Religious Daoism never developed a systematic child-education framework

Evidence

What the religious Daoist tradition does not have — and this is the notable institutional gap for this series — is an equivalent of the Vinaya’s monastic-disciplinary framework for children, or Tsongkhapa’s ten guru qualifications, or Zhu Xi’s Xiaoxue: a systematic account of how children should be educated within the tradition. The philosophical Daoist texts offer a powerful implicit critique of coercive pedagogy. The religious Daoist tradition developed sophisticated practices for the cultivation of adult practitioners. But the question of how to raise children within a Daoist framework — what Daoist parents should do differently from non-Daoist parents — remains, across the tradition’s history, largely unaddressed. — , The Rod and the Child, 4119

Categorization

• QUESTION: Worth chasing: does any Daoist text or sect address child-rearing that this chapter’s sources missed?
• SEED: Article angle: what happens when a radically child-friendly philosophy fails to institutionalize — the Daoist gap as a case study in how doctrines do (or don’t) reach the household.