This Mean There Are Never Any “Random” Lessons? No, Mason was not advocating for a rigid, overly structured approach where everything must fit into a strict sequence. She left ample room for spontaneity, curiosity, and discovery, recognizing that learning often happens in unexpected ways.

  • Nature Study – She valued the incidental discoveries that happen outdoors, encouraging children to observe and marvel at what they encounter in the natural world.
  • Living Conversations – Her method of narration and the science of relations allows room for exploring interests and connections the child makes, And if they come across something intriguing—a historical event in the news, a bird outside the window, or a thought-provoking idea—Mason would never have discouraged exploring it simply because it wasn’t on the schedule.
  • Connections Across Subjects – She knew that the best learning happens organically, when a child suddenly connects a history lesson to something they read in literature or a math concept to a real-life problem.

Mason’s point is not that every lesson must be perfectly pre-planned, but that education should not be scattered or arbitrary. Lessons should be purposeful and connected, ensuring that children build a deep and lasting understanding of the world rather than merely collecting isolated facts.

The “Golden Rule” of Teaching: “Teachers shall teach less, and scholars shall learn more.”

Are we not justified in concluding that singular effects must have commensurate causes, and that we have chanced to light on unknown tracts in the region of educational thought. At any rate that GOLDEN RULE of which Comenius was in search has discovered itself, the RULE, “WHEREBY TEACHERS SHALL TEACH LESS AND SCHOLARS SHALL LEARN MORE.”

~Towards a Philosophy of Education (Vol.6) p.8

Charlotte Mason embraced this “Golden Rule” she attributed to John Amos Comenius. This principle marked a radical departure from traditional, teacher-centered instruction—where educators dictate knowledge—to a model where children actively pursue their own learning.

Comenius (1592–1670), a Moravian educator and pioneer of modern pedagogy, sought a universal teaching method that was natural, efficient, and attuned to a child’s development. He rejected forced, artificial education, insisting that learning should flow from how children naturally engage with the world. Mason believed she had rediscovered this elusive rule in her own approach: children thrive when immersed in “living ideas”—rich, narrative-driven content like literature, history, and nature—rather than burdened by lectures or rote memorization.

Mason observed that children educated her way displayed extraordinary traits: keen interest, deep focus, and broad knowledge across subjects. Many assumed this stemmed from privileged, “educated and cultivated” homes, but she challenged that notion. Such intellectual vitality, she argued, was innate to all children—working-class or otherwise—when given the right conditions. This insight fueled her mission to make a liberal education accessible to everyone, not just the elite.

Her interpretation of the “Golden Rule” reflects her core philosophy:

  • Teachers act as guides, curating knowledge rather than spoon-feeding it.
  • Children take ownership of their learning, wrestling with ideas rather than passively absorbing facts.
  • A broad, generous education belongs to all, not a select few.

For Mason, true education was self-education—a groundbreaking path she saw as illuminating “unknown tracts” in educational thought.

Unlike today’s teacher-heavy classrooms, where pedagogy often trumps content and testing dictates priorities, Mason envisioned something freer. She rejected filtered textbooks and rigid curricula, urging children to engage directly with unadulterated ideas—proving learning thrives when less constrained.

Her “Golden Rule” remains a potent critique of a system that too often doubts the child’s capacity for self-directed growth. Mason saw children as naturally eager to learn, ready to take responsibility for their intellectual journey when placed in an environment that trusts and nurtures their potential. In an age of over-managed education, her call to “teach less” so students can “learn more” rings truer than ever.

PRINCIPLES HITHERTO UNRECOGNIZED OR DISREGARDED

Charlotte Mason introduces these additional principles as ideas previously unrecognized or dismissed in education, yet foundational to her method’s success across countless schools. She argues that national education had long lacked a cohesive, thoughtful basis—relying instead on fragmented or outdated assumptions—and that these principles offer the missing structure, proven effective in practice.
Mason justifies expanding beyond her 20 core principles for two reasons: to refine how her philosophy is applied and to spotlight overlooked elements driving its remarkable outcomes—like children’s sustained curiosity and depth of understanding. Crucially, she insists these ideas aren’t just for the “clever child” but work for all, including the average and even the “backward” child.

The appeal is not to the clever child only, but to the average and even to the ‘backward’ child.

In Charlotte Mason’s time, the term ‘backward’ was commonly used in education to describe children who were slower in academic progress compared to their peers. It was not as laden with the derogatory or offensive connotations it carries today, but rather indicated students who needed more time or different approaches to learning.

What’s fascinating is how Mason subverts the term’s sting. She doesn’t dwell on “backward” as a deficit but as a challenge her method overcomes.

“…in our schools every child has been discovered to be a person of infinite possibilities. I say every child, for so-called ‘backward’ children are no exception.

~Towards a Philosophy of Education (Vol.6), p.44-45

She rejects the era’s tendency to write off “backward” kids—contrast this with, say, the eugenics-influenced views of some contemporaries who saw them as inherently limited. Her radical claim is that the fault lies in education’s failure, not the child’s nature. 

People are too apt to use children as counters in a game, to be moved hither and thither according to the whim of the moment. Our crying need to-day is less for a better method of education than for an adequate conception of children,––children, merely as human beings, whether brilliant or dull, precocious or backward.

~Towards a Philosophy of Education (Vol.6) p. 80

Rather than writing off “backward” children, Mason’s philosophy was quite radical for her time in asserting their intellectual potential. She advocated for a broad, rich curriculum for all students.

This scheme is carried out in less time than ordinary school work on the same subjects.

