The Christian School
Christian primary and secondary education (sometimes called “Christian Day School”) became popular among fundamentalists during the 1970s. While some have alleged that the Christian school movement was a response to racial integration,1 it was more likely a reaction against the increasingly vicious secularism of public education. For a generation, many Christian parents sent their children to Christian schools, even when the cost of tuition meant significant financial sacrifice.
Over the past decade, however, most Christian schools have begun to decline. Administrators speculate about the reasons, but at least a few seem pretty obvious. These are generalizations that will not hold in every instance. Certain tendencies, however, can be observed more often than not.
First, Christian schools have not typically produced a better academic product than public education. True, the average test scores from Christian school students are higher than those of public school students. That is partly because public schools are required to accept students (including special education students) whom Christian schools uniformly reject. Take the top ten percent of graduates from the typical Christian school, and compare them to the top ten percent of graduates from the typical public school, and you will likely find that the public school graduates are better prepared.
A second reason that Christian schools are in decline is because they do not generally produce a better quality of Christian. Granted, the environment of a Christian school does shield its students from the most brutal influences of the secular school environment, such as rampant drug use and open promiscuity. It also grants Christianity a normative status, so that a student’s faith is not overtly and constantly under attack. Nevertheless, graduates of Christian schools do not seem to be noticeably more spiritually minded than Christian graduates of public schools. The real test is in what happens to Christian school students after they graduate. How many of them are walking with the Lord five years later? The proportions do not seem markedly higher for Christian school alumni than for other Christians of the same age.
A third reason that Christian schools are declining is the massive amount of resources that they consume. Hiring qualified teachers and maintaining excellent facilities takes money—lots of it. Both parents and churches have grown fatigued by the constant expense, but somebody has to bear the cost. Though exceptions do exist, few churches are actually able to operate a Christian school at a profit. Budgets are often balanced on the backs of teachers, who are pitifully underpaid. Consequently, hiring qualified faculty becomes exponentially more difficult, with the result that unqualified individuals are sometimes placed in the classroom. This in turn affects the performance of the school, and declining performance only exacerbates the problem.
In view of the foregoing, does the Christian school still have a place? If so, what is the contribution that it should be expected to make? A preliminary answer to these questions can be deduced from two observations about the nature of the Christian faith.
First, Christianity is a religion of text, and Christians are people of the Book. True Christianity derives its entire faith and practice from the written Word of God. No authority is higher than the Scriptures.
Second, Christianity affirms the priesthood and soul-liberty of the believer. Among other things, this means individual Christians are responsible to know and understand the Scriptures for themselves. Spiritual authorities may help believers to interpret and apply the Scriptures rightly, but they may not take over the duty of Christians to know and obey the Word of God.
These two considerations have powerfully shaped Christian ministry. They have led to massive dissemination of the Christian Scriptures. No other ancient document was as widely copied as the Bible. No other book has been as widely translated, printed, and distributed. Throughout Christian history, believers have given their lives to protect, translate, and publish the Scriptures. This work has been paramount because Christianity is a religion of text.
Since Christianity is a religion of text, it can thrive only where believers are skilled readers. In order to know and apply the Scriptures for themselves, Christians must be able to read and understand with precision. This is not so much a matter of any special unction as it is a matter of good preparation. The tools for understanding the Bible are not significantly different from the tools for understanding any serious literature.
Biblical Christianity survives only where people read skillfully. Necessarily, then, every Christian church has an interest in ensuring that its members are skilled readers. Unskilled adults, however, usually resist efforts to foster new intellectual skills. This leaves children and teens as the target constituency for fostering the proficiencies that are necessary in order to prepare skillful readers.
What are those skills? The ordinary reading and understanding of serious literature requires, at minimum, a mastery of the disciplines known as the Trivium. Grammar deals with the way that words are connected so as to constitute communicative units. Logic examines the relationship between ideas to determine whether one idea necessarily arises from or gives rise to others. Rhetoric structures communicative units so that the connections between them are readily followed and grasped. The Trivium ought to be the core of a Christian school curriculum.
The standard interpretive method used by Protestant readers of the Bible is called “grammatico-historical.” The idea is that texts must be understood according to both their grammar and their historical location. Historical interpretation assumes and relies upon knowledge of history. To the Trivium, Christian schools must add history.
The Scriptures contain literature from a variety of forms and genres. Skilled readers must be comfortable dealing with diverse sorts of writing. This skill is gained only by broad exposure and wide reading. Literature has its place in the curriculum of the Christian schools.
For generations, Western Christians have relied upon public institutions to prepare their children. Over the past several decades, however, public education has de-emphasized literacy in favor of ideology. Unfortunately, Christian schools have spent much of their effort constructing and emphasizing an alternative ideology rather than fostering excellence in those skills without which Christianity cannot survive.
Does the Christian school have a future? The above observations imply that it does, if it takes seriously the work of preparing Christian readers. Most of a twelve-year curriculum could be derived from these considerations alone—and other considerations could be offered that would justify a fully liberal education in the arts and sciences.
Christian schools do have a future and they ought to be perpetuated. They have no reason for existence, however, if they merely offer “less of the same” thing that students can get in public institutions. Christian education ought to be different. The difference should not lie in making every course a stale tract for Christianity. The difference ought to lie in the gravity with which Christian educators take their task and in the thoughtfulness that they foster in their students.
Notes
1 For references see William J. Reese, “Soldiers of Christ in the Army of God: The Christian School Movement in America,” in Leslie Francis and David W. Lankshear (eds), Christian Perspectives on Church Schools (Leominster, England: 1993), 274.
Hymn 1:1
Behold the Glories of the Lamb
Isaac Watts (1674 –1748)
A new song to the Lamb that was slain. Rev. v.6-12
Behold the glories of the Lamb
Amidst His Father’s throne.
Prepare new honors for His Name,
And songs before unknown.
Let elders worship at His feet,
The Church adore around,
With vials full of odors sweet,
And harps of sweeter sound.
Those are the prayers of the saints,
And these the hymns they raise;
Jesus is kind to our complaints,
He loves to hear our praise.
Eternal Father, who shall look
Into Thy secret will?
Who but the Son should take that Book
And open every seal?
He shall fulfill Thy great decrees,
The Son deserves it well;
Lo, in His hand the sovereign keys
Of Heav’n, and death, and hell!
Now to the Lamb that once was slain
Be endless blessings paid;
Salvation, glory, joy remain
Forever on Thy head.
Thou hast redeemed our souls with blood,
Hast set the prisoner free;
Hast made us kings and priests to God,
And we shall reign with Thee.
The worlds of nature and of grace
Are put beneath Thy power;
Then shorten these delaying days,
And bring the promised hour.
Kevin T. Bauder Bio
This essay is by Dr. Kevin T. Bauder, who serves as Research Professor of Systematic Theology at Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). Not every professor, student, or alumnus of Central Seminary necessarily agrees with every opinion that it expresses.
Strong point…
FWIW, last year, my kids began attending a Christian school where the trivium is the core of the curriculum. We feel very blessed to be within almost-reasonable driving distance of an option like that.
Want to point out, tough, that another huge factor in the decline of the Christian school is homeschooling. Not equipped to put a number on it but I have to think that a large percentage of homeschooled kids would be in Christian schools if homeschooling was not an option (many are only homeschooled because a Christian school is not available nearby).
And the beauty of that is that the homeschool can teach the trivium. It’s tougher for parents without that background to teach it to their kids, but you have the same problem in schools… teachers who want to teach classical rarely had a classical education themselves.
Unfortunately, Christian schools have spent much of their effort constructing and emphasizing an alternative ideology rather than fostering excellence in those skills without which Christianity cannot survive.Though I don’t buy the “survive” part. Replace it with “thrive” and I agree completely.
