宋元至明初士人的訓蒙理念與實踐大都遵照朱熹倡導的「小學」工夫。但隨著明中晚期思想版圖的分裂，陽明學與湛學在訓蒙的理念和實踐層面較明前期呈現出多元的面貌。陽明學者認為孩童自幼便知愛親敬長的觀點以及對「良知」的提倡均削弱了閱讀《小學》的必要性，這也是導致明中晚期《小學》邊緣化的原因之一。但是，《小學》邊緣化的原因並不限於此，同屬理學傳統、且立場相對溫和的陽明學者面對這一現實，也嘗試從「良知」的角度改變《小學》邊緣化的處境。面對陽明學的衝擊以及《小學》邊緣化的現實，明中晚期的程朱學者努力捍衛「小學」工夫在訓蒙領域的正當性，並對《小學》文本進行了不同於前賢的改動。湛若水所編的《古文小學》雖因其特殊的政治目的，導致編寫初衷和文本呈現之間有自相矛盾之處，但從思想史的角度看，《古文小學》既剔除了《小學》中的宋儒言論，從而彰顯「隨處體認天理」的觀點，同時也表達了對陽明學所倡「良知」的批評。明中晚期思想競爭對社會的影響是無遠弗屆的，其影響下滲至《小學》這類面向孩童的蒙書便是體現。對中晚明《小學》與訓蒙理念與實踐的討論，有助於豐富我們對中晚明多元複雜思想世界的認知。

From the Song and Yuan dynasties to the early Ming, the conceptions and practices of scholars concerning the teaching of children predominantly followed the “elementary learning” 小學 advocated by Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130-1200). However, with the formation of divisions in the intellectual world during the mid- and late Ming dynasty, the emergent Yangmingism and thought of Zhan Ruoshui 湛若水 (1466-1560), or “Zhan studies” 湛學, both presented different understandings of training children divergent from former practices. Scholars of Yangmingism were proponents of “liangzhi” 良知 (innate knowledge) and believed in the inborn filial piety of children. Some even thought that it was unnecessary to read the work Elementary Learning, which was one of several reasons for its marginalization in the mid-Ming. Other relatively moderate Yangming scholars who belonged to the tradition of neo-Confucianism instead attempted to change the situation of the text’s peripheral status from the perspective of “liangzhi.” Facing the impact of Yangmingism and marginalization of Elementary Learning during this period, scholars of Cheng-Zhu 程朱 neo-Confucianism actively defended the legitimacy of Zhu Xi’s “elementary learning” and engaged in authoring new commentaries on the work that differed from those of their earlier counterparts. Regarding Zhan studies, a number of contradictions admittedly exist in Guwen xiao xue 古文小學 (Classical Elementary Learning) compiled by Zhan Ruoshui owing to specific political motivations. However, from the perspective of intellectual history, Zhan not only removed many Song Confucian discourses from Elementary Learning so as to illustrate his own view of “recognizing the principles of heaven everywhere” 隨處體認天理, but also used his book to express criticisms of the “liangzhi” advocated by the Yangming school. The influence of this ideological contestation on society in the mid- and late Ming dynasty was far-reaching, affecting classics such as the Great Learning 大學—which were mainly for elites—as well as penetrating into Elementary Learning and other works for the teaching of children. These discussions on the ideas and practices of “elementary learning,” both the conception and the work, ultimately enriched the apprehending of the diverse and complex world of thought at the time.