Ways of Using Books: Comparing Socratic Applications & Charlotte Mason

Ways of Using Books

0:00

Often the best way to understand something new is to compare it to something already seen or understood. For example – what is a giraffe? Well, it’s like a cow, but taller… ok, much taller – and leaner. Same sort of tail, but a longer neck… much longer; similar ears, and it does have horns of a sort… but different. Same length of hair, but with a distinct pattern. In the end, we realize that in actuality, a giraffe is not as much like a cow as first expected, however, a familiarity with a cow at least gives us a starting point for discussion.

Similar comparisons can be helpful in the field of education today. There has been a rightful push-back against the mechanical approach of: teachers present information; ask destination questions; check “learned” off a list. There have been various efforts to rehumanize education and since Charlotte Mason’s approach is among these, it can be helpful to compare and contrast it with other techniques in order to bring clarity and effectiveness to all. The current fad of collecting a hodge podge of “best practices” is just another example of the fragmented and utilitarian fever of our times. Collecting “tools” can be helpful, however when things are misunderstood, mashed together, or taken piece meal those same tools can be dulled into uselessness.

In this piece we will compare and contrast two current approaches to the use of the written word in education: the Socratic method, and Charlotte Mason’s method. We will use the “cow” to understand the “giraffe”. On a personal level, I would like to show why in my work with K-12 students I have chosen to use the Charlotte Mason method despite enjoying the Socratic approach both as a participant and as a leader.

The Socratic Method

While the Socratic method was originally developed as a way to test moral and philosophic statements, thereby establishing thought; today it is primarily used to analyze existing thought in the form of books and so is popular in many classical and forward-thinking traditional schools as a way of utilizing “real” books. While there are variants in the way it is used, I will present a common K-12 approach.

In this model of teaching, students do the readings outside of the group. They come to the table with ideas already taken in, prepared to participate in a dialogue led by a leader who asks carefully planned, tacting questions designed to make the students think deeper about the ideas themselves, and question their initial assumptions about them. A core motive is to shift thought towards what is true. To be clear, in a pure Socratic approach, there is no preconceived truth to steer towards or with, in fact this method was developed as a way of mining truth via human reasoning. For many the group forms a bit of a think-tank, drop in ideas, shake them around and see what surfaces.

In the classroom, this approach is valued as a way of leading students rung by rung up the ladder of thought via strategic questions, nudges, and continuing requests for clarification in imitation of Socrates as he would famously feign ignorance with his conversation partners. These sessions are long and leisurely. Participating feels like a back-and-forth conversation of external processing as the teacher leads with requests to clarify, expound, or compare.

The Charlotte Mason Lesson

If one has participated in any of the multiple adaptations of Socrates’ ideas, one of the distinguishing differences for a Charlotte Mason lesson is that the reading is done in class. A session will begin with the student being asked to quickly reproduce the thought of the previous reading as a way of anchoring and anticipating what is to come. While the overall length of the session will be shorter than a Socratic session, again, a significant part of that precious portion will be prioritized for the reading itself in real time, either aloud or quietly.

The Mason approach grew out of the belief that ideas are alive and vitalizing; that they are to the immaterial parts of a person, what food is to the material; that there is a correlation between the way mind responds to ideas, and the way the physical body responds to food in its uptake and assimilation, that this work of the body is largely done autonomously and spontaneously. The teacher working under this model sees that at the moment of inception, thought begets thought, that that is the moment to train habit upon.  Contrast this understanding with the Socratic, which treats the person as a receptacle; reading before class is a mere collecting of content into one place so that it can be brought forth and worked upon by the teacher at the appointed time.  

In Mason’s model, immediately following the reading, the student will be prompted to take a step back and accurately retell in their own words what has been said. “First make sure you have heard accurately and not with bias or gaps.” The goal is, from the beginning, chronologically; not verbatim but point by point. This part may be done aloud, the students doing all of the speaking, the teacher listening attentively but quietly; or it may be written. In both cases the teacher is noticeably reticent. After this “narration” is completed. The student may share what they think about the idea at hand, questions it piqued, things it reminded them of, or things to research further, try later, or anticipate in the next reading. The session may or may not end with a conversation with the teacher – dependent on the student and time. Rather than camping out on a single philosophical point as the Socratic method is prized for, Mason’s approach is applicable to all subjects and any living book with its forward-facing trajectory.