Charlotte Mason’s educational method—based on living books, narration, and a broad curriculum—allowed children to learn more effectively in less time than traditional school methods. This efficiency came from several key factors:

  • Single Reading with Attention – Children were expected to read a passage only once and then narrate it, which strengthened comprehension and retention. This avoided the wasted time of re-reading and drilling.
  • Living Books vs. Dry Textbooks – Engaging, well-written books captured students’ interest and made learning more natural and memorable, reducing the need for repetitive lessons.
  • No Busywork or Cramming – Instead of relying on rote memorization, worksheets, or excessive testing, Mason’s method focused on meaningful engagement with ideas.
  • Short, Focused Lessons – Lessons were kept brief (usually 10–20 minutes for younger children, up to 30–45 minutes for older students), aligning with a child’s natural attention span and preventing mental fatigue.

By eliminating unnecessary repetition, passive learning, and mechanical exercises, her approach allowed children to cover more subjects in-depth while spending less total time on formal lessons. The afternoons were then free for nature study, handicrafts, and personal exploration—things Mason saw as just as essential as book learning.

There are no revisions, no evening lessons, no cramming or ‘getting up’ of subjects; therefore there is much time whether for vocational work or interests or hobbies.

Charlotte Mason meant that her method eliminated the common school practices of revising, cramming, or artificially preparing for exams, which often consumed a great deal of time in traditional education. Instead, students engaged deeply with their lessons the first time, making additional review unnecessary.

In conventional schools, revising often meant re-reading textbooks, memorizing notes, and drilling facts to prepare for tests—practices that encouraged short-term retention rather than genuine understanding. Cramming was the last-minute rush to absorb large amounts of information, usually for the sake of passing an exam, rather than for meaningful learning. Artificial preparation included activities like summarizing pre-digested material, answering comprehension questions designed to guide a student’s thinking, or rehearsing expected answers—all of which placed the teacher at the center of learning rather than the student. These methods treated education as something to be got through, rather than something that naturally fed the mind.

By removing these unnecessary burdens, Mason’s method ensured that children were not overloaded with schoolwork in the evenings.

All intellectual work is done in the hours of morning school, and the afternoons are given to field nature studies, drawing, handicrafts, etc.

Charlotte Mason insisted that students have ample free time for pursuits that enriched their lives, recognizing that afternoons should be left open for activities that fostered personal growth and creativity. She understood that the mind continues to process and “chew on” ideas during periods of rest, reflection, and play. True learning is not achieved through endless study but is strengthened when a child has time to absorb knowledge, recharge, and engage with the world in a natural, meaningful way.

Mason structured the school day so that intellectual work took place in the morning, while the afternoons were left free for hands-on, creative, and outdoor pursuits. A typical morning included:

  • Reading and narrating from living books (history, literature, science, etc.)
  • Mathematics
  • Writing
  • Foreign languages
  • Bible lessons
  • Recitation and poetry

Instead of extending bookwork into the afternoon—as modern schools do with homework, review, and extra lessons—Mason reserved the later hours for activities that were just as essential to a child’s development:

  • Field nature studies – Observing plants, animals, and weather firsthand, often recording findings in a nature journal.
  • Drawing and art – Practicing observational drawing, watercolors, and picture study of great artists.
  • Handicrafts – Developing useful, beautiful skills like sewing, woodworking, clay modeling, and knitting.
  • Personal interests – Pursuing knowledge for enjoyment rather than obligation, such as music, writing, or independent projects.
  • Outdoor activity – Physical exercise, exploration, games, hiking, and free play.
  • Vocational work – Practical skills, early career training, or part-time work for older students.

Mason believed that this balance between intellectual and hands-on learning deepened retention and provided opportunity for creativity and exploration. She saw afternoon pursuits not as a break from education, but as a vital part of it—a way for children to fully integrate knowledge and develop into whole, capable persons.

No homework is required.

Charlotte Mason didn’t require homework because she believed it was unnecessary for real learning and could even be counterproductive. She saw it as an intrusion on a child’s natural rhythms and home life, both of which she considered essential for overall development.

By eliminating homework she safeguarded the home as a place for:

  • Unhurried family meals and meaningful conversation
  • Read-alouds and storytelling
  • Shared chores and contribution to family life
  • Engaging discussions that deepen understanding
  • Evening leisure, rest, and quiet reflection

Rather than letting schoolwork pull children from these priorities, her method kept them present—engaged in family life and growing in knowledge and character.

It is not that ‘we’ (of the P.N.E.U.) are persons of peculiar genius; it is that, like Paley’s man who found the watch, “we have chanced on a good thing.” “No gain that I experience must remain unshared.” We feel that the country and indeed the world should have the benefit of educational discoveries which act powerfully as a moral lever, for we are experiencing anew the joy of the Renaissance, but without its pagan lawlessness.

Charlotte Mason, in A Philosophy of Education (Volume 6), expresses a sense of profound discovery within the Parents’ National Educational Union (P.N.E.U.), akin to William Paley’s analogy of the watch. Paley’s argument suggests that if one stumbles upon a watch in a field, its intricate design indicates the necessity of a watchmaker—a designer with intentionality. Mason draws on this analogy to explain that the P.N.E.U. members have not devised an educational system out of personal genius, but rather, they have discovered a truth about education—an underlying natural law governing learning.

She emphasizes that this discovery is not something to be hoarded, but rather a gift that must be shared: “No gain that I experience must remain unshared.” Education, when rightly understood, acts as a moral lever with transformative power, not only for individuals but for entire nations. Mason and her colleagues feel compelled to spread this knowledge, believing that education can shape character and integrity.

Further, she connects this discovery to a sense of intellectual and cultural renewal, likening it to the Renaissance. However, unlike the historical Renaissance, which, for all its brilliance, was sometimes marked by pagan lawlessness, Mason insists that their educational approach fosters a renewal of knowledge while remaining firmly rooted in Christian truth and moral order.

🔝 Back to Top
Share this: