Essay on John Locke Theories on Early Childhood Education

In this essay, I would like to discuss Rousseau’s approach to childhood and how his work impacted society. The themes of innocent states and fears of corruption are repeating themes that appear within Rousseau’s work. I would like to highlight the main points he emphasizes throughout his texts, particularly in his treatise on education called Emile (1762), also known as On Education, which supplies a more holistic approach, for the time, on childhood and education. In addition to this, the impacts of his work will also be covered with a particular interest in how Rousseau’s work affected parenting at the time and how society viewed his approach as a whole. Ultimately, I would like to make the point that Rousseau was an opposer of contemporary society at the time, trying to argue from a different perspective than that of politics or religion. It was a highly influential discourse that aided the developing idea that children should be allowed to be children. However, that is not to say that Rousseau’s work was not challenged or did not oppose other discourses. The likes of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are also influential perspectives on childhood and education for their time and provide alternative views to that of Rousseau and so, will also be discussed within the essay.

The most important point Rousseau begins to make is that children are born innocent. He suggested that as infants, we have basic needs such as food, water, shelter, and companionship and that because we are not competing with each other for any other factors, we are innocent. This innocence he later believes, is corrupted by civilization. “Everything is good as it leaves the hands of the Author of everything; everything degenerates in the hands of man” (Rousseau, 1792, p.37). What he means by this, is that later in life, other factors may affect survival or social relations, which leads to feelings of jealousy, for example. He then goes on to explain that for children to remain free from the toxicity of society, we need to allow childhood to develop within the child. The emphasis is on a physical connection to nature itself through play. If the child spends more time doing so, they can become a more natural learner and will gain more agency to make rational judgments as they grow older.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

This then brings us to the question: what role does an adult have in this process? In his work on Emile (1762), Rousseau takes on the role of a ‘tutor’ for a young boy Emile. It is his task to ensure that Emile’s innocence remains as he develops. To do this, he manipulates the environment around Emile in a way that allows the child to become more agentic. He stresses the point that children need to work problems out for themselves rather than telling them what to do. Allowing the child to run around, play, and interact with nature meant that there was less of a focus on formal education such as reading, which Rousseau did not agree with. He believed that books would detach the child from ‘the real world’ and that experiencing things first-hand was part of the process of learning to be a child.

In addition to his emphasis on play and exercise, Rousseau acknowledged the relationship between mother and child. At the time, many households would have a wet nurse rather than the mother personally breastfeeding the child. This is also something that Rousseau did not necessarily agree with. He infers that the bond between mother and child would be a lot stronger if the child is breastfed by the mother. This again, stresses the importance of naturalness in childhood which in turn forms a child that is free from the unscrupulousness of society.

As we can see from this, there is a heavy influence of romanticism on Rousseau’s work. “Children have a natural goodness and clarity of vision. Redolent with the reason that will form the society of tomorrow, their natural characteristics are those we can all learn from; they represent a condition lost or forgotten and this one worthy of defense (and susceptible to sentimentalization)” (James, Jenks & Prout, 1998, p. 13). There is an ideal of childhood that presents it as something that should be enjoyed for what it is, rather than being disregarded. There began to be an increasing interest in how children learn, with a reiterated importance on saving the innocence of children at the time, making a constant link between children and nature.

This promptly brings us to how Rousseau’s work impacted society and whether his romanticized view of childhood had an effect on the way people viewed childhood. Rousseau's approach to childhood had a large impact, particularly on parents at the time. Many adults were reading his works, changing the perspective of parenting and its effects on childhood for many people. It was an approach that resulted in controversial discussion. For example, the point made previously about breastfeeding. Because so many women were using wet nurses, the idea of breastfeeding being healthier for your baby sparked discussion amongst women on which of the two is more appropriate for the child. In addition to this, concerns were raised about education in schools of the time. It led to children’s games becoming more important parts of everyday life as well as school life in countries such as England. Because his views could be perceived as an opposition to various religious and political views of childhood at the time, it could almost be said that his work attempted to rebel against a corrupt society, bringing the focus onto the child and their right to agency.

On the other hand, Rousseau’s work does not remain unchallenged. Other discourses of childhood are also influential perspectives that oppose Rousseau’s romanticized view of childhood such as Thomas Hobbes’s Puritan discourse and John Locke’s Tabula Rasa discourse.

The Puritan discourse puts a large emphasis on the idea of original sin. It derives from the religion of Christianity and suggests that children are innately evil, contain sin, and need absolution or saving. This particular discourse was formed after the Reformation period in which the Church of England gained power and painted the child as deceiving, immoral, and malevolent. Furthermore, persisting to bring up the importance of saving the soul of the child. We can compare this view to the Dionysian child who is described as mischievous and in need of gratification.

However, John Locke argued the idea of children being born as a blank slate (tabula rasa) and are influenced by experience and education during their childhood development. This approach heavily promotes the idea of education and the expectations of a child to be a citizen of society. He suggests that children should be encouraged to be curious and that adults should take extra care when answering questions asked by children. Although it suggests that the focus should be child-centered, there is a distinct interest in what part the child will play in the future of society. It is also inferred that strong, authoritarian figures are necessary during childhood to ensure that the child is not impacted negatively, whereas, in the case of the child, a lack of authority in a figure such as a mother could lead to such negative impacts. Nonetheless, Locke does mention that play can also be important during childhood so long as it promotes an educational outlook. Therefore, giving power to the educator.

As we can see, each perspective is vastly different from the other and differs from the perspective of Rousseau. Locke’s view is one of its independence from the other two approaches. It takes an authoritarian perspective of childhood and emphasizes the role of education with the future kept closely in mind. While Hobbes and Rousseau seem to remain at opposing ends. Hobbes’s puritan discourse can be easily traced back to Christianity with the idea of original sin being the main feature of the idea of the child and a direct focus on the adult being the savior of the child. Indeed, we then have Rousseau who attempts to completely oppose this approach by delving into the deeper meanings of childhood and tries to make connections to children and nature to suggest that the environment a child is in and the social pressures surrounding them are what causes corruption. So, it could be said that although Hobbes and Rousseau argue different points, they can interlink at different points in a child’s life. For example, a child may be born with an innocence but, ultimately becomes the ‘evil’ child Hobbes describes, just later on in life after being corrupted by society.

Be that as it may, if we reflect on Rousseau’s work with Emile, we can see that Rousseau plays a large part in Emile’s life and we could almost argue that he has a lot of control over what Emile does throughout the day and what he sees. If we base the idea of childhood on Rousseau’s work, we could argue that the child don’t have as much say in their childhood as they could. Because the approach emphasizes the protection of innocence from society, it means that adults must, in a way, shelter the child from certain aspects of reality and society to do so. Having so much control over the environment poses the question: how much agency does the child have? Compared to other discourses, Rousseau’s does allow the child to be more in touch with themselves and nature, allowing for more independence overplay and exploration. However, when the adult is ‘shielding’ said child from the corruption of the world, they are not able to make their judgment of society or the environment around them. However, Rousseau may argue that the child is not yet capable of making rational judgments if they do not yet fully understand their environment. This is because he argues that the ability to make rational judgments is a result of learning through play and repeating tasks after they fail to solve problems, etc.

While it is important to consider the other discourses that attempt to describe the child and childhood and oppose Rousseau’s idea of the romanticized child, Rousseau explored the perspective in such a refreshingly holistic way that brings to light, the depth of childhood and its connections to nature and society. He highlighted the point that children should have agency and it is their right to have that. He showed society that learning does not have to be mundane, academic, or systematic, it can be adventurous, curious, and fun. In settings where this is allowed, the child can make connections with nature and with themselves to experience a childhood that is more freeing and will ultimately be a more independent citizen who remains uncorrupted by social factors. Rousseau attempted to critique society controversially, yet so insightful to the people of the time and it is that kind of attention to his work that makes it relevant even today. His work is still relevant in today’s society, it is important to appreciate that children are capable, agentic beings with their own free will and can learn in a multitude of ways that do not necessarily have to be through a book. The importance of play has come to light much more in recent years and we now understand that it is a crucial part of development so, to conclude, Rousseau’s work is one of many that started a discussion leading to a shift in how people viewed childhood.