I want to throw this out there because I'm not sure what to think about it.
My son goes to a public pre-school. Yesterday, in his backpack, he had a flier for a fall festival being put on by a local Baptist Church.
When I first glanced at it I was in the middle of a dozen things and didn't give it much thought, but as the day wore on I kept thinking about it and wondering at the appropriateness of a public school promoting an event hosted by a church.
I asked my husband yesterday evening, and he was also unsure what to think about it. It's not like the flier was for a religious service, it's for a free fall festival open to the public, but it is held at and by a church that is frankly known for proselytizing.
Both of our gut feelings was that it wasn't right.
What do you think? Should a public school be sending home materials promoting events at local churches?
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Nope. I find that extremely bothersome as well.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I don't have any problem with it.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
As long as the location is clearly marked, I think it is ok, as long as they don't bar fliers for events that promote different religions or a lack of religion.
(If on the other hand, they do have a policy against materials that are religious across-the-board, I would find that (as in sending that kind of flier) irritating)
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
I would be very bothered by it.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I wouldn't worry about it. The resistance has infiltrated that church and is actually using the fliers to send coded messages to our agents in the area. "Fall Festival" is... well, nothing you need worry about, at any rate.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
LOL @ KoM
As for the rest of you: you're about 50/50. That's no help!
Sigh...I think the thing that bothers me is that I live in Kansas and I'm already worried that despite the fact that I'm sending my kids to public school, there will be a heavy Christian influence there. I won't always know what my kids' teachers are saying to them and I don't entirely trust them, not because I think they'd intentionally hurt anyone but because I think people around here assume everyone is Christian and don't even blink twice about asserting their world view as truth when it is only opinion. I know too many people who don't know the difference.
Of course, the other kids will be saying all kinds of things but they're not authority figures and my kids will just have to learn to think for themselves in those situations. Eventually, they're going to have to think for themselves and question what teachers tell them too, but that's not going to happen for a while.
In the meantime, I think I want to see a clear line drawn in the sand if for no better reason than it reinforces in a teacher's mind what is and is not appropriate.
Posted by DaisyMae (Member # 9722) on :
I'm trying to figure out why this would be bothersome.
I really can't.
It's a flier. Throw it away if you're not interested.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Did the school or a teacher pass them out or were they just "available" - like on a table with other fliers for community events? Or did some other kid pass them out? How does the school handle requests from other groups?
My reaction would depend somewhat on the answers to these questions. I might well be bothered.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Did the school or a teacher pass them out or were they just "available" - like on a table with other fliers for community events? Or did some other kid pass them out? How does the school handle requests from other groups?
I don't know. My son rides the bus so these things just come home in his backpack. I have no idea if they are mentioned at school or what. If I picked him up instead of having him ride the bus, I don't know if they would have just been in a publicly available grab spot. And I have no idea how they would handle a request from another group.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
What, your son refuses to answer questions? It's a bad sign when they go quiet. If the brainwashing has not progressed too far, the resistance has... ways... of making the pod people talk. With recent advances there is even a good probability of getting back an un-brainwashed child in practically undamaged condition. You would never notice the difference.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I grew up in NE Kansas (the Lawrence area), and never felt the kind of pressure that you're concerned about when I was in public school (and I was brought up in an atheist/agnostic household, so it's something that I'd have been likely to notice). I'm not sure what part of Kansas you're living in, though.
I think that I would probably feel a little concerned about the flier, but it would depend quite a bit on those things that kmboots outlined. If I were in your position, I'd probably give the teacher a call and ask about it.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: I grew up in NE Kansas (the Lawrence area), and never felt the kind of pressure that you're concerned about when I was in public school (and I was brought up in an atheist/agnostic household, so it's something that I'd have been likely to notice). I'm not sure what part of Kansas you're living in, though.
I live about 30 minutes from Lawrence, actually, but you have to understand that Lawrence is an oddity in this state. It is a liberal town surrounded by conservative and religious areas. It's even been gerrymandered so that it doesn't even get a real say in politics.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
The thing with cases like these (and on a similar note, people working a store wearing "God Bless America" pins and the like) is that any individual case really isn't a big deal. However, it's something that easily could become a big deal if everyone started doing it. Imagine if you sent your kid to a school where he/she was constantly bombarded with flyers from ("Insert religion that creeps you out for whatever reason").
While I don't think this one instance is really an issue, I wouldn't do it again.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
As long as their flier policy allows all organizations to send fliers home I don't have a problem with it.
There was a case in the last few years where a school decided to only allow school-related fliers to go home with the kids. (a change in policy) A local church complained and the policy was changed, allowing their vacation bible school flyers to go home with the kids. The next winter a pagan church sent a Solstice Celebration invitation home with the kids. The Bible School church freaking out. I think they are back to school-related flyers only again.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Christine, I think you clearly need to hold an Atheist Harvest Festival for which you can deliver fliers to the school for distribution.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
If the flier itself is not proselytizing, and the event is not a religious service and the school would handle a promotional flier for a community event from any other group the same way, then I don't think there's anything wrong with it.
If the school hands out fliers promoting community activities then they shouldn't not hand out this one because it's a church sponsoring the event.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: I live about 30 minutes from Lawrence, actually
Oh, interesting. I grew up in Clinton (about two blocks from the Clinton Store, and the second house east of the township hall if you're familiar with the place), which is also about a half hour from Lawrence. I went through Lawrence schools, though.
quote:but you have to understand that Lawrence is an oddity in this state.
:: laugh :: Yeah, I'm aware of that; I think it'd be difficult to be from the area and not be. That was why I added my qualifier, explaining what part of the state I was from. My experience probably wouldn't have been the same if I'd grown up in most other parts of the state.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I agree entirely with dkw.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Christine, I think you clearly need to hold an Atheist Harvest Festival for which you can deliver fliers to the school for distribution.
Maybe for Christmas -- a Winter Solstace celebration, perhaps?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: If the flier itself is not proselytizing, and the event is not a religious service and the school would handle a promotional flier for a community event from any other group the same way, then I don't think there's anything wrong with it.
If the school hands out fliers promoting community activities then they shouldn't not hand out this one because it's a church sponsoring the event.