FWIW, last year, my kids began attending a Christian school where the trivium is the core of the curriculum. We feel very blessed to be within almost-reasonable driving distance of an option like that.
Want to point out, tough, that another huge factor in the decline of the Christian school is homeschooling. Not equipped to put a number on it but I have to think that a large percentage of homeschooled kids would be in Christian schools if homeschooling was not an option (many are only homeschooled because a Christian school is not available nearby).
And the beauty of that is that the homeschool can teach the trivium. It’s tougher for parents without that background to teach it to their kids, but you have the same problem in schools… teachers who want to teach classical rarely had a classical education themselves.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
A second reason that Christian schools are in decline is because they do not generally produce a better quality of Christian… Nevertheless, graduates of Christian schools do not seem to be noticeably more spiritually minded than Christian graduates of public schools. The real test is in what happens to Christian school students after they graduate. How many of them are walking with the Lord five years later? The proportions do not seem markedly higher for Christian school alumni than for other Christians of the same age.That would be because the students are not necessarily Christians to begin with. Many, if not most schools, accept students based on the parents signing a SoF and agreeing to uphold the policies or the school, and only the custodial parent/guardian is required to sign.
Christian schools use Christian curriculum and have a Christian staff- that is why they can call themselves a Christian school. But they do not have a regenerate student body.
The problem with education overall is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=player_embedded] the modern assembly line/manufacturing model . Until we deal with the fact that the traditional classroom is a dinosaur, reform is pointless.
This applies to how Christian schools operate- quality materials and inspiring teachers need not be cost prohibitive. Many homeschoolers have learned that given quality materials, enthusiastic guidance, and minimal supervision, children can and often will become autodidactic.
“First, Christian schools have not typically produced a better academic product than public education. True, the average test scores from Christian school students are higher than those of public school students. That is partly because public schools are required to accept students (including special education students) whom Christian schools uniformly reject. Take the top ten percent of graduates from the typical Christian school, and compare them to the top ten percent of graduates from the typical public school, and you will likely find that the public school graduates are better prepared.”
You could argue the academic gap between Christian and nonChristian is wider at the university level than at the day school level.
You could argue the academic gap between Christian and nonChristian is wider at the university level than at the day school level.
I am a product of the Chrsitian School. I was never in the top 10% of my class. I have 2 of my kids in public school and two in a LCMS school. My oldest will be a junior at the public school and is in the top 10%. I have to say that I know she is much more prepared then the average Christian school kid. There are good Christian Schools out there, but there are many sub-par ones. Dr. Bauder’s idea here is good. We would consider that as an option if we could.
I was terrified of the public school, but know that God has done a great thing putting us in the mix of it. I have way more respect for public school teachers than I did before. They have to deal with things that I never put up with at the Christian Schools I worked at. I am not just dealing with the sins. I mean kids and parents who don’t care. In my daughters freshman Bio class, there was a guy who did nothing but text. He was 18 and still taking freshman biology. The teacher would send him to the hall. He told him he would have a conference with his parents. The studen said, “Why? I am 18 and have my own apartment.” Even among that, he is a great teacher and helped my daughter love science that year and that is not one of her passions. She always does well, but has only enjoyed it that one year.
I think many Christian Schools have focused so much on saying they are a better alternative instead of proving it. Following Dr. Bauder’s advice will go along way in actually proving it
I was terrified of the public school, but know that God has done a great thing putting us in the mix of it. I have way more respect for public school teachers than I did before. They have to deal with things that I never put up with at the Christian Schools I worked at. I am not just dealing with the sins. I mean kids and parents who don’t care. In my daughters freshman Bio class, there was a guy who did nothing but text. He was 18 and still taking freshman biology. The teacher would send him to the hall. He told him he would have a conference with his parents. The studen said, “Why? I am 18 and have my own apartment.” Even among that, he is a great teacher and helped my daughter love science that year and that is not one of her passions. She always does well, but has only enjoyed it that one year.
I think many Christian Schools have focused so much on saying they are a better alternative instead of proving it. Following Dr. Bauder’s advice will go along way in actually proving it
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
On “the massive amount of resources that they consume”
I hypothesize that these resources drain the pool of funds available for missions and that there is a link between the rise of the C/S movement and the ridiculous # of years it takes for a missionary candidate to raise support to get to the field.
I hypothesize that these resources drain the pool of funds available for missions and that there is a link between the rise of the C/S movement and the ridiculous # of years it takes for a missionary candidate to raise support to get to the field.
I’m a product of Bob Jones Academy (from pre-school on. I got my BJU ID number at six weeks old!). I’m very blessed to have gone there, and wouldn’t trade the experience. I went on to intern for the American Association of Christian Schools in college, so I believe in Christian education as one option open to parents (along with homeschooling and public school).
One thing that has bothered me is how church-run schools can distract from the church’s main goals. I wish Christians had more of a vision to partner together as groups of churches to create Christian schools that aren’t connected with churches directly. I wonder how many pastors out there with Christian schools, if asked in total privacy and honesty, saw their church school as a distraction.
One thing that has bothered me is how church-run schools can distract from the church’s main goals. I wish Christians had more of a vision to partner together as groups of churches to create Christian schools that aren’t connected with churches directly. I wonder how many pastors out there with Christian schools, if asked in total privacy and honesty, saw their church school as a distraction.
I have over 30 years experience as a Christian school teacher and administrator and this article has ignited a number of points of interest with me. I’ll try to deal with one at a time.
Most schools find it extremely difficult to assure a regenerate student body. Requiring a signed profession of faith is no guarantee and adding a personal testimony does little to improve the situation. A pastoral recommendation was seldom a guarantee. Because of the problem being able to accurately “judge someone’s salvation”, some simply required that the student be amenable to discipline and the rules of the school.
Most schools find it extremely difficult to assure a regenerate student body. Requiring a signed profession of faith is no guarantee and adding a personal testimony does little to improve the situation. A pastoral recommendation was seldom a guarantee. Because of the problem being able to accurately “judge someone’s salvation”, some simply required that the student be amenable to discipline and the rules of the school.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
[Ron Bean] I have over 30 years experience as a Christian school teacher and administrator and this article has ignited a number of points of interest with me. I’ll try to deal with one at a time.Agreed. If churches already can’t “assure” an entirely regenerate congregation, what makes them think they’ll assue the professions of kids? It seems like a losing battle.
Most schools find it extremely difficult to assure a regenerate student body. Requiring a signed profession of faith is no guarantee and adding a personal testimony does little to improve the situation. A pastoral recommendation was seldom a guarantee. Because of the problem being able to accurately “judge someone’s salvation”, some simply required that the student be amenable to discipline and the rules of the school.
I liked the approach of BJA, which was to have self-described non-Christians able to come to school for up to a year, then move on if they can’t say they’re a Christian. But I don’t think it was a requirement to attend that you had to say you were a Christian.
[Ron Bean] Most schools find it extremely difficult to assure a regenerate student body. Requiring a signed profession of faith is no guarantee and adding a personal testimony does little to improve the situation. A pastoral recommendation was seldom a guarantee. Because of the problem being able to accurately “judge someone’s salvation”, some simply required that the student be amenable to discipline and the rules of the school.Which means this
the environment of a Christian school does shield its students from the most brutal influences of the secular school environment, such as rampant drug use and open promiscuity.and
It also grants Christianity a normative status, so that a student’s faith is not overtly and constantly under attack.are not necessarily the case. When I went to Christian school, drug use was rampant, and fornication was taking place in every nook and cranny. The student body knew who was doing whom and how often. There were pregnancies and abortions, unbeknownst to the staff, usually because the parents were trying to preserve the status quo, so it wasn’t uncommon for the girl who got an abortion last week to get a Christian Character Award next week.
That was 27 years ago. Do any of us think things have gotten better?
I have no objections to Christian schools as long as parents don’t abdicate their responsibility to educate, disciple, and train their children, and the school doesn’t attempt to make any guarantees about its role in forming a child’s character or equipping them spiritually. That primarily happens in the home, but can be reinforced in a school with consistent values- which is where the attraction to a Christian education usually lies. IOW, the parent assumes that they won’t have to do a significant amount of ‘deprogramming’ when their child gets home from school.
I have no objections to Christian schools as long as parents don’t abdicate their responsibility to educate, disciple, and train their children, and the school doesn’t attempt to make any guarantees about its role in forming a child’s character or equipping them spiritually. That primarily happens in the home, but can be reinforced in a school with consistent values- which is where the attraction to a Christian education usually lies. IOW, the parent assumes that they won’t have to do a significant amount of ‘deprogramming’ when their child gets home from school.good point, and could simultaneously be argued for public education
[dmicah]I taught in a Christian School for 10 years. It was a board run school which was primarily supported by 5 churches. The church that I attended (one of those five) had an interesting mix of Christian school students/families and teachers, public school students/families and teachers, and homeschool families. In each of these “groups” I saw wonderful, bright students with clear Christian testimonies and a deep understanding of the “Trivium,” as well as a fair share of “scorners,” “fools”, and floaters . The difference? Parental involvement. When the parent took “their responsibility to educate, disciple, and train their children” seriously, the product was almost always top notch, regardless of where they went to school. When the parent abdicated his/her responsibility, the result was just as predictable in the negative direction.I have no objections to Christian schools as long as parents don’t abdicate their responsibility to educate, disciple, and train their children, and the school doesn’t attempt to make any guarantees about its role in forming a child’s character or equipping them spiritually. That primarily happens in the home, but can be reinforced in a school with consistent values- which is where the attraction to a Christian education usually lies. IOW, the parent assumes that they won’t have to do a significant amount of ‘deprogramming’ when their child gets home from school.good point, and could simultaneously be argued for public education
While I agree with the main points of the essay, I agree wholeheartedly with Susan and Micah. Parental involvement is a major influence in a child’s education. This is another point the Christian School must keep in mind if it is to succeed.
Shawn Haynie
Somewhere in the Christian School discussion, I think the reason for the Chrisitian school and/or Christian
education should be considered. Years ago, I heard a leader quoting Proverbs 19:25, “Cease my son to hear
the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.” In our pursuit of Christian education for our
daughter, we always rejected “government” schools for the philosophies lurking in the classrooms. Christian
parents should understand the “molds” to which the child will be conformed. Joe Henderson
education should be considered. Years ago, I heard a leader quoting Proverbs 19:25, “Cease my son to hear
the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.” In our pursuit of Christian education for our
daughter, we always rejected “government” schools for the philosophies lurking in the classrooms. Christian
parents should understand the “molds” to which the child will be conformed. Joe Henderson
Joe,
It is possible to know follow the Word and put ones kids in public schools.
It is possible to know follow the Word and put ones kids in public schools.
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
[JGHenderson] Somewhere in the Christian School discussion, I think the reason for the Chrisitian school and/or ChristianI think KJV has the grammar wrong here, though that rendering is not impossible.
education should be considered. Years ago, I heard a leader quoting Proverbs 19:25, “Cease my son to hear
the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.”
Some alternatives:
Prov 19:27 NKJV 27 Cease listening to instruction, my son, And you will stray from the words of knowledge. (ESV, NASB virtually identical)
Prov 19:27 NIV Stop listening to instruction, my son, and you will stray from the words of knowledge.
(Interestingly, Keil & Delitzsch say it translates more like “Cease from hearing instruction if you are going to depart form the words of knowledge.” That is, you might as well quit learning if you’re not going to use it.)
All the same, though I try not to be judgmental, I never have understood why we’d want to educate kids in an anti-Christian context when we could do it in a Christian one. Worldviews are more caught than taught. I’ve seen parents successfully see to it that their kids “catch” the Christian worldview while being educated in a mostly antichristian one, but it’s hard for me to understand why this is worth attempting (given the available alternatives).
I’m heavily biased, though. I attended Christian schools every year after 1st grade. The experience wasn’t always positive, but overall it was. It’s true that many of my classmates are not living for the Lord now. The percentage is better than that of the local high school, though! The elementary school I attended was especially strong in grammar… and I’m grateful for that just about every day.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Roland,
Honestly it depends….Where I live, the closest Christian school that you would be comfortable is over 50 miles away. So that isnt even a choice that I have. Also, I think it is important to note that I was in Christian School all the way through. In my freshman preacher boys class at BJ, Shanes dad asked how many of us came from public and Christian school…very few homeschoolers back then…and it was about 60% from public school.
Aaron,
We did home school for a time. Then the Lord gave us our 4th child with autism. We didnt know he had it…but we knew something was wrong…my wife was going nuts homeschooling and careing for him…I came home one day at lunch and said we had to do something different…..we found th LCMS school that only went to 8th grade….thus why our daughter is at the high school…our youngest needs to be in public school…because like Bauder said…most Christian schools are not equipped to handle special needs kids….Some even dont acknowledge autism
We put our kids in PS, because God sovereignly made that our only choice….it is difficult, but in some areas it is actually easier.
Honestly it depends….Where I live, the closest Christian school that you would be comfortable is over 50 miles away. So that isnt even a choice that I have. Also, I think it is important to note that I was in Christian School all the way through. In my freshman preacher boys class at BJ, Shanes dad asked how many of us came from public and Christian school…very few homeschoolers back then…and it was about 60% from public school.
Aaron,
We did home school for a time. Then the Lord gave us our 4th child with autism. We didnt know he had it…but we knew something was wrong…my wife was going nuts homeschooling and careing for him…I came home one day at lunch and said we had to do something different…..we found th LCMS school that only went to 8th grade….thus why our daughter is at the high school…our youngest needs to be in public school…because like Bauder said…most Christian schools are not equipped to handle special needs kids….Some even dont acknowledge autism
We put our kids in PS, because God sovereignly made that our only choice….it is difficult, but in some areas it is actually easier.
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
Roland,
Wayward kids come out of Christian School all the time as well!
Wayward kids come out of Christian School all the time as well!
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
One other thing….I know a guy who got the Christian Character award 4 years in a row at a Christian school…He was a asistant prayer captain as a sophomore…prayer captain as a Jr and sr…chaplain of soceity and still unsaved. That was me…i was a good pharisee but I was not saved by God’s grace until I was a Senior at BJU
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
What if parents ask, “Do your teachers have degrees in their teaching fields?”
How many schools have math, science and foreign language majors on their faculty?
How many would replace their current history teacher with a history major if they had the opportunity?
And while we’re asking questions; how many men does your school have as faculty to serve as role models for young men?
How many schools have math, science and foreign language majors on their faculty?
How many would replace their current history teacher with a history major if they had the opportunity?
And while we’re asking questions; how many men does your school have as faculty to serve as role models for young men?
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Roland,
I was responding to your statements that indicated there was no Biblical justification for sending kids to public school. I am not anti Christian education. I am saying that for some,public school is the beat option. It is for us with two of our kids and if God keeps us here will be for all 4. I am resting in God’s plan for us.
Do my kids have battles Christian school kids don’t? Yes. But they also have privileges. My oldest daughter has respect of her peers. They know her stand and many admire it
I was responding to your statements that indicated there was no Biblical justification for sending kids to public school. I am not anti Christian education. I am saying that for some,public school is the beat option. It is for us with two of our kids and if God keeps us here will be for all 4. I am resting in God’s plan for us.
Do my kids have battles Christian school kids don’t? Yes. But they also have privileges. My oldest daughter has respect of her peers. They know her stand and many admire it
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
Roland,
Can you really deny Bauders critique? He is not anti..just trying to make the movement better
Can you really deny Bauders critique? He is not anti..just trying to make the movement better
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
I look forward to you airing your disagreement. It is actually what the thread is about. But as someone who has seen every aspect of all types of education, my experience agrees with his views. I have found them to be accurate.
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
[RPittman]I don’t think we are disagreeing. I’ve said that character training and education rests primarily with the parents. And it’s true that there are no guarantees, because children grow into independent adults who make their own choices, regardless of the tools that they’ve been given by parents, church, school, etc…[Susan R] When I went to Christian school, drug use was rampant, and fornication was taking place in every nook and cranny. The student body knew who was doing whom and how often. There were pregnancies and abortions, unbeknownst to the staff, usually because the parents were trying to preserve the status quo, so it wasn’t uncommon for the girl who got an abortion last week to get a Christian Character Award next week.Well, whose fault is this? The parents! Unless the drug use and fornication occurred on campus or under school auspices. Christians schools are not the guarantors of students’ spirituality, moral purity, or freedom from drugs. This is the parents’ responsibility. However, no Christian school worth its salt will knowingly tolerate these things.
My whole point was that it is a mistake to assume that a Christian school is full of Christians. The staff and curriculum may be Christian, but a significant percentage of the student body is likely not, and since traditional schooling lends itself to peer dependency, it is also highly likely that more influence will be exerted and absorbed by other students than by staff. It takes a very, VERY vigilant and involved parent to counteract this tendency.
[RPittman] I can quickly name several schools where your description is totally off-base. However, there are schools still like this. We must remember that around 30 years ago or more, many of the students, especially high school, were essentially products of public schools. Christian schools had their tremendous growth spurt due to the sexual revolution, drug culture, etc. of the 1960-70’s. There were problems due to students having already been exposed to these vices before matriculating at Christian schools. Now, it appears that majority of Christian school students have been there long-term.Both of us only have anecdotal evidence to support our conclusions. But- the school I attended was considered to be the most conservative school in the area, as well as excellent academically. It was, by all the standards that most people associate with a well run school, a well run school.
A large problem today, though, are the parents who attend church and send their kids to a Christian school meanwhile allowing their kids to run indiscriminately with a worldly crowd, go to teen clubs, imbibe the world’s music, standards, media, and dress, hang out unsupervised at the mall on the weekends, etc . On Monday morning, these kids bring the world and PS into the Christian school classroom.
Humorous (or not) anecdote- to be a cheerleader, athlete, etc… you had to agree to even more restrictive rules than what applied to the rest of the student body. So (not only being a cheerleader but on the speech team) one day I’m supposed to be studying for debate at the local library, but I grabbed a friend and we went to the Mall instead to see Flashdance. While I was there, we ran into a couple of guys on the basketball team, so we went to the movie together. When I got back, the principal met me and my girlfriend at the door and asked us where we’d been. I told him I went to the Mall to see Flashdance. He laughed, and said “No, really- where were you?” So I told him I went to the library to study for debate. He believed the lie. He didn’t believe me when I told him the truth, and I knew he wouldn’t, because I was known for being a ‘good kid’.
I said that to say this- kids are not stupid, and adults who think they are, are stupid.
So- how do these schools that you can quickly name maintain moral and ethical purity in their student body, and in the lives of the parents? What policies does the school have in place to prevent the kids from bringing the world into the classroom, and how do they enforce it? Maybe what I should ask instead is- “What is a “well run” school?”- or we are going to be talking past each other, which we are well on our way to doing already.
[RPittman] Even the best home cannot guarantee a child’s character or behavior either. There are very good families having three kids with shining spiritual lights and serving God while the fourth growing up in the same home is living a life of sin and wickedness. This is not what Christian education is all about. It’s not about measurable results, because no one can produce spiritual results except God but it is about our faithfulness as parents and teachers in teaching the Word of God by mouth and example. We plant, water, and fertilize but God gives the increase.I agree- I think a huge problem with Christian schools and with the parents who send their kids to one is ANY assumption that certain methods and policies will guarantee spiritual and moral results. Certain methods and policies are wise, preferable, prudent, etc… but we can never, NEVER rest on the idea that these rules are all the fences we need.
I’m not going to address the public school vs. Christian school question- it’s too far, IMO, off the topic of this thread.
Christian schools are in a unique position to toss out everything that is wrong with traditional schooling and, without gov’t control and intervention, do a much better job at partnering with parents, presenting solid information with a Christian worldview, and inspiring creativity and critical thinking. As long as Christian schools mimic public education, because “That’s the way we do it, furthermore, that’s the way we’ve always done it” (Harold Leake), they are not only going to have the problems that the federal system faces, but the additional headache of attempting to legislate spirituality.
Christian schools have a lot riding on the word “Christian” in their title, and I think they (generally) have trouble prioritizing the needs of the students over the ‘testimony’ of the school. Any time we operate with the good of the institution in mind while kicking children to the curb, we become spiritually worthless and IMO morally putrid.
Although worldview is important, it is not the only, or even the main argument for Christian education. Depending on theological persuasion, there are many Christian worldviews, not just THE Christian worldview, out there.A worldview is not a comprehensive set beliefs about everything. It’s a set of beliefs that forms a foundation or grid or framework (several metaphors work) for arranging your beliefs about everything. There is only one Christian worldview. Though people may differ some on how they define the fringes of it, a few differences does not comprise a different worldview, just a slight variation of the same one.
But this isn’t really all that relevant to the topic except, I guess, in talking about what schools are good for vs. what church are home are best suited for.
On Bauder’s assertion that academic product is not better from Christian schools (generally), he explains in the essay how the statistics work in his view. You declared this to be a “red herring,” but that’s not really a counter argument. His explanation is that the generally higher test scores among Christian school kids has to do with the fact that they do not have to deal with as broad a spectrum of test takers—including many that would come in at the very low end. Then he argues that the top x% in the typical Christian school roughly matches the top x% in the public school. The implication that is that he believes this should not be the case. Due to the larger and more ability-diverse student body in the public schools, the top tier of the Christian school ought to be much higher than the top tier of the public.
Of course, it’s valid to question the stats here. I don’t have that kind of data. I would not be surprised to find that he’s right, though, because, as he points out later in the piece, most Christian schools have embraced a paradigm in which they respond to the ideological focus of the public schools by having an opposite ideological focus.
My own take on that is that too many Christian schools see themselves primarily as places to pursue sanctification rather than places to pursue education. But this is defeating because they are nowhere near as well equipped as church and home for the mission of sanctification (and the church and home tend to be less able to accomplish the goals of education).
So in the schools there is alot of preaching and alot of ideological repetition, etc., but not enough equipping with the disciplines of thought and communication. This is true of both public and most Christian schools, only the content of the preaching is different.
It would really be surprising if the academic results were not pretty much the same.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
I went to 3 different Christian Schools by the time I graduated high school and I can say that all of what Bauder says is spot on with maybe one exception. One of the Christian schools I went to actually had pretty decent academics despite that fact that they did not use the trivium (and we wore uniforms there as well ;) ). The difference? They cost more to attend because they put the money into paying good qualified teachers. They were still underpaid compared to their public school counterparts but it was better than the 2 other schools I attended.
This brings us to the present. That better Christian school I attended is more than twice what it was when I was there 12 years ago. Bottom line is, good Christian education costs way too much these days for the average person. It is to the point that it can be considered a luxury like buying a bass boat or weekend Harley to ride except you have to pay for it every year.
We are homeschooling our kids and using Classical Conversations which is based on the trivium. This kind of schooling allows parents of lower incomes (who are willing to teach their kids themselves) to give their kids a good education for a fraction of the cost.
