"If the education and studies of children were suited to their inclinations and capacities, many would be made useful members of society that otherwise would make no figure in it"
About this Quote
Richardson argues that schooling should follow the grain of a childs nature. When lessons match a learners inclinations and capacities, latent ability turns outward into work that serves others. When they do not, many who might have contributed end up sidelined, appearing to make no figure, that is, to leave no mark in public life. The phrase useful members of society carries no sneer; it recognizes a wide field of worthwhile roles and suggests that usefulness, not conformity to a narrow ideal, is the right measure of education.
The setting is mid-eighteenth-century England, where a classical curriculum still held pride of place while a bustling commercial society was expanding. Richardson, a printer by trade and a novelist whose stories revolve around moral formation, saw how homogenous schooling could waste diverse talents. He was attentive to the apprenticeship system and the domestic sphere, places where learning was concrete, ethical, and fitted to the learner. By contrasting fame-making education with utility, he resists the aristocratic impulse to prize only those who shine in the old subjects. He tilts toward the emerging middle-class ethic of competence, industry, and social contribution.
The claim is both humane and pragmatic. Tailoring instruction affirms that minds differ in pace, mode, and interest; it also enlarges the common stock of skill. A society that insists every child climb the same ladder will lose the musicians who might have been stifled by mathematics, the careful artisans bored by rhetoric, and the patient caregivers made to memorize Latin. Matching study to disposition does not lower standards; it changes the standard from sameness to mastery. The result is fewer misfits and more citizens who take pride in the work they are well suited to do. Long before modern talk of differentiated instruction or vocational pathways, the insight is clear: personal flourishing and the public good rise together when education meets the learner where he or she stands.
The setting is mid-eighteenth-century England, where a classical curriculum still held pride of place while a bustling commercial society was expanding. Richardson, a printer by trade and a novelist whose stories revolve around moral formation, saw how homogenous schooling could waste diverse talents. He was attentive to the apprenticeship system and the domestic sphere, places where learning was concrete, ethical, and fitted to the learner. By contrasting fame-making education with utility, he resists the aristocratic impulse to prize only those who shine in the old subjects. He tilts toward the emerging middle-class ethic of competence, industry, and social contribution.
The claim is both humane and pragmatic. Tailoring instruction affirms that minds differ in pace, mode, and interest; it also enlarges the common stock of skill. A society that insists every child climb the same ladder will lose the musicians who might have been stifled by mathematics, the careful artisans bored by rhetoric, and the patient caregivers made to memorize Latin. Matching study to disposition does not lower standards; it changes the standard from sameness to mastery. The result is fewer misfits and more citizens who take pride in the work they are well suited to do. Long before modern talk of differentiated instruction or vocational pathways, the insight is clear: personal flourishing and the public good rise together when education meets the learner where he or she stands.
Quote Details
| Topic | Teaching |
|---|
More Quotes by Samuel
Add to List