Well put.
Posted by theresa51282 (Member # 8037) on :
I don't think it would bother me too much. The flyer itself doesn't promote any religion per se. Nothing in recieving the flyer would make kids feel pressure towards any religion or even spark religious discussion.
Sometimes I feel like we go too far in worrying about talking about religion instead of worrying about promoting religion. When I taught preschool, I hated when the holidays rolled around because all the kids wanted to talk about were their holiday traditions (the class was about 1/2 jewish 1/2 christmas celebrating). Parents got offended over ridiculous things in my opinion such as decorating pine cones with glitter and snow balls because they "could" have been used as christmas tree decorations. It really put a damper on the kids fun. I would have loved to have let everyone make something that said winter to them. Whether that was some dreidls, some christmas trees or snowflakes. Instead we avoided anything winter related because all of it was deemed too controversial. I guess this is a round about way of saying be careful about worrying too much about things because after a while, everything that could ever possibly be construed as controversial is gone and the kids are the ones who really suffer.
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
Perhaps part of why it would bother me is that I can't remember ever receiving any flier for a community (as opposed to school organized/hosted) event while in school. Is this common in some districts? It feels very weird to me.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by ambyr: Perhaps part of why it would bother me is that I can't remember ever receiving any flier for a community (as opposed to school organized/hosted) event while in school. Is this common in some districts? It feels very weird to me.
Not only did I never receive such a thing in school, but my son has been in school for almost a year now (he started in November last year) and this is the first we've received. I don't know...after reading the comments here I'm beginning to think it would actually bother me *less* if he had received other such fliers for other similar events.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
dkw summed up my position on the matter perfectly.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
One more vote for dkw here, but with a bit of reservation.
My concern arises from living in Utah where there is a majority religion and having seen how this kind of thing can be part of a larger picture where people who aren't part of the majority religions are excluded. If the overwhelming majority of people in this community attend this particular baptist church, I would worry more.
The flyer issue is a bit weird. Like ambyr, I don't remember ever having the school send home flyers for community events that weren't somehow linked to the school. I wonder how it happened, my best guess is that it was something distributed by the PTA but I'm not sure why.
I have a friend who lived in a neighborhood in the southern part of the Salt Lake Valley that was 90+% Mormon. In her school district, the PTA unofficially operated through the local church. They made announcements in church, send home PTA flyers at church and so on. Because my friend wasn't Mormon, she never got any of the PTA flyers and announcements. I'm sure it was something that just happened thoughtlessly. The PTA leaders in the school likely figured that church was a place where they could get stuff to most parents directly rather than having to send stuff home with the kids. They very likely didn't even think about how this would exclude the few neighbors who didn't come to church. But the effect was the same as if it had been intentional.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
As a public school teacher, I will tell you that according to what I have learned both from my administration and from classes and professional development on religion in schools and the law - dkw's take is exactly right.
If the school hands out flyers from the Baptist church but refuses to hand out flyers from the Jewish Community Center or Islamic center, or a secular group, then there would be a problem. But, so long as the event is free, open to all including those who are not reglious, and they offer the same opportunity to other faiths and secular community groups it's perfectly okay.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
I'm also a public school teacher and I don't see what the problem is either. It's just an event hosted by an organization in the community. Why is there something not right about it because it involves a church? If some church happens to sponsor a food drive to help the less fortunate are you going to feel scandalized if they send home a flier for that too? It's not like it's a pamphlet for bible camp.
I say teach your kids about religion, tell them what you believe/don't believe, explain that other people believe different things and let them learn and decide for themselves rather than worrying about every subtle influence they may be exposed to.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Rabbit covered pretty explicitly the sort of thing that COULD be wrong about it. In this particular case it's probably not a big deal. But in communities where one particular church is dominant, giving that church additional presence and influence in a supposedly public setting can be intimidating for minority religions, which is something that deserves consideration whenever a "minor" issue is going on.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
I also worry about the "majority" slant.
Yes, it would be nice that a school could feel free to promote community activities regardless of affiliation with various religious groups. And its key that discrimination isn't part of the consideration process.
But its more challenging in areas where there is a strong and vocal majority. I can easily envision a scene in which a principal and school board member stands up and proudly announces that they support community involvement from ALL religious organizations, even though only one or two are ever represented.
I've never lived in religiously diverse communities. There was the occasional in-fighting between various Christian denominations but there were not vocal non-Christian, or non-religious organizations in my town. As an atheist growing up in East Texas I was very thankful that our school district was VERY careful about separating religion from the public school system.
Plus, prior to the event, how much can the schools guarantee that its not an event to recruit new members? On more than one occasions I've attended festivals "hosted" by local churches were attendees were being approached my recruiters. The fliers often said that there would be games for the kids, free music and food. Just because it doesn't say that there's a religious agenda, doesn't mean there isn't one.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna:
Plus, prior to the event, how much can the schools guarantee that its not an event to recruit new members? On more than one occasions I've attended festivals "hosted" by local churches were attendees were being approached my recruiters. The fliers often said that there would be games for the kids, free music and food. Just because it doesn't say that there's a religious agenda, doesn't mean there isn't one.
Then don't go to it. I still don't see the harm in a flier.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
Maybe this would cause more trouble than it's worth, but I would make up some fliers promoting a Wiccan event. (Or something to that affect.) And give that to the school to distribute.
If they allow it, regardless of any complaints they may or may not receive, then the Baptist flier doesn't bother me.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That would be inherently dishonest.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: That would be inherently dishonest.
Only if there was no Wiccan event. I didn't say make up some fliers for a fake one. Sorry. Rereading, it does sound like I'm implying that.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon:
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: ... The fliers often said that there would be games for the kids, free music and food. Just because it doesn't say that there's a religious agenda, doesn't mean there isn't one.
Then don't go to it. I still don't see the harm in a flier.
Ummm, I think the idea is that the fliers were false advertising. The flier might say that everything is free, but there is a cost, being proselytized at.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: That would be inherently dishonest.
Only if there was no Wiccan event. I didn't say make up some fliers for a fake one. Sorry. Rereading, it does sound like I'm implying that.
Ah.
