Not too long ago there was a thread in GD asking why a person with no children should have to pay taxes to support schools. The responses far and away tended to say that schools have a societal value and that as a member of that society it was entirely appropriate that you support them with your own money even if you never had children (or your children were grown). I agree with that wholeheartedly (that we all need to support the schools).
So why is the notion that as a member of society it is somehow wrong of me to suggest that there be some oversight of those schools? Even private schools that my tax dollars do not pay for it is the idea that we ALL have a stake in the children our society turns out.
I understand concerns of the overbearing State and Big Brother. I also agree that in order to accept things like free speech I need to allow for someone saying something that makes my blood boil. I do not however think that some over sight, setting some minimum standards for ANY school is inappropriate. Even home schooled kids should be made to take a state exam once every year or two to show they are coming along as they should and be in line education wise with their peers.
And yeah, I find teaching about God in a Geometry class to be inappropriate. That school still has abundant opportunity to teach their particular message and whether I like that message or not I allow they should be able to as a private school.
The state having oversight to ensure that privately school kids receive an adequate education is a far cry from your OP. I doubt you’ll meet with much resistance on this modified position, though I’ve yet to see any evidence that this is a problem.
Say they are teaching in their biology class that Creation is how it all works. They also mention Evolution so the students are aware of it and tell them how it is wrong. On a test that student can answer that Charles Darwin was responsible for the idea and even parrot back how evolution supposedly works. But they will still be running around thinking it is all bunk and that God created the world 6,000 years ago.
Is that a problem? I have to admit I am hard pressed to say how people running around believing that adversely affects others but I cannot shake the feeling it is wrongheaded and really not a good thing.
Standardized tests (SAT and ACT), portfolios of accomplishments, additional personal interviews and sometimes the placement tests that most freshman have to take are offered as part of the consideration process.
First of all, a vocabulary distinction, which is probably meaningless for most of y’all and not particularly relevant to this thread, but a pet peeve of mine from having worked in the industry: Accreditation is not done be the state at all, but by a (supposedly) independent accreditation *corporation *which ensures that similar claims are similarly taught. The upshot is supposed to be that you can be pretty certain that two Introduction to Statistics classes in two schools accredited by the same body teach pretty much the same thing. This makes class credit (see the word “credit” in “accreditation”? You can’t use “credit” if you’re not accredited, you have to use “hours” instead) much easier to transfer from one school to another - they know that if your old school was accredited by the same body as them, their similar courses were similar. In reality, however, many of these accreditation bodies are themselves corrupt, and issue accreditation based on a hefty fee and cursory paperwork. There are accreditation bodies for private religious schools and homeschooling curricula, and in fact the school in the OP claims accreditation through Association of Christian Schools International, whoever the hell they are.
What I described on the state level and by the state’s agency is CERTIFICATION and it’s not the same thing as accreditation. No one’s checking against a standardized curriculum, but just making sure that what you teach is what you promise and that you’re more-or-less financially stable.
Certification compares you to your catalog and makes sure it’s consistent. Accreditation compares you to other similar schools and makes sure you’re equivalent.
And you’re right, I think accreditation is mostly bullshit politics and a legal racketeering scheme that does almost nothing to ensure the quality of education.
The only way, IMHO, to ensure the quality of your child’s education is to get into the school and nose around. Read the textbooks, talk to the teachers, quiz the students. Any “standards” we put around schools only leads to more headaches a la NCLB, teaching to the test (if you put in more standards, how will you know if they’re meeting them except more testing?) and the similar ills which have paralyzed our public schools and made them great masters of the suck.
Whack, that’s fine, and no one has a problem with your feeling that way. But what we are trying to get across (or at least I am) is that your feelings do not constitute anyone else’s obligations. You’re so personally invested in all this that you cannot see the absurdity of your own argument.
You’ve even contradicted yourself (though you likely won’t see it) in that you’ve said other people (schoolboards and such) should determine what our children learn while at the same time fretting that other people will teach them kitten torture. There is no reason that the very parents you worry so much about teaching their kids the wrong things won’t end up themselves on the school boards. If it’s fair for you to dictate to others, then it’s fair for them to dictate to you.
And now you are trying to make a religion out of science itself, not allowing interpretations of data that run contrary to popular consensus. With all due respect, I recommend you back away, evaluate all this objectively and dispassionately. Just stop the dictating part. Take care of your own kids. Worry over others if you must, but stop trying to parent on everyone else’s behalf. Really. Just stop it. For your own good.
As far as I can tell, the school in question is not teaching math incorrectly…as Diogenes said, it does not contradict anything that is known to be true about math. Can you explain, then, how that is the same as teaching creationism, a concept that cleary goes against what we know about science?
I actually think it is you missing my point although I’ll allow I may have done a poor job of describing it. I absolutely understand what you are driving at and agree with your concerns. I just think you are taking your concerns to a level that I am not suggesting.
My main premise is I think, as a society, the government has a place in regulating what happens in schools (any school including home school). As it stands, from what I have read here, there is quite literally no regulation of curriculum in any non-state school. They can pretty much do anything they damn well please. How you are ok with this notion is beyond me. I think we all have a stake in how children are educated even if they are not our own children.
