Last Child in the Woods

I'm halfway through this book (by Richard Louv), and this quote struck me:

"If such joy [in nature] is dormant, we must reawaken it. This is not an easy task for parents who previously missed the chance to connect with the outdoors. But that opportunity is still available, and I believe most parents will do this -- when they fully understand that nature is not just 'nice to have' but a must for healthy childhood development."

It struck me because it's almost exactly what Charlotte Mason said about finding a way to get kids out in nature:

"Impossible! Says an overwrought mother who sees her way to no more for her children than a daily hour or so on the pavements of the neighbouring London squares. Let me repeat, that I venture to suggest, not what is practicable in any household, but what seems to me absolutely best for the children; and that, in the faith that mothers work wonders once they are convinced that wonders are demanded of them."

---------------------

And there's this from teacher John Rick, envisioning a change in schools that would bring kids and nature back together:

"The society we are molding these kids toward is one that values consumer viability. The works of John Muir, Rachel Carson, or Aldo Leopold are seldom if ever taught to children in the public schools. Even in the sciences, where nature could play such an important role, the students study nature in a dry, mechanized way. How does the bat sonar work, how does a tree grow, how do soil amenities help crops grow? Kids see nature as a lab experiment.
The alternative? I imagine a classroom that turns outward, both figuratively and literally. The grounds would become a classroom, buildings would look outward, and gardens would cover the campus. The works of naturalists would be the vehicle by which we would teach reading and writing. Math and science would be taught as a way to understand the intricacies of nature, the potential to meet human needs, and how all things are interlaced. A well-rounded education would mean learning the basics, to become part of a society that cherished nature while at the same time contributing to the well-being of mankind. Progress does not have to be patented to be worthwhile. Progress can also be measured by our interactions with nature and its preservation. Can we teach children to look at a flower and see all the things it represents: beauty, the health of an ecosystem, and the potential for healing?"

I like it, but I'm reminded of how people tend to see all of education through the lens of their own interest. For example, the guy who did the Robinson Curriculum happens to be a mathmetician and feels that every child should be required to spend three hours a day on math. "The works of naturalists would be the vehicle by which we would teach reading and writing." I wonder if this means he would replace classic literature for nature books?With some balance, I think his suggestions are good.