In that case, it's really bad form to "advertise" someone else's activity without their permission to further your own agenda.
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
I just really don't think schools should be advertising non-school events to children, at all, regardless of the type of event or who's hosting it. Kids get bombarded with enough advertising out in the "real world"--I'd like school to be an advertising-free zone. That applies whether it's advertising for a canned food drive or advertising for a local flea market.
This has nothing to do with whether I think it's legal for them to do so; I just wish they wouldn't.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon:
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: ... The fliers often said that there would be games for the kids, free music and food. Just because it doesn't say that there's a religious agenda, doesn't mean there isn't one.
Then don't go to it. I still don't see the harm in a flier.
Ummm, I think the idea is that the fliers were false advertising. The flier might say that everything is free, but there is a cost, being proselytized at.
Yes, but I figure that the people who are likely to be offended by such a "trap" (for lack of a better term) will be wary of attending anyway, and perhaps rightfully so. Simply being informed that a church-hosted event is occuring just doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I'm just not seeing the harm here. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I just really don't think schools should be advertising non-school events to children, at all... Kids get bombarded with enough advertising out in the "real world"--I'd like school to be an advertising-free zone.
I got the impression that the flyer was for the parents, not for the children.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
neo-dragon: Well, it roughly depends on which affirmative camp you belong in, if you're in the "all fliers should be allowed camp, regardless" then there is no harm. However, if you're in the "fliers should be allowed, except when for a religious service or when proselytizing" then there very well could be harm.
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:I just really don't think schools should be advertising non-school events to children, at all... Kids get bombarded with enough advertising out in the "real world"--I'd like school to be an advertising-free zone.
I got the impression that the flyer was for the parents, not for the children.
Err. So, to me, that's even worse--the kid is being forced to be the advertisER. The organization is using the kid (captive audience) as a channel to his parents. Ick.
I really do want to know if this is common in American schools. Like I said, I can't recall it happening a single time in all my pre-college years.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I can't recall it happening a single time in all my pre-college years.
Me neither.
quote:I really do want to know if this is common in American schools.
I think it's pretty common, yeah. Our kids come home with tons of crap.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
My (Catholic) church used to hold an Octoberfest when I was younger. The whole event was a fundraiser for the church, but the event itself was secular and included food, an auction, a yard sale, games with prizes, pony rides, a jail. A carnival type company brought the portable spinny rides and rip-off midway games which drew an even larger crowds. Being a cool thing to do, everyone in town showed up, not just parishioners. About the most church-centric event was a dunk tank in which the two priests took a turn (there was one everyone hated and he drew quite the group of parishioners). The event died because carnival people and their rides were sketchy, and they were not asked back (then no one came) and the new priest wasn't much into that event so it didn't happen anymore. It's a shame, because I miss the Octoberfest now looking back on it.
If the event that the church is putting on is like that one, then I think I don't have too much of a problem with advertising in school beyond the typical corporate sponsor objections.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: Sigh...I think the thing that bothers me is that I live in Kansas and I'm already worried that despite the fact that I'm sending my kids to public school, there will be a heavy Christian influence there. I won't always know what my kids' teachers are saying to them and I don't entirely trust them, not because I think they'd intentionally hurt anyone
I'm sorry, but I had to LOL at that, Christine. Just because so often I hear the exact opposite in the exact same wording -- Christian parents worried about sending their kids to public school because of the heavy secular/anti-Christian influence there.
It is just amazing to read it the other way around.
Posted by Traceria (Member # 11820) on :
Also throwing myself in with the dkw lot.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:I'm sorry, but I had to LOL at that, Christine. Just because so often I hear the exact opposite in the exact same wording -- Christian parents worried about sending their kids to public school because of the heavy secular/anti-Christian influence there.
Secular <> anti-Christian. It's not even an "influence" per se, it's a position of neutrality. There's nothing anti-Christian about not leading a prayer in the classroom or not posting the Ten Commandments in the hallway.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Try reading the "/" as "and/or", which is what I think the intent was.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I think my comment about secularism not being an influence is relevant in either case. We don't worry about the secular "influence" of the doctor's office, the public library, or our favorite fast food restaurant or grocery store. I'm not sure why having school be similarly devoid of religious ideology, of any sort, represents an "influence". Is this just shorthand for "lack of Christian influence"?
I guess I'm being a little pedantic, but I don't like the compromise position of religious neutrality being treated as a position of hostility toward the dominant religion. It's an unfair framing of the debate so I'm compelled to poke at it when I see it.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
We have reached the limits of my ability/willingness to speak for Farmgirl, and she doesn't post here very often. *shrug*
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
If we're only talking about one flier, then I wouldn't worry. My son comes home with fliers all the time for a variety of different things. I think some of them have been sponsored by one church or another, but I couldn't tell you for sure. Most of the stuff so far has been PTO, sports related, or Boys&Girls club... stuff like that. However, there have been a couple announcing different activities and I'm sure some of them were church sponsored.
If you're worried, call and ask the school what the policy on "hand outs" is. If they have a policy that they let all non-discriminatory groups hand out "non-offensive" public service fliers (as in, no cuss words, etc), then they really couldn't have stopped the church from sending them out. They also couldn't stop any other organization (Pagan, UU, or even Nazi's) from sending out fliers as long as they didn't include a "hate message".
I would be much more worried if your child came home with a pamphlet of the 10 Commandments.
On the other hand, I don't think it's unreasonable to watch your child's teacher carefully. I get annoyed with people who don't let kids have Halloween Parties and Christmas Programs because I honestly don't see those as religiously related. However, when I was going through public school, I had more than one teacher totally cross the line. I was even raised in a Catholic household (the majority here) and still felt funny about it. One time, in 7th grade, we were given an assignment to write about what we were giving up for lent and why! At other times, things were more subtle, but still uncomfortable.
I'm having some of the same struggles with my son now. I'd made the decision to raise him here to be close to family, but since he's started Kinder this year, I've begun to question that decision. It seems that in order to allow him to have a decent life here, I'm going to have to compromise rather heavily on some of my core beliefs, and I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that any longer. Being a minority in a small town is tough!