Even if Christian schools use the trivium that has only fixed the educational quality and not the cost. The whole model needs to change is more Christian children are going to get a good education.
This brings us to the present. That better Christian school I attended is more than twice what it was when I was there 12 years ago. Bottom line is, good Christian education costs way too much these days for the average person. It is to the point that it can be considered a luxury like buying a bass boat or weekend Harley to ride except you have to pay for it every year.
We are homeschooling our kids and using Classical Conversations which is based on the trivium. This kind of schooling allows parents of lower incomes (who are willing to teach their kids themselves) to give their kids a good education for a fraction of the cost.
Even if Christian schools use the trivium that has only fixed the educational quality and not the cost. The whole model needs to change is more Christian children are going to get a good education.
To piggy back on Aaron’s statements about schools as a means of sanctification, I would like to say that Christians schools have taken on this task for two reasons.
, they are confused about the purpose of Christian education. Christian education is to teach kids a liberal education from a Christian perspective that sees all of the subjects as connected to God and show how God shapes and informs each of them.
[list=2]
, as they have with the church, parents have given over their parental role as discipler of their children to the school. This sanctification mentality can be really seen when a Christian school tries to be a mission school to unsaved children but never actually evangelizes them. This is the experience I had in two of the three schools I went to. In my experience, the school becomes no better of an atmosphere than a public school. On the other hand, I have a teacher in our church who teaches at a mission Christian school and they have a lot of success with it. It is in GR, MI which may account for the success but maybe it can work in some places.
If Christian schools could understand what their purpose is - to educate kids - then they might be more successful. If parents could understand their purpose - to disciple AND educate their kids - then they might be more successful as well.
RPittman, are there any books or articles that you would recommend from your side and any that critique the classical model? I love to read on both sides of everything.
To clarify my comments on Christian schools and sanctification I would say that there seems to be an imbalance in some schools to major on this at the expense of other goals. A truly Christian education will certainly include moral and spiritual aspects. But then again that is part of the value of the trivium - it seeks to show the spiritual nature of all of the disciplines as they fall under the rule of God as their creator. This is why public education will always fail and could never truly adopt this model or a similar model with the same goal.
True, a good education will not make you successful but then again it can’t. Seminary cannot make a guy a successful pastor - that’s not its intent. It provides a person with the tools and guides them on how to use them once they are on their own with them. I, as well as many others, know people who have had full rides to great schools and then they flounder once they are done. They had a solid education and achieved good grades but end up far from their educational potential based on their educational background.
This is the problem we have with seminaries and the church right now. Churches are expecting schools to do for the student and future pastor what they are not designed to do nor can do. School gives the tools and the church gives the context to use them as they gain them. The schools and the church must work together to educate the student in the area they are meant to. They can both dip into the other but they must major on what they are designed to do. The same goes for K-12 grade education.
I suppose the definition of a good education depends on what you define as education and therefore what an educated person looks like.
I think there is value in academics because God created everything and therefore it is worth knowing and studying. Again, this is part of the foundation for a Christian understanding of the trivium.
Given your points on the downfalls of the trivium, do you think it can be reformed to be successful in today’s world? I think its underlying goals are correct but that does not mean it cannot be tweaked to fit the contemporary setting better given the changes.
True, a good education will not make you successful but then again it can’t. Seminary cannot make a guy a successful pastor - that’s not its intent. It provides a person with the tools and guides them on how to use them once they are on their own with them. I, as well as many others, know people who have had full rides to great schools and then they flounder once they are done. They had a solid education and achieved good grades but end up far from their educational potential based on their educational background.
This is the problem we have with seminaries and the church right now. Churches are expecting schools to do for the student and future pastor what they are not designed to do nor can do. School gives the tools and the church gives the context to use them as they gain them. The schools and the church must work together to educate the student in the area they are meant to. They can both dip into the other but they must major on what they are designed to do. The same goes for K-12 grade education.
I suppose the definition of a good education depends on what you define as education and therefore what an educated person looks like.
I think there is value in academics because God created everything and therefore it is worth knowing and studying. Again, this is part of the foundation for a Christian understanding of the trivium.
Given your points on the downfalls of the trivium, do you think it can be reformed to be successful in today’s world? I think its underlying goals are correct but that does not mean it cannot be tweaked to fit the contemporary setting better given the changes.
RPittman, I could be wrong but from what I have been told and have read the classical model as practiced by some Christians is designed to address the whole person. My wife and I are using the model used by Classical Conversations curriculum. Based on the explanation and from my interpretation of it, it is a holistic approach to education. This is what drew us to it.
Yes I would love to see the class notes!
Forgive my ignorance but where do you teach?
Yes I would love to see the class notes!
Forgive my ignorance but where do you teach?
Worldview, as I use the term, is simply one’s underlying philosophy, the lens through which you interpret life. It will either be based on Biblical principles- hence a Christian worldview- or it isn’t. A Christian education certainly does entail teaching the precepts of the Word of God, but helping kids (and adults) think critically and interpret life, their experiences, culture, etc… properly, is the application of those principles.
As for data comparing public and private schools (as far as academics go)- there are some studies, for what that’s worth. I don’t believe we can do much more than come to a few general conclusions based on stats and studies.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf] Comparing Private Schools and Public Schools Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling
This website gives an overview of why most folks believe that private schools have an advantage over public schools-
http://www.greatschools.org/find-a-school/defining-your-ideal/59-privat…] Private versus public- Some differences between public and private schools are obvious. But deciding what’s right for your child entails shedding light on the subtle distinctions many parents ignore.
The traditional top heavy Chalk and Talk for the Sit and Git is not the best teaching/learning method. http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/ed_cert_1101_20071129024241.pdf] Credentials are not the best indicator of an effective teacher . http://www.mcte.org/journal/mej07/3Henry.pdf] Standarized testing is not an accurate measure of learning . These are Flat Earth paradigms that need to be turned on their heads if we want kids to flourish academically, and also affordably. Isn’t it nice that we can have both.
Homeschoolers have already thrown themselves on the education grenade. Perhaps its time for Christian schools to do the same. If it truly is a ‘ministry’, then why should the church limit ‘ministering’ to those who can afford it?
As for data comparing public and private schools (as far as academics go)- there are some studies, for what that’s worth. I don’t believe we can do much more than come to a few general conclusions based on stats and studies.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf] Comparing Private Schools and Public Schools Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling
This website gives an overview of why most folks believe that private schools have an advantage over public schools-
http://www.greatschools.org/find-a-school/defining-your-ideal/59-privat…] Private versus public- Some differences between public and private schools are obvious. But deciding what’s right for your child entails shedding light on the subtle distinctions many parents ignore.
Private school students typically score higher than public school students on standardized tests, but a 2006 study (pdf) by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), which took into account students’ backgrounds, told a different story.Most folks believe intuitively that private schools should do better, based on admissions policies, the assumption of involved and invested parents, better socio-economic status, etc… but just because private schools are “schools of choice” doesn’t mean they are more efficient or effective.
Public school students in fourth and eighth grade scored almost as well or better than their private school peers in reading and math, except that private school students excelled in eighth-grade reading.
A Harvard University study (pdf) challenged the results, using the same data but different methods. Researchers found that private schools came out ahead in 11 of 12 comparisons of students.
Earlier in 2006, an analysis of math scores by two University of Illinois researchers found similar results to the NCES study. “Charter, Private, Public Schools and Academic Achievement” (pdf) states that “after accounting for the fact that private schools serve more advantaged populations, public schools perform remarkably well, often outscoring private and charter schools.”
But as this dissenting view from the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation’s Education Gadfly newsletter shows, the debate over which kind of school does a better job is far from settled.