A key component of this approach is that somewhere else in the day there is down-time to ruminate and digest, not only the ideas of this reading – but the ideas of the day’s readings. In this leisure space, the mind has time to make connections across many areas of study. Very often the recall portion of future group sessions will contain the sharings of this inward digesting. In this way, a cycle of self-education develops which is not confined to a particular space of time and the Holy Spirit gains much fodder with which to work.

Contrasting Socrates & Mason

So, is the cow better than the giraffe? Each has unique giftings suited to its needs. But what cannot be denied is that there are striking differences with both advantages and challenges for each. As a person who enjoys leisurely private readings, long back and forth conversations that dig into the marrow of ideas, and even specifically Socratic circles, in my work as a teacher I have chosen the Charlotte Mason approach for these reasons:

1.      In the course of a day, week, term – I simply cannot sow the bulk of idea “seeds” required for true synthesis with days chunked into 3 or 4 lengthy sessions of dialoging. Long days certainly don’t provide space for leisure. One cannot think without a bulk of words/ideas, and one cannot make connections with ideas unless there are enough of them cast forth to bump against and juxtapose each other. Short lessons are crucial in facilitating the wide feast of ideas necessary for synthetic thinking. Short lessons are required for free afternoon spaces. The Socratic approach doesn’t allow for short lessons.

2.      In my experience as a participant in read-before-you-come-formats, I know the feeling of having lost the vitality of thought before we sit down together. I try to buffer it by reading just before we meet, taking notes, and underlining key pieces to re-read to the group. The fact is, these coping mechanisms all feel stale compared to the flash of that first moment of recognition. That is what I want to capture with my students.

3.      As a facilitator of read-before-you-come formats, I can tell you that it is idealistic to think all will diligently adhere to the expectation to read thoughtfully. SparkNotes exists for a reason! Speed reading, cramming bulk page ranges, checking the internet for summaries and talking points, are the norm. Expecting K-12 students to prioritize calm, un-crammed schedules and promise that no family obligations or unforeseen catastrophes will jeopardize the sowing of the vital seed, for an entire year, is beyond what is realized of even college students living in buffered places and times for the specific purpose. If ideas, vitalizing thought, are important – then the proper sowing of them (attention), the consistent sowing of them, even if in smaller page ranges, is not a waste of class time. It may feel this way to the teacher as they find themselves in a secondary role – but this requires much of the student. The less the teacher does, the more the student.

4.      Another distinctive of the Charlotte Mason approach compels me to forgo the temptation of jumping immediately into conversation after a reading. The moment that an idea flashes, the mind immediately leaps over certain pieces to get to the parts it wants… and yet those skimmed parts are often needful. And so, after a proper sowing, the student is asked to set themselves aside for a moment in order to tell back. To step out of the wind and perform a disciplinary habit of accurate hearing. Narration. Note that telling back doesn’t necessitate agreement with the ideas, and it will often clarify the points on which they may diverge with the author. What it does do, is require justice to the idea, for both guilty and innocent deserve a fair hearing. Narration cultivates honesty and shrewdness of thinking.

The habit of narration, the habit of accurate hearing and reproduction before engagement offers intrinsic gains not only for intellectual development, but relational proficiency with ideas and people, flowing in almost as a by-product. This is something no list of scaffolded questions can imitate. And so, I follow Miss Mason’s lead in allotting a piece of the precious portion here rather than in dialoging. 

5.      The final reason I have chosen Charlotte Mason’s method for the use of books, rather than the Socratic is a recognition that – the flash of idea did come in my, read-before-you-come, experiences. The bit that was vitalizing, the part I wanted to catch and tell about, was sparked - mind to mind between the author and myself. Distracted by the need to capture that and bring it to the group, I almost missed the fact that… the group wasn’t needed, the teacher’s questioning wasn’t required for knowledge to pass, for clarity to come. In humility I must confess that what is true for me must be a possibility for others. And so, another reason I have chosen the Charlotte Mason approach to teach within, is that I see the inherent limitations of one person to another and bow.

Challenges of Mason & Socrates

Choosing Charlotte Mason’s use of books over a Socratic approach for the benefits above, doesn’t mean that I don’t still sometimes wince at the challenges she presents. A class never ends that I don’t wish it was just a little bit longer. The conversation that starts and then must get set aside for more seed always feels like a tease. And yet even these challenges serve as a catalyst to come back, a priming of the pump that will, of its own accord, perform the real effort of drawing up the waters in times to come.