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
I agree with ambyr- not only should schools be an advert free zone in general,I do think that as our society gets more pluralistic we have to be more sensitive to offending people.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:,I do think that as our society gets more pluralistic we have to be more sensitive to offending people.
As our society gets more pluralistic, I wish that we'd put a little more effort into not getting offended.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I can't believe you would say such a thing!
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:,I do think that as our society gets more pluralistic we have to be more sensitive to offending people.
As our society gets more pluralistic, I wish that we'd put a little more effort into not getting offended.
I think effort on both fronts would be good. The real crazy is when we get offended at other people's attempts to be sensitive or inclusive.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:I think effort on both fronts would be good. The real crazy is when we get offended at other people's attempts to be sensitive or inclusive.
A thousand times this.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
I wouldn't worry about it. If it is what is says, a festival, then that should be it. Whether it is hosted by a church or not shouldn't matter.
The thing is, you have a choice whether to go or not. Seeing a flyer for a harvest festival isn't teaching your children about the Baptist church, nor is it trying to convert them. If the flyer had some religious quotes on it or teachings of the church, then I might have an issue with it.
The LDS church ward I attend here in Vegas has an annual "Trunk or Treat" that the entire neighborhood is invited to every year. People show up, decorate their cars, and provide a safe location for kids to load up on sugar. We have tables set up with free chili dogs and punch for everyone as well. There is nothing religious about it. It is simply an event that is put on so everyone can have a little fun. Heck, my father is the Bishop and he uses latex to make himself look like a creepy 6'4 troll every year and gets a kick out of scaring the pants off kids. Try talking someone into joining the church when your nose is 6 inches long, your skin is green and scaley, and you have red contacts in your eyes! My wife and I go just for that.
I have a feeling this is the same deal. It is probably just an event hosted by the church to provide a safe place for kids to trick or treat.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: neo-dragon: Well, it roughly depends on which affirmative camp you belong in, if you're in the "all fliers should be allowed camp, regardless" then there is no harm. However, if you're in the "fliers should be allowed, except when for a religious service or when proselytizing" then there very well could be harm.
Not by my definition of harm.
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:,I do think that as our society gets more pluralistic we have to be more sensitive to offending people.
As our society gets more pluralistic, I wish that we'd put a little more effort into not getting offended.
I couldn't agree more.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Lots of Christian parents do complain that schools are too secular, and I can honestly say I can see why it has happened. You have to be so careful about what you have students read or study at school.
For example, my state curriculum slots Dickens' A Christmas Carol for 7th grade.
Well, today I find out that one parent is demanding that his son be given a different book because they are Jehovah's Witnesses and do not celebrate holidays. Now I will do it, of course, but it just about doubles my workload. I have to find a new book for him, create a reading guide, come up with reading check questions, come up with an assessment of some type (project or paper), and then create questions for a test. Then, I will have to create a totally different quarerly exam for this student, because my exam will have questions from Chrismas Carol on it. To make matters even worse, he can't be in my room while I'm discussing it, so that means finding some alternative place for him to be during the two weeks we are covering this novel.
Now, given that I am going through all that, I have a pretty strong incentive NOT to cover Christmas Carol next year and just have everyone reading the alternative, safely-secular book. And then, parents will complain that we are taking all references to Christianity out of schools.
Sometimes teachers are just caught between a rock and a hard place - we cannot please everyone, and many things are beyond our control.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
That's a freaking idiotic parent.
Look, we KNOW my position on the state being in schools. But A Christmas Carol has literary merit, and, well, yes, it has holidays in it. So do many many many books. My brother freaking taught genesis in an English Class. You just have to approach these things the right way.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Why would anyone complain about there not being enough Christian content in a public school system? I'm starting to think that there's just no pleasing Americans when it comes to religion. Everything is either too much or too little.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Well, I don't agree with his position but I have no choice but to respect it. I checked with our counselor who confirmed that he is in the band, and was not able to play any Christmas music last year.
It seems extreme to me - we don't use the novel to proselytize, and seems to me just because you don't celebrate something doesn't mean you cannot learn about it. I don't celebrate any Jewish holidays, or Islamic ones, yet have no problem with my kids learning about those holidays in school. But again, as teacher, I have to respect the parents' wishes in this and give the child an alternate book.
Plus, what's going to happen when this kid goes to college? And he is very bright - reads extremely well and excels in my classes so he could be very successful in college. Or, what happens in the workforce? He can't go through life avoiding all contact with anything that suggests a holiday. *shrug* Not my call. I do what I'm told.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"Well, I don't agree with his position but I have no choice but to respect it."
You should look into that. You're required to make reasonable accomodations, I'm sure, but this isn't really a reasonable request. You're first year teacher, right? That might play into the decision, I suppose, depending on how laws work in your state.
*shrug* Things are different in every school district. If it were me, I'd ask around quietly, because there's no way I'm adding that much work for one student, given how much work I have anyways.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
My administration has already told me I have to comply with his request. As a first year teacher, I was unsure so I asked.
My sister-teacher across the hall (she teaches the same subject and grade level) told me to use one of the books from my reading intervention class...because it has a lot of curriculum that accompanies it and assessments already done for me. I may do that - I'll pick one of the books at the highest reading level which is grade-level and go with that. Still have to make another copy of the quarterly exam and find a place for him, though.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Ugh. Sorry Belle. At least you've got some resources.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: neo-dragon: Well, it roughly depends on which affirmative camp you belong in, if you're in the "all fliers should be allowed camp, regardless" then there is no harm. However, if you're in the "fliers should be allowed, except when for a religious service or when proselytizing" then there very well could be harm.
Not by my definition of harm.
Exactly.
I'm just answering the question you seemed to be posing which was why you couldn't see any harm. Well, its not that you see different things, but that you disagree on the definition of harm.
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: I'm starting to think that there's just no pleasing Americans when it comes to religion. Everything is either too much or too little.
Well, the answer to this is that there are two separate non-overlapping sets.