[CPHurst] Bottom line is, good Christian education costs way too much these days for the average person. It is to the point that it can be considered a luxury like buying a bass boat or weekend Harley to ride except you have to pay for it every year.Isn’t that just crazy? I mean, here we are fussing about how much a Christian education costs because of the overwhelming expense, but yet a low income family can homeschool very effectively at minimal cost. I’m spending about $120 this year on curriculum and supplies. For 3 kids.
We are homeschooling our kids and using Classical Conversations which is based on the trivium. This kind of schooling allows parents of lower incomes (who are willing to teach their kids themselves) to give their kids a good education for a fraction of the cost.
The traditional top heavy Chalk and Talk for the Sit and Git is not the best teaching/learning method. http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/ed_cert_1101_20071129024241.pdf] Credentials are not the best indicator of an effective teacher . http://www.mcte.org/journal/mej07/3Henry.pdf] Standarized testing is not an accurate measure of learning . These are Flat Earth paradigms that need to be turned on their heads if we want kids to flourish academically, and also affordably. Isn’t it nice that we can have both.
Homeschoolers have already thrown themselves on the education grenade. Perhaps its time for Christian schools to do the same. If it truly is a ‘ministry’, then why should the church limit ‘ministering’ to those who can afford it?
Susan, as I mentioned earlier my wife and I just started using the Classical Conversations material. In fact, my wife is going to be a tutor!
Classical education, or the Trivium Method, or the Principle Approach, or Charlotte Mason, or Montessori, or Waldorf, or my personal favorite- http://www.moorefoundation.com/article.php?id=5] The Moore Formula - are just methods. I don’t care who invented the vacuum cleaner- if the sucker works (haha, I made a pun!), I’m using it. There isn’t anything inherently problematic with a Classical approach. It simply advocates that in early years, kids learn core skills and memorization of facts. As they get older and are more able to reason and process abstract thought, they are able to begin learning concepts that lead to higher math, vocabulary, and reading comprehension, and then move on to more complicated ideas and skills such as algebra, biology, physics, and debate.
Most curriculum (BJU, Alpha Omega, A Beka) uses the Scope and Sequence method, which is much more of a manufacturing/assembly line model of education patterned after traditional public education. I think the technical term for that is ‘icky’.
Most curriculum (BJU, Alpha Omega, A Beka) uses the Scope and Sequence method, which is much more of a manufacturing/assembly line model of education patterned after traditional public education. I think the technical term for that is ‘icky’.
Bro. Pittman, it looks to me like you’ve got out a tweezers and are picking apart and compartmentalizing to the point where your rebuttals are nearly incomprehensible. I don’t think he said what you think he said. I think you are arguing points he (CPHurst) did not make. I certainly don’t see anyone trying to credit the Trivium with sanctifying powers. And I don’t think saying that “I think there is value in academics because God created everything and therefore it is worth knowing and studying.” means “Let’s study gambling, prostitution, and gay sex”. Seriously now. Could we give folks some credit for not being complete imbeciles and having to explain, clarify, re-explain, re-clarify… until we go shoehorn crazy?
When we discuss ideas, one point at a time, we aren’t attempting to separate and compartmentalize. I think we realize that the Holy Spirit leads and guides to Truth, but Holy Spirit doesn’t teach us how to read in our language or change the oil in the car or file our income taxes.
I’m going to say this as nicely as I can- my ultimate goal as a parent is to bring up children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But angels forfend, if one of my children does not come to know the Savior, they are still going to be law-abiding, productive citizens. I am going to teach them life skills, marketable skills, integrity, morality, and a butt-kickin’ work ethic, with the Bible as the primary foundation of faith and practice. Their salvation is between them and God.
When we discuss ideas, one point at a time, we aren’t attempting to separate and compartmentalize. I think we realize that the Holy Spirit leads and guides to Truth, but Holy Spirit doesn’t teach us how to read in our language or change the oil in the car or file our income taxes.
I’m going to say this as nicely as I can- my ultimate goal as a parent is to bring up children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But angels forfend, if one of my children does not come to know the Savior, they are still going to be law-abiding, productive citizens. I am going to teach them life skills, marketable skills, integrity, morality, and a butt-kickin’ work ethic, with the Bible as the primary foundation of faith and practice. Their salvation is between them and God.
I think we could pick at each others points all day long and get no where. We are coming at this from different angels. However, I think if we were to sit down together we might be in more agreement than we realize…I could be wrong.
However, I didnt say academics is a created thing. God created the stuff of which mathematics, science, literature/language, history, etc. study. These are categories of learning content. God created the earth and all that is in it and science studies it. God created numbers and logic and mathematics studies it. God acts in history with people and history studies it. As so on. This is not a pious thought but one that acknowledges reality. Studying these areas is useless if God is not part of it.
Susan, I know the Scope & Sequence method is a little different but in its most basic form cant any educational model use the scope and sequence method to teach the material of a particular educational philosophy?
However, I didnt say academics is a created thing. God created the stuff of which mathematics, science, literature/language, history, etc. study. These are categories of learning content. God created the earth and all that is in it and science studies it. God created numbers and logic and mathematics studies it. God acts in history with people and history studies it. As so on. This is not a pious thought but one that acknowledges reality. Studying these areas is useless if God is not part of it.
Susan, I know the Scope & Sequence method is a little different but in its most basic form cant any educational model use the scope and sequence method to teach the material of a particular educational philosophy?
[CPHurst] Susan, I know the Scope & Sequence method is a little different but in its most basic form cant any educational model use the scope and sequence method to teach the material of a particular educational philosophy?Any educational model can employ a Scope & Sequence, if you are talking about an outline of what topics you will cover each year. But a http://www.abeka.com/Resources/PDFs/ScopeAndSequence.pdf] traditional S&S is usually very general, and often introduces concepts before a typical student is equipped to make the information useful.
For instance, of what real use it is to teach scientific principles to children who do not yet understand Algebra? Of course, I’m NOT saying they aren’t to be exposed to science, creationism, etc… but you can’t teach the principle of chemistry, weather, motion, etc without higher math. So basically, the problem with a traditional S&S is that it teaches kids a little bit of everything, and doesn’t allow for specialization. Ditto with the accompanying grading system- children are not ‘allowed’ to excel in one area and struggle in another without being labeled as a ‘failure’. Only in school are people essentially punished for specialization.
Yes it seems that maybe the S&S model is ok for higher education like college?
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/flowers.gif
For many, if not most private schools and homeschoolers, the Trivium is a pattern, not a philosophy. You don’t have to buy into the whole package, if there is a package. I don’t have to be a wild-eyed Charlotte Mason or Maria Montessori disciple to take away ideas that have merit and use them.
[RPittman] My point has been mangled and trivialized.Yeah- tell me about it. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-confused002.gif
[CPHurst]
I think there is value in academics because God created everything and therefore it is worth knowing and studying. Again, this is part of the foundation for a Christian understanding of the trivium.
[RPittman] Academics is ideation, not a physical entity that God created. This sounds good and pious but it’s not accurate. Every idea or concept cannot be attributed to God’s creating. If so, did God create gambling? prostitution? Queer Theory? spiritualist seances? Dianetics?I think in the context of this discussion and granting some intelligence to the average SI contributor, we can safely assume that that Bro. Hurst was not including everything that exists as something worth knowing and studying. We are talking about elementary and high school academics, and you have to go to college to study “The Unbearable Whiteness of Barbie” or “The Philosophy of Star Trek”.
For many, if not most private schools and homeschoolers, the Trivium is a pattern, not a philosophy. You don’t have to buy into the whole package, if there is a package. I don’t have to be a wild-eyed Charlotte Mason or Maria Montessori disciple to take away ideas that have merit and use them.