And still, the question begs to be answered by those like me who love the long and leisurely back and forth of iron sharpening iron; where is this in the Charlotte Mason approach? This feels like a key element of our humanity that her timetables push us past and her insistence on variety eclipse.

My response to this is that these are key elements of what it means to be human and as such should not be outsourced to classes and facilitators, but cultivated on porches and beside fires, over coffee and beside rivers, around sandboxes and dinner tables with wide variety of participants and streams of thought flowing in. Miss Mason’s method does not belittle this element of our make-up or even negate the value therein – but rather protects childhood spaces for the development of personhood so that they will have what it takes, substance of both self and ideas, to offer in those spaces.

The capabilities of childhood are profound, but so too are its vulnerabilities. Expecting anything less than a mature adult (the original intent) to participate in the back-and-forth intensities of Socratic dialogue cannot help but manipulate the formation of thought and person. The teacher’s posture simply has too much sway.

Those who know will point out that in the traditional classical model the Trivium protects young kids from the rigors of Socratic practice. While this is true, elements of the Socratic approach and posture bleed into k-6 interactions due to a natural desire to engage these younger students with thought in a model that doesn’t acknowledge that as a possibility and so doesn’t provide a strategy or tools.

A Final Caution

This brings up a final, but key, internal difference between the original intent of Socratic practice and its modern applications. Again, the practice was crafted to distill truth as a disinterested service to humanity, today very few of its proponents would be fine with, thought leading where it will. More often than not there is motive, content, and specific understandings as a goal; there is something to impart, something to pass down. Cloaked in this new robe, inherent risks quickly mount. In classroom applications, power has not been given to a fellow thinker seeking to develop thought as a peer, but to a person already formed and rooted in beliefs about the way things are and the way things should be. In any classroom, of whatever ages, there is of necessity a hierarchy to consider. 

That hierarchy will unwittingly facilitate a bias in all but the rarest cases. Whether it be the district, the school, or the individual personality of the teacher; the very nature of the Socratic method requires some sort of steering in order to avoid endless circling. This is in direct contradiction to its original purpose. One prominent Classical Christian teacher stated bluntly:

“The Socratic classroom is the worst kind of classroom absent God’s fixed standard… the only hope for fruitful discussion rests squarely on the fact that there is a fixed standard that exists apart from man and his changeable opinions… Rather than depending upon the shifting sands of human passions (reason).”¹

This quote shows a committed theist attempting noble work with a flawed humanistic tool. He is attempting to modify a technique that doesn’t quite fit reality, doesn’t work within the parameters of real life.

Again, this approach to teaching handed down to us by the ancients was designed to mine truth via human reason, but as Charlotte Mason reminds us, Reason is not infallible! It is flawed, will argue for inclination. What is a teacher to do? This is the snag that Classical Christian teachers try to smooth.

The point to note for our conversation is that caveats, like the quote above, must be added to the glowing praises of the Socratic Method because it is flawed and potentially dangerous tool.

Human Reason and conversation can only ever lead in endless circles, there must be a standard, a point to steer a class to or with. It is here that this popular technique leaves the door wide open for manipulation. This should be a concern for all regardless of faith or worldview.

*****

In our collective craving to use real books in education, two tools are most often presented. Mason’s and Socrates’. Like the cow and giraffe, there are some similarities, but each is suited to different ends and motivations. We should be candid in discussing differences of philosophy and practice. To act like they are all the same and of equal value in all situations is to show ignorance.  

In my teaching experience, the Charlotte Mason approach has proven to be the best suited to personhood, and to the traditional hallmarks of a good education. Personhood requires protectants against manipulation; hallmarks of good education require variety of mind foods. A Christian understanding of personhood presupposes a Creator who equips and guides in all things pertaining to life and godliness; with that position adequately filled – the teacher may perfect the art of what Charlotte Mason called Masterly Inactivity.

Because her approach is not yet broadly applied, it runs the risk of being mingled with other ways of using books. Clarifying what narration is and is not, understanding the posture of the teacher, along with the reasons behind these applications will protect Charlotte Mason from being swept up into the bin of “best practices” and allow her holistic method of education to stay intact.

Sara Timothy 2025

^[1] Baldwin, J. “Iron Sharpening Iron”. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/534ee91ce4b0ef4242bf9cc7/t/621e942bad728967a962f817/1646171180341/Why+the+Socratic+Method+Matters+So+Much.pdf