It is perfectly consistent if you understand that the group that thinks that there is usually too much is usually distinct from the group that thinks there is too little.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
I know that some parents wish public schools were really Christian schools and taught Jesus and God, etc, BUT
Many parents that complain about taking "Christmas" out of schools aren't complaining that their kids aren't getting taught Christian beliefs in schools. What they're really complaining about is the fact that everything that just might have SOME Christian tie to it seems to be getting systematically eradicated in schools - even more than things that may have Hindu, Islamic, Jewish, or any other group ties. Christmas, for instance, is a national holiday celebrated by many MANY families that have never even been in a church. Christmas is even celebrated by families with ties to other religions. Both my Muslim coworker and my Hindu friend have always celebrated Christmas with their families. Thus, it seems pretty stupid that schools can celebrate Columbus Day without problems, they can celebrate Valentine's Day without problems, but if they have a "Christmas" tree they run the risk of getting in big trouble! Many parents aren't really wanting their kids to get bible lessons, but they are objecting to people being more offended by "christian" ties than the ties of any other culture or religion.
Posted by Griffin (Member # 7166) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: I say teach your kids about religion, tell them what you believe/don't believe, explain that other people believe different things and let them learn and decide for themselves rather than worrying about every subtle influence they may be exposed to.
Well said.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
quote:Thus, it seems pretty stupid that schools can celebrate Columbus Day without problems, they can celebrate Valentine's Day without problems,
Actually, I've heard of teachers not being allowed to celebrate either. Columbus Day is not something the Native American's see as worthy of celebrating, and St. Valentine was--well--a Catholic saint, so that runs into trouble as well.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
St. Valentine may have been a Catholic saint, but cute little cupid baby definitely wasn't! ;-)
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Try reading the "/" as "and/or", which is what I think the intent was.
We have reached the limits of my ability/willingness to speak for Farmgirl, and she doesn't post here very often. *shrug*
You are exactly right, rivka, and my apologies for making a comment them bopping out of the thread for several days - I no longer read Hatrack daily.
I did not mean to sound like I equated them (although some people do, but not me). I meant either/or OR and/or. Secular does not mean anti-Christian.
Also, I wasn't saying I agree with the people who think that way, nor do I think the opposite. I was just saying I am more accustomed, in my circle of people, to hearing the opposite of what Christine was originally posting.
(my own personal belief is that if parents want a specific theology OR philosophy/worldview taught to their kids, then instead of requiring or demanding it of public schools, they should just home school their kids so they can teach them whatever viewpoint they want them to have. And that goes for both religious views and non-religious views) Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Farmgirl:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Try reading the "/" as "and/or", which is what I think the intent was.
We have reached the limits of my ability/willingness to speak for Farmgirl, and she doesn't post here very often. *shrug*
(my own personal belief is that if parents want a specific theology OR philosophy/worldview taught to their kids, then instead of requiring or demanding it of public schools, they should just home school their kids so they can teach them whatever viewpoint they want them to have. And that goes for both religious views and non-religious views)
Yeah, I think I don't like the idea of people going off into the woods and raising little Eric Robert Rudolphs. I don't like that at all. It's not much better than the Islamic madrasas.
Note that I am not saying all religious schools and home schools are raising future terrorists. However, I refuse to accept wholeheartedly the idea that home schools and religious schools are a panacea. If kids are raised in crazy religious extremism, guess what? They're more likely to be dangerous crazies.
Please don't take this post with the dickish tone that it seems to have. I just wanted to be really clear and succinct, and the wording that resulted doesn't exactly drip with love. Sorry about that. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
And of course, all homeschools and religious schools teach "crazy religious extremism". Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: And of course, all homeschools and religious schools teach "crazy religious extremism".
IF you think that's what I said/meant, please reread this paragraph (which I quote for your convenience)--
"Note that I am not saying all religious schools and home schools are raising future terrorists. However, I refuse to accept wholeheartedly the idea that home schools and religious schools are a panacea. If kids are raised in crazy religious extremism, guess what? They're more likely to be dangerous crazies. "
Now, Rivka, if I were saying what you SAID I said, then the first sentence there would read "I am saying" instead of what it actually reads. As well, the last sentence might read "always going to become" instead of "more likely". You see the difference, riiiiiiight, Rivka? I think you do, and I think that you are so addicted to the eyeroll smilie that you can't stop yourself. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Please prove that there is a high correlation between attending homeschool or religious school and becoming a "dangerous crazy". Something more than your say-so, if you please.
Failing that, you were implying what I said you were. Only the matter of degree differs.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
You do know that there are a lot of religious schools, right? Lots of them. Notre Dame for example. Roughly half of children in private schools go to Catholic School. There are hundred of Catholic Universities. Not what most would worry about being crazy religious extremists.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I don't need to prove that madrasas produce terrorists, or at least, people who would support terrorism. If I do, we are worlds apart, and need not continue discussing these issues.
As far as something closer to home goes, I imagine that the Christian Identity movement (with which Eric Robert Rudolph was at least tangentially associated) are big homeschoolers. They are also big terrorists and criminals. Take a look at the Wiki for the Christian Identity movement.
What about Warren Jeffs? I'm not trying to rile the Mormons here, but man oh man, is he a good example of my point. He may not be a terrorist, but he's not exactly a fine, upstanding pillar of society.
Shall I go on? My point was not (and it has never been, if you feel like reading my old posts about homeschooling ) that homeschooling is, in and of itself, a bad thing. My point is (and has always been, IIRC) that homeschooling and religious schooling are intensifiers. If the parents/teachers are extreme about something, there is an excellent chance that the kids will be at least as extreme, and sometime more so. This isn't always the effect that is going to make the world a safer place for anyone.
I'm not anti-homeschooling. I think FG's endorsement of it was way too much of a blanket endorsement, and I don't think her post was well-thought-out. She may have a more nuanced attitude toward it than her post showed, but I doubt it, given her YEC beliefs, and other beliefs.
It's nonsense to say I'm anti-homeschooling. I get all my raw dairy products from families who homeschool, and I let Skyler spend time with them whenever she wants. I just realize that homeschooling can definitely produce kids that don't have a place in the larger world, and the friction between these kids and that world can sometimes make a mess.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Steven, I think you have one or two examples of extremism and are using that to colour the vast majority of religious schooling which is not at all extreme.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
It colors itself. I didn't have to cherrypick too awful much, or too awful hard.