[Susan R]You are doing it again. Quit it. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-angry031.gif
I think we realize that the Holy Spirit leads and guides to Truth, but Holy Spirit doesn’t teach us how to read in our language or change the oil in the car or file our income taxes.[RPittman] Knowing how to do the taxes is not enough without honesty.
[CPHurst] Yes it seems that maybe the S&S model is ok for higher education like college?A traditional S&S is aimed at spreading general knowledge about many subjects like a miser spreads peanut butter on bread. Just enough to cover, not enough to need a glass of milk to wash it down.
College is a time for even more specialization, but it’s expected at that level for a person to have an idea about what they want to ‘do’ with their lives. Of course, this doesn’t explain the multitudes of young people who go to college to ‘find themselves’, but that’s another thread.
I see no reason to wait until the college level to allow kids to begin to specialize. I start from day one clearing a path for my kids to travel in the directions they show interest and ability. When my oldest son showed an aptitude for mechanics at 8 years old, we started picking weedeaters, lawnmowers, bikes, VCRs… off the curb on trash day, and made Seth a little workshop where he could take things apart. By the time he was 16, he was working full time for an HVAC company doing installs on his own. Did he read Shakespeare, Dickens, and take in variety of poetry? Did I teach him who Picasso and Monet were? Did he take foreign language lessons? Yes- he did the essentials in those subjects, but I didn’t force him to spend time trying to excel in an area where he had no interest. That’s practically educational heresy in our One Size Fits All society.
The discussion over trivium, scope and sequence, etc. reminded me of an old debate that was going on in CE years ago over whether methods were neutral. One man, using I Corinthians 3:10 as his proof text, denied their neutrality. One noted Christian textbook publisher said that any biology textbook that taught from the simple to the complex was espousing evolutionary theory.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Some methods are mostly mechanical, others are inherently bound to a philosophy. All methods make assumptions though, and it’s the assumptions that should be examined. But I can use the same method you do, and not be on board with the same assumptions.
If one uses the model of classical education because they believe that children should be taught core skills and memorization of facts first, and in increasing order of difficulty introduce complicated concepts, critical thinking skills, and abstract thought processes, on what misguided philosophy would this be based? But- if someone was superglued to every facet of the Trivium because they felt it was ordained by God or contained the promise of a thoroughly educated and morally upstanding graduate, they are making a false assumption… or two.
Most of the notions that provide a foundation for today’s education system are hideously flawed, but have been adopted by the church with hardly a whimper. Just reading the history of public education and those who have influenced its progression- Immanuel Kant, Horace Mann, Rousseau, John Dewey, G. Stanley Hall… should give every Christian a bad case of hives. But look at how dedicated we are to romanticizing childhood, peer segregation, grade levels, and adolescence. What’s the first question every adult asks a kid- “What grade are you in?” How do we organize Sunday School? Why do we have youth groups? Because we bought the pig in the poke without examining the underlying assumptions.
On standardized testing- my kids have to test every year, and standardized tests are the dumbest thing to come down the pike since Chihuahuas in handbags. I don’t care who creates or ‘interprets’ them, they are based on faulty assumptions. And if they can’t measure critical thinking skills, research ability, and creativity, then save some trees (and me $75, two days of my time, and about $1.50 postage) and stop printing them.
On homeschooling- I have never said that homeschooling is perfect, a panacea, Utopia, Paradise, or even Southern Georgia. What I have said is that HSers have essentially walked on ahead, regardless of the nay-sayers who cried “There be dragons, ya’ll!” and on average we’ve proven that there is not necessarily a need for expensive textbooks, traditional classrooms, or the direct oversight of professional, certified educators.
I think we’ve already settled on the fact that regardless of the method, there are no guarantees. After all, Jesus chose 12 and one of them became the son of perdition, for cryin’ out loud. But there is what has been tried and tested and by all the evidence appears to work best, and then there is what hoovers like an F5 tornado regardless of how many times it has been reformed or had billions of dollars thrown at it.
If one uses the model of classical education because they believe that children should be taught core skills and memorization of facts first, and in increasing order of difficulty introduce complicated concepts, critical thinking skills, and abstract thought processes, on what misguided philosophy would this be based? But- if someone was superglued to every facet of the Trivium because they felt it was ordained by God or contained the promise of a thoroughly educated and morally upstanding graduate, they are making a false assumption… or two.
Most of the notions that provide a foundation for today’s education system are hideously flawed, but have been adopted by the church with hardly a whimper. Just reading the history of public education and those who have influenced its progression- Immanuel Kant, Horace Mann, Rousseau, John Dewey, G. Stanley Hall… should give every Christian a bad case of hives. But look at how dedicated we are to romanticizing childhood, peer segregation, grade levels, and adolescence. What’s the first question every adult asks a kid- “What grade are you in?” How do we organize Sunday School? Why do we have youth groups? Because we bought the pig in the poke without examining the underlying assumptions.
On standardized testing- my kids have to test every year, and standardized tests are the dumbest thing to come down the pike since Chihuahuas in handbags. I don’t care who creates or ‘interprets’ them, they are based on faulty assumptions. And if they can’t measure critical thinking skills, research ability, and creativity, then save some trees (and me $75, two days of my time, and about $1.50 postage) and stop printing them.
On homeschooling- I have never said that homeschooling is perfect, a panacea, Utopia, Paradise, or even Southern Georgia. What I have said is that HSers have essentially walked on ahead, regardless of the nay-sayers who cried “There be dragons, ya’ll!” and on average we’ve proven that there is not necessarily a need for expensive textbooks, traditional classrooms, or the direct oversight of professional, certified educators.
I think we’ve already settled on the fact that regardless of the method, there are no guarantees. After all, Jesus chose 12 and one of them became the son of perdition, for cryin’ out loud. But there is what has been tried and tested and by all the evidence appears to work best, and then there is what hoovers like an F5 tornado regardless of how many times it has been reformed or had billions of dollars thrown at it.
[RP]I’m muddying the waters? :D
Once again, Aaron, you’ve managed to muddy the waters….
…If I may quietly and kindly point out, worldview is not necessarily a naturally occurring phenomenon with an existence in reality. It is a theoretical construct, akin to Weltanschauung in rationalistic German philosophy…
Remind me again of when I said a worldview was “a naturally occurring phenomenon with an…” Well, of course it has an existence in reality. People have worldviews, ergo worldviews exist. There’s no need to get all metaphysical. … somebody might get the impression you don’t actually have a point. ;)
But I better stop. Roland, I think everybody’s laughing at both of us. “The Aaron and Roland follies.” Since they’re not paying for the entertainment, I think I’ll slink off the stage.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Wow, Brother Pittman, You’ve sure used a lot of grammar, “logic,” and rhetoric in your responses. Perhaps now we should simply not learn the trivium because you have used the trivium to defeat the trivium. Kinda self defeating, isn’t it?
Add chaos theory
Mix cup of free radicals
Makes batch of this thread
On worldviews, I think Roland has a point. How do supposed ur-beliefs (beliefs behind belief) meaningfully differ from beliefs? And why is it that the same people who insist that worldviews operate on core principles actually wind up with some highly particular, robust systems of thought that are supposedly the necessary outcome of those worldviews? (I’m referring mainly here to some wingnut Reformed theonomists.) Although I think the concept of “worldview” did some useful things in the 20th century, such as reminding Christians that beliefs are based on other beliefs, and thus subject to “transcendent” or “transcendental” refutation (technically they’re different), I don’t know that the concept of worldview has much of a future. It tended toward a subject-object polarization that, at the very least, isn’t fashionable in philosophy now. For one Christian philosopher who is moving beyond the concept, see James Smith, Desiring the Kingdom.