I'm not saying public school is always the best answer in every situation. I had a teacher who went to a Catholic high school because she said she would have had to carry a knife to school to defend herself at all the public schools around. Woo hoo for public schools!! Not. Yeah, public schools are not all getting the job done.
The question is, though, on a larger scale, do we abandon public schooling, and let our descendants deal with that, or do we try to make the public schools better? On a larger scale, I think I'm firmly for the second option. In individual cases it's good to be flexible.
Posted by Amilia (Member # 8912) on :
Just for the record, there isn't any love lost between the Mormons on the board and Warren Jeffs. FLDS =! LDS
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amilia: Just for the record, there isn't any love lost between the Mormons on the board and Warren Jeffs. FLDS =! LDS
Yes, I'm familiar with that particular mathematical equation. However, several Mormons here on Hatrack got their feelings all kinds of hurt when we discussed the reaction of Texas child protective services to the FLDS ranch situation, back a year or two ago. I ain't trying to step on Mormon toes. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: It colors itself. I didn't have to cherrypick too awful much, or too awful hard.
Nonsense.
And I notice we still have only your word to go on.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
Such Hostility!
Still, I think you're missing a rather large point Steven. "Religious Extreme" schools (or homeschools) may produce some scary people, but that doesn't mean that regular religious schools do. Normal religious education, of any type, doesn't severely warp a person's sense of existence. A catholic school in New York, or a Baptist school in Kansas, or KQ's homeschooling curriculum (just to pick a convenient example) - NONE of those educational methods are even remotely close to what was happening at the FLDS ranch. To even try and make the cases parallel is wrong, even ridiculous.
Besides, if a kid has a religious nutcase for a parent, Public School isn't going to save them!
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by DDDaysh:
Besides, if a kid has a religious nutcase for a parent, Public School isn't going to save them!
Fortunately, Earth has you, wonderful YOU to decide who is a religious nutcase, and who isn't, thus saving the Earth from children being educated by religious nutcases.
Do you see the catch there? That someone has to judge who is a nutcase, and that people don't agree 100% on who is and isn't?
The point being, while I can't STOP people from homeschooling, I would prefer they didn't. The public schools work better if we are all putting our energy into them, versus hiding our kids away, leaving them to maybe (or maybe not) develop actual social skills. I have similar, though not as strong, feelings about religious schools. I think that, generally speaking, with some exceptions, parents who send their kids to religious schools would serve their kids better by spending those thousands of dollars a year on tutoring and extra-curricular activities. As far as wanting to keep STDs and drugs away from your kids, I understand that. However, is it not just as good to educate your kids about sex and drugs, thus giving them the tools to successfully deal with temptation, versus keeping them in the dark?
Again, I'm not saying it's all black and white. There are public schools that I wouldn't dare send Skyler to, for a variety of reasons, from violence to poor teaching. OK, those are the main 2. However, not all public schools are bad. I'm going to say that I think most homeschoolers have a less nuanced view of public schools than I have of homeschools. I'd say the same of parents that send their kids to religious schools. Yeah, I think I'd say that.
Flame away.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: I'm going to say that I think most homeschoolers have a less nuanced view of public schools than I have of homeschools. I'd say the same of parents that send their kids to religious schools.
This one you have already disproved, so I'm not even going to bother to ask for evidence.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by steven: I'm going to say that I think most homeschoolers have a less nuanced view of public schools than I have of homeschools. I'd say the same of parents that send their kids to religious schools.
This one you have already disproved, so I'm not even going to bother to ask for evidence.
Oh please, sister.
I see homeschooling for what it is: an intensifier of whatever the parents bring to the process. I also see that, generally speaking, homeschooling is very weak in the areas of match, science, and history. It can actually be stronger in the area of reading/writing. Christopher Paolini is an example.
Now, math isn't a big deal. You can teach math pretty quickly. I used to teach SAT prep math, and it's a snap compared to trying to get a student's verbal score higher. However, science and history, I can't say. Particularly if the homeschooling involves Young Earth Creationism or other such stupidity, I worry that undoing such harm might be a lot, LOT more problematic. I could be worried over nothing, but, nevertheless...
It does bother me that so many homeschoolers seem to think that state-mandated standardized testing is useless and/or a waste of their time. No, it isn't. Sadly, the homeschoolers that need such testing the most are the ones farthest back in the woods, hiding out, refusing to even let the state know they have children of school age. And yes, such people exist. They seem to find the Native Nutrition Yahoo group a wonderful gathering place to talk about their crazy conspiracy theories, and about the wonders of homeschooling. Feel free to ask them about the wonders of not vaccinating, not getting your kid a Social Security Number, etc. They'd love to tell you aaaaalll about it, as well as how Obama is a Muslim space alien who will rape your daughter. LOL
I will finish with a story of my best friend. I know I always tell this one in homeschooling threads, but it really proves my point. My friend actually has his Master's in Geography from VA Tech, and he has run several state level political campaigns. However, until age 9, he could barely read. Why? His mom homeschooled him until age 8, and she would only use the Bible to teach reading. It doesn't work so well, my friends. Ironically (and here's the funny) his Mom now has her Master's in reading instruction, and is the reading coordinator for the entire school system in Forsyth County. She's very smart, and a great teacher. She taught 5th grade for about 20 years, and was a principal for 3 or 4 years. However...
Again, sadly, the homeschoolers who need help the most are the ones least likely to use it and/or ask for it.
So, to sum up, I disagree strongly with blanket endorsements of teh homeskoolin'.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
There is some evidence that home schooled kids do better then non home schooled kids, even in math. However, the study I read doesn't try to eliminate other factors. In the study, home schooled kids tended to come from wealthier homes with better educated parents. http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n8/ I am slightly biased. The only person I know in real life who home schools is awesome and there is no doubt her kids are doing better with her then they would in public school. Her kids are geniuses and the school expected them to go at the same rate as everyone else.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
Wow. I was just wondering if schools should be sending home flyers from churches. I didn't mean for it to get all kinds of crazy in here.
I've been away for a long weekend so I haven't read all of the responses as closely as I normally would have. But anyway, I'm thinking there are more important things to worry about. MUCH more important things...
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: I'm not anti-homeschooling. I think FG's endorsement of it was way too much of a blanket endorsement, and I don't think her post was well-thought-out. She may have a more nuanced attitude toward it than her post showed, but I doubt it, given her YEC beliefs, and other beliefs.
*laughs*
No, Steven, I had no more nuanced attitude that what I blatantly said. The older I get, the wiser I get, the more I believe public school just isn't the very best option for a kid - ANY kid of any belief system.
Notice that I originally said
quote: if parents want a specific theology OR philosophy/worldview taught to their kids,
I was not just talking about religion. I was talking about belief systems of any kind. If an atheistic parent freaks because their child "might" be touched by religion at school, then perhaps they should shelter them at home so they would possibly come into contact with crazy believers.
If they are so scared of just the idea of a school group attending an event at a church, or being the same room with someone saying a prayer, then maybe public school just is too wild of an environment of different worldviews for them.
If someone is fanatically vegan (to the point of thinking everyone needs to be) then maybe they shouldn't be thrust into the public school system with all those meat eaters. OR they are avid followers of PETA and they shouldn't be put in that horrid high school biology dissection lab!
I mean -- surely they won't have to learn to live with varying beliefs in the real world. once school is over and they are grown up.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
So, you're saying that because some parents abuse homeschooling, you'd prefer no one to have that option? Am I understanding you correctly Steven?
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by DDDaysh: So, you're saying that because some parents abuse homeschooling, you'd prefer no one to have that option? Am I understanding you correctly Steven?
I'll have to think about that. I don't think a hard-and-fast rule should be applied, but...I honestly don't know how to handle the fact that the craziest, most dangerous people are also often the ones most likely to homeschool. That's an act of terrorism/crime just looking for a place to happen. But, maybe the people of this country need a few more Ruby Ridges, etc. before we wake up and start finding ways around this type of stuff. I don't know.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I'd think that somebody with your... unconventional opinions about food and nutrition would be more wary of labeling others as crazies.
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
I am trying to come up to a response,steven, but words fail me. I homeschool, and know people from across the spectrum, and even though I may not, for example, agree with how all of them teach science, no one I know is raising terrorist crazies. Including me. The only time I have seen kids " not being prepared to take their place in society", their parents had ulterior motives for keeping them home. (ie, to babysit a younger sib). And yes, I think there should be a way, such as testing, to weed those kids out.Oh, and BTW, both my kids who have been tested have always scored above level in everything, including math and science.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by Amilia: Just for the record, there isn't any love lost between the Mormons on the board and Warren Jeffs. FLDS =! LDS
Yes, I'm familiar with that particular mathematical equation. However, several Mormons here on Hatrack got their feelings all kinds of hurt when we discussed the reaction of Texas child protective services to the FLDS ranch situation, back a year or two ago. I ain't trying to step on Mormon toes.
Every LDS person I knew agreed with Child Protective services going in there. I think it was the right thing to do.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I am a public school teacher who supports parents rights to homeschool and thinks that for some families, homeschooling can work well. Notice I said some.
I've seen homeschooling succeed spectacularly. I've seen it fail miserably. I believe parents have a right to educate their kids themselves and I wish them luck - I hope they are the ones who succeed and not the ones who fail.
Thing is, homeschooling is not now and never will be an option for the vast majority of families in this country. It is not an option for the single parent who must work to support his/her family. It is not an option for the family where both parents must work to keep food on the table. It's only an option for those wealthy enough or at least comfortable enough to have one working spouse and one that can devote his/her time exclusively to their children's education. That is not most American families.
Public education is still the best option for most American children. The school where I teach is certainly not the best in the world and it has its problems, but it is a haven where kids can come and spend the hours between 7 and 3 and know that no no one will beat them, no one will allow anyone else to hurt them, and they will even be fed breakfast and lunch - completely free if they can't afford it. There are adults in the building that care about their welfare and want them to be successful. That is not necessarily something they ever see at home.
One of my students is homeless right now. His family is living in a shelter. One has a home, but mom and dad couldn't pay the water bill this month and he has no running water at home. His clothes haven't been washed in weeks - they have caked dirt and food on them and he smells terrible - I had to go to the counselors and they are getting social services involved. Another of my students sleeps in my class everyday because his mother works nights and he has to cook dinner and care for his siblings every night. He's 13.
For my part, I believe in public education. It isn't perfect - far from it - but it is all many kids have.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Belle says it well. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:The school where I teach... is a haven where kids can come and spend the hours between 7 and 3 and know that no no one will beat them, no one will allow anyone else to hurt them
I'll bet you try your best, but I doubt that's true for all your students.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I guess I should amend that and say no adult will beat them or hurt them.
Unfortunately, you're right that it is too true that kids do hurt each other and in the school where I teach sometimes those assaults are pretty serious. We do get the offenders out as quickly as possible - I have a student on his way to alternative school right now for attacking another kid in the bathrooom.
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
I very much agree with Belle too. I'm grateful the public schools are ther for those who need them.
Posted by Sala (Member # 8980) on :
I've witnessed everything Belle said in her last two posts, and agree withwhat she said, too. But in my own school. With fourth graders. I'm really grateful for public schools, too.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I believe that one-on-one or one-on-two is by far the best method of teaching children. Anyone who's worked with kids in class, groups and one-on-one can tell you that. Kids alone are better behaved, more intelligent, more focused, more interested in the world, more able to complete work. For kids alone you can zero in on their difficulties and interests-- and of course this is going to work better.
However, I also believe in public schooling. Not only for the reasons Belle has outlined (and not so dramatic either-- I've worked with kids who come from reasonably well-off, stable families whose parents are totally checked out of their children's education and/or well being). But also for the reason that I believe I learnt some valuable skills in school, even as I lost out on some others. I was somewhat socialized and I can guarantee that wouldn't have happened at home. In a best case scenario, regular (public or private) schoolers learn to choose friends, learn to deal with people who aren't friends, learn to learn from teachers who don't have enough time for just them). These are useful skills, because the world is a bit like that.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: I believe that one-on-one or one-on-two is by far the best method of teaching children. Anyone who's worked with kids in class, groups and one-on-one can tell you that.