Mix cup of free radicals
Makes batch of this thread
On worldviews, I think Roland has a point. How do supposed ur-beliefs (beliefs behind belief) meaningfully differ from beliefs? And why is it that the same people who insist that worldviews operate on core principles actually wind up with some highly particular, robust systems of thought that are supposedly the necessary outcome of those worldviews? (I’m referring mainly here to some wingnut Reformed theonomists.) Although I think the concept of “worldview” did some useful things in the 20th century, such as reminding Christians that beliefs are based on other beliefs, and thus subject to “transcendent” or “transcendental” refutation (technically they’re different), I don’t know that the concept of worldview has much of a future. It tended toward a subject-object polarization that, at the very least, isn’t fashionable in philosophy now. For one Christian philosopher who is moving beyond the concept, see James Smith, Desiring the Kingdom.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
RPittman, sorry to ‘pick’ but your analogy with basketball actually works in favor of both of us. It is not just the action of aiming and shooting that enables one to make a basket but rather the repetition of those actions that enables one to repeatedly (there’s that word again!) make a basket. It is the repetition of the proper form that enables you to be successful. It is the repeated use of proper form that will enable one to make the basket sooner and more often.
Repetition can be taken too far but there is no complete substitute for it (not that I think you are trying to but it seems to feel that way).
Repetition can be taken too far but there is no complete substitute for it (not that I think you are trying to but it seems to feel that way).
To quote myself on this I said, “It is the repeated use of PROPER form that will enable one to make the basket sooner and more often.” As my preaching professor in college always said, “Practice dosent make perfect so make sure you are practicing it right.”
If you practice the PROPER form then you will improve but the level of improvement will depend on your personal abilities. So not everyone practicing the same form for the same period of time will have the same exact results….but now we are way off topic:)
I feel like my words are dying the death of a thousand qualifications……..
If you practice the PROPER form then you will improve but the level of improvement will depend on your personal abilities. So not everyone practicing the same form for the same period of time will have the same exact results….but now we are way off topic:)
I feel like my words are dying the death of a thousand qualifications……..
- If a church can partner with other churches to have a regional school, DO IT! This is superior to a single church hosting a school (Exemptions for churches over 500 in membership)
- If you cannot pay teachers an adequate salary plus benefits (like a health care plan and a 403(b) plan), DON”T START A SCHOOL! I’ve seen poor teachers at the near end of retirement who faithfully served in near poverty! Shame on the schools who treated them like slaves!
- If you cannot host a school with teachers who have degrees in the area in which they are to teach (Math teacher has a math degree or a math / teaching degree, et cetera), DON”T START A SCHOOL
- If you do not intend to seek accreditation, DON”T START A SCHOOL
- If your church is not financially sound, DON”T START A SCHOOL
- If you cannot honestly answer this question “YES” - to a church member, “It is your decision as to where to send your child to school. If you decide to send your child to a public school OR home school, we will still regard you as an equal in our church! And your child will be regarded as an equal in youth group!” - If cannot say “Yes” to this question … DON”T START A SCHOOL!
Jim you are right on with all of those remarks! Because they cant do #1 most of them fail or limp along and drag everyone else with them. Most of the schools I attended or knew of did all of the rest and it was a shame.
So far, I have hesitated to get involved in this conversation because I really don’t have a dog in this fight. I have 4 kids and we have had our kids in the public schools, christian schools, and we even home schooled our oldest for one year. I am inclined to side with Susan and Micah where the parents are essential for whatever method that we choose in the education of our children. As for allowing godless, worldly philosophy from the public schools into our children’s lives, there are many old testament examples of leaders that were educated this way. Moses, for example, was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts 7:22), yet God used him to deliver his people. Nehemiah, Esther, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednigo were others that were educated in a pagan setting, yet they did not compromise their faith in Yahweh. Of course, none of these mentioned had much of a choice in the matter. But it does serve as Biblical descriptive (not prescriptive) examples that if the Biblical foundation and discernment is taught by the parents to their children, one can survive or even thrive among pagan education……..
[RPittman]As a former Christian school administrator, I would agree with this. I’ve seen schools who had people with engineering degrees teaching math and science. One had a person with a degree in nursing teaching biology. But this option rarely happens. Instead, those teaching math and science seldom have any meaningful qualifications.[Jim] If you cannot host a school with teachers who have degrees in the area in which they are to teach (Math teacher has a math degree or a math / teaching degree, et cetera), DON”T START A SCHOOLThis has the germ of a good idea but it is too general, too open and shut, and too emphatic. There are good, qualified people who are able to teach courses outside of their degrees. For example, most science teachers, especially those with graduate degrees in science, have a strong math background in algebra, trigonometry, calculus, etc. making them well-qualified to teach a HS math course. Some good math teachers have an engineering background and the business teacher with accounting knowledge is well able to teach general and consumer math courses. One can argue that science majors, engineers, and accountants make better math teachers because they have the view of math application to the real world. (I learned more math in my college chemistry and physics courses than in my calculus courses.) The emphasis ought to be on qualifications, not degrees or certification. A school should hire only hire teachers qualified to teach in the area for which they are hired to teach.
(Anecdote) One fine young man I know wanted to teach history in a Christian school. He graduated with honors and discovered that schools weren’t interested in hiring a history major. A number of them told him that “anyone can teach history” and admitted that none of their history teachers had majors in the field.
Concerned parents will ask about the qualifications of teachers and most of them won’t settle for “they really love their students”.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
In response to several posts further up the thread…
I hate to see perfectly good concepts ruined by shifting tides… in this case, a sort of “worldview” fad, now followed it seems, by the beginnings of an “antiworldview” fad. OK, if we’re getting hung up on the term, let’s try to save the concept.
There are ultimate questions every thoughtful (and most non-thoughtful) human beings have about themselves and the world they live in. The answers to these questions are what I’m talking about (e.g., Who or what are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here? How do we go about getting answers? How do we identify right and wrong?)
There is only one Christian set of answers to those questions. If it’s hopelessly 1990’s to call this a “worldview,” call it something cooler. The reality is that these basic lenses through which we look at the world exist and have always existed. They will not be philosophized away.
I hate to see perfectly good concepts ruined by shifting tides… in this case, a sort of “worldview” fad, now followed it seems, by the beginnings of an “antiworldview” fad. OK, if we’re getting hung up on the term, let’s try to save the concept.
There are ultimate questions every thoughtful (and most non-thoughtful) human beings have about themselves and the world they live in. The answers to these questions are what I’m talking about (e.g., Who or what are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here? How do we go about getting answers? How do we identify right and wrong?)
There is only one Christian set of answers to those questions. If it’s hopelessly 1990’s to call this a “worldview,” call it something cooler. The reality is that these basic lenses through which we look at the world exist and have always existed. They will not be philosophized away.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
I’m with Aaron on the use of the term “worldview” as appropriate. Just because the word was ‘invented’ does not mean it cannot be used from then on (can we say trinity!). Also, words tend to change in meaning and sometimes become better defined in meaning and use and so I think so with worldview. It’s a word that accurately (as best it can) describes the sum set of beliefs a person has (whether consciously or not). As Aaron said, it is the lens through which you view the world and is made up from all of your beliefs whether coherent, conscious, false or not.
I taught a class at church on the Christian worldview and in the 6-8 books I read no one questioned the use of the term. I confess I did see Naugle’s book but I just never got to it. I am not saying the term is beyond critique and we need to ignore the context from which it came but it is a useful word/concept and I will carry it with me to my grave! -:)
I taught a class at church on the Christian worldview and in the 6-8 books I read no one questioned the use of the term. I confess I did see Naugle’s book but I just never got to it. I am not saying the term is beyond critique and we need to ignore the context from which it came but it is a useful word/concept and I will carry it with me to my grave! -:)
Discussion