I can't disagree with that, at all, even though it undermines my argument. Having taught music, and had it taught to me, definitely proves this point, beyond all shadow of any doubt.
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: ...I've worked with kids who come from reasonably well-off, stable families whose parents are totally checked out of their children's education and/or well being). But also for the reason that I believe I learnt some valuable skills in school, even as I lost out on some others. I was somewhat socialized and I can guarantee that wouldn't have happened at home. In a best case scenario, regular (public or private) schoolers learn to choose friends, learn to deal with people who aren't friends, learn to learn from teachers who don't have enough time for just them). These are useful skills, because the world is a bit like that.
The strange thing is, some kids seem to socialize just fine, even if they are homeschooled. Others just don't, and I don't really know how much is genetic, and how much is environmental. I know a homeschooled family where one sibling is totally social and well-adjusted, while the other...not even close.
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
I have two kids who are very, very social, in lots of activities, panty of friends- and one who is in only one activity under duress (swim, because I consider that a lifesaving skill) and has two good friends and maybe a handful of lesser ones. I would call him wella djusted, just introverted. The difference is that the social ones are like me and the less social one is JUST like dad.
[ November 09, 2009, 08:25 PM: Message edited by: romanylass ]
Posted by Sean Monahan (Member # 9334) on :
quote:Originally posted by romanylass: I would call him wella djusted,
This is totally going to be my next RPG character name.
"You can call me - Wella Djusted."
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
LOL! Glad to be of help. Of course, now I can't fix the typo.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
phoneticize it!
It's "Wella Justed"
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: I believe that one-on-one or one-on-two is by far the best method of teaching children. Anyone who's worked with kids in class, groups and one-on-one can tell you that.
if there was an option where you had licensed public teachers giving you one-on-one education as their 7-to-5 job, that would be the optimal situation.
Instead, you've got a choice (usually) between unlicensed untrained parents giving the one-on-one education with varying degrees of objective competence and focus and time dedication, and qualified teachers with full focus being divided up between a whole class.
Depending on the quality of your district and the quality of the parent's ability to homeschool, the homeschooling option CAN be the superior option, but isn't usually.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I think Belle put the whole scenario very well. For many kids, the one-on-one of homeschooling is the best option for those who can do it, or who have strong feelings and/or fears about what their kids should be taught.
But it isn't possible for everyone, and public school fills the need for all others.
My whole point was just that too much now, parents are wanting the schools to accommodate everyone's "personal world view". So afraid of offense. Must bend the public school to my will, kind of thing (I don't even like Christian parents doing this, btw -- if they feel that strongly about it, they should homeschool).
But there is such an invasive fear of being "incorrect" now, that there is no personal responsibility, etc. You can't have your child bring a peanut butter sandwich into school anymore because someone other child might have peanut allergies (do they do away with all the sugar in the school lunches just in case one kid is diabetic? Where does the line of personal responsibility come in?)
You can and/or can't (depending) wear some particular head covering because it might be 1) gang sign 2) religious garb 3) offensive to people of other religions or gangs, etc.
You can't mention the word God because it might offend. People panic at the idea of a school function held in a church building, or of a church renting a school facility, like something evil from that might rub off on them.
It is just all this over-reaction that I detest. Parents say "not around my little Johnny!" but everyone has different definitions of what little Johnny needs, and public schools get torn limb from limb trying to accommodate it all. (That is the reason I said if a parent has STRONG feelings on a particular world view, they should homeschool if they don't want their children to ever be exposed to other world views).
When I was growing up, I did not celebrate Christmas (I'm not going to explain that here, so don't ask). I was the only one in the entire school who would not participate in that celebration (which goes on for much more than one day, as you know). In a strongly religious community and public school, I was not exactly looked on favorably for this view. I didn't try to make others "convert" to my view, no, I just said "I'm not going to do that." Even as young as fourth grade, I would calmly explain to my teachers my beliefs, and I myself would come up with alternatives to the Christmas-based assignments (whether it be coloring a Christmas tree, or singing in the Christmas operetta). I didn't insist that no one in the whole school should celebrate Christmas. I didn't throw a fit and make a big deal. I just took responsibility for my own education and did alternative credit work.
And I don't see that type of thing happening these days. Instead of being content with "I believe different and here is how we can work it out" people instead are suing schools, making big media ploys, raising Cain, and in general trying to make school be specialized to their whims, to hell with everyone else. (and the first post in this thread showed this kind of thinking).
THAT was my point. [/soapbox]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well said.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I feel like a lot of time adults get excised by things that matter to them and thus small slights or pressures exhibited in school groups that stem from issues they care about are considered unacceptable, whereas the things the actual children care about tend to spark much larger emotional reactions for the kids. An example being sports during recess was an almost infinitely larger source for teasing and humiliation than religion or skin color at my grade schools: yet all the focus from the adults was on the latter two. Of course that being said, what Farmgirl said is absolutely right: the solution isn't to pounce on anything that could cause a feeling of being different but to recognize that children are in general rather resilient, and that challenges at any age of life are the source of growth. Trying to remove any possible source of unhappiness is not only futile, but would be disastrous if successful.
Hobbes Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: I believe that one-on-one or one-on-two is by far the best method of teaching children. Anyone who's worked with kids in class, groups and one-on-one can tell you that.
if there was an option where you had licensed public teachers giving you one-on-one education as their 7-to-5 job, that would be the optimal situation.
Instead, you've got a choice (usually) between unlicensed untrained parents giving the one-on-one education with varying degrees of objective competence and focus and time dedication, and qualified teachers with full focus being divided up between a whole class.
Depending on the quality of your district and the quality of the parent's ability to homeschool, the homeschooling option CAN be the superior option, but isn't usually.
I can't speak for all states, but in WA you are required to either have a Bachelors or take a parent educator course.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
That is not the case in Alabama. The parent can homeschool up to grade 12 even if that parent never graduated high school themselves.
You must participate in some kind of cover school, but the only requirements many cover schools have are that you keep attendance.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
My sister homeschooled my nieces (not for any ideological reason; the schools in her district just sucked) until high school. Although my sister doesn't have any kind of degree, judging from my nieces' success in high school and college, it wasn't a problem.
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)