And yes I realize the very real dangers here. As soon as government starts poking their nose in where does it stop? We certainly have seen things WhyNot mentioned where this can lead to “teaching the test” and paralyzing schools in other ways. Schoolboards are, IMO, a real problem in their own right. They look good in principle but in practice often seem to do more harm than good (perhaps worthy of a thread all on its own).
No question sorting out the education system is a very complex problem and hugely emotionally charged. And FTR I am not keen on government intervention as a general rule but I allow it has its place as well.
The “How’s” of what I am on about are certainly open to much debate but just because the solution is difficult does not argue it should not be addressed. Giving carte blanche to a school to teach literally anything they see fit I do not find reasonable. I think it is entirely appropriate that there is some accountability in there. This does NOT prevent a Baptist school from also teaching their particular dogma. They will have ample opportunity for that and I am fine with that. How it has a place in a class on Geometry I do not see nor do I see how I am infringing on their rights in that case. Teach about God all you like in a religion class. Teach Geometry in Geometry.
They may well perhaps roll out of their Geometry class knowing geometry as well as any other student elsewhere. But where does it stop?
I mentioned Creationism as a similar example. What if (not saying these folks are) they are teaching creationism in Biology? They also teach evolution but only debunk it. The students may well exit the class understanding the mechanics of evolution and could answer question on that but really to them it is all crap and creation is the way of it.
The point being, as it stands, a private school apparently could teach quite literally anything. It is ok with you if a Biology class was used to teach the inferiority of black people from a genetic perspective (such attempts at that have been made)? I am NOT saying this particular school is doing that or indeed any school but sounds to me like they could and are perfectly free to do so. I am not ok with that.
Let’s say it stops there. The curriculum is completely appropriate and “correct” from the standpoint of what we all would consider a good education. But the students are taught in each class that what they are learning is a example of the wonders of God’s creation, whether it be literature, math, science, whatever. THAT is what you pitted in your OP, as far as I can tell, and then got into all of this “what if they teach creationism, what if they teach that Black people are genetically inferior?” What I’d like to know is how you take the leap that if they mention God in math class that it will inevitably lead to what you say here:
All of that is a lot of “what ifs,” and you have no evidence to show that appreciating that God created math is going to lead to all that, or that they necessarily go hand-in-hand.
Then how, exactly, did you learn addition? Why did you believe it worked?
Then don’t send your kids to that school.
You’re missing the point, big time.
Um, because they aren’t the same schools that we’re paying for?
So do I. But I bet some people find teaching science as a natural phenomenon independent of God to be inappropriate. I’ll give you three guesses as to why you’re still allowed to do it if you want to. I’ll give you a hint: it starts with “This is the U” and ends with “nited States of America and that’s how it works here”. It wasn’t always that way, even here, so I’m glad it is now, personally.
What if the government thought that it had a place in regulating what happens in your living room? How would you feel about that?
It stops when the community says it should stop. Either by monetary pressure (not sending their kids there), social pressure (picketing outside, disrupting school meetings), legislative pressure (plenty of states do have minimum requirements for school curricula - I’m afraid I’ve led you to think that because Illinois doesn’t, no one does. That’s not the case.) or educational pressure (some colleges indeed don’t allow admissions from certain notorious private schools or homeschooled students).
I think you’re creating a problem where there isn’t one, frankly. We could “what-if” all day, but if you can’t find a school that’s actually teaching flat-earth theory as fact, then it’s a good bet that the pressures mentioned above are already keeping the problem in check.
I’ve seen more and more problems the more government steps into schools, frankly. I think, to paraphrase a leader of today, that this is a case where the free market forces are a better regulator than the government.
Well their whole curriculum reads the same way as the Geometry one (insofar as they cram God in wherever possible) so no, it does not stop at Geometry for them.
I agree as someone else posted earlier that it may well be their curriculum reads a little funny but when it comes to geometry they say a prayer and then do just that…geometry. That’s fine.
And you are correct. I do not have evidence of how this affects the children. Maybe they all come out of their just great and brilliant people. I am not sure how you would measure it. If they know geometry is that all that matters? The other fluff tacked on has no bearing on this? I do not know. My gut tells me it cannot be helpful but certainly I could be wrong.
Right…what I said was, what if part of the curriculum of EVERY class is to say that that discipline is an example of the wonder of God. That’s the extent of “cramming God in whereever possible.” Not teaching bad math. Not teaching bad science. If it stops there, is it OK?
OK, so you’re NOT against what they are doing?
My gut tells me that it cannot be harmful but certainly I could be wrong, too. If there’s no way to tell, then I can’t imagine a reason that we should try to stop it.
Ok…I do not know how this school goes about their day-to-day lessons. But I think I can draw some conclusions that are suggestive. Certainly I think the following should make you wonder:
Correct me if I am wrong but that sounds like the same brand of religion the school in question is on about. From the above how would you suspect they teach evolution in that school?
I’m sure there are some religious schools that teach Creationism and dismiss evolution as anti-God. So what? We have freedom to practice religion in this country, and as long as you’re not hurting other people or breaking any laws, you get to worship as you please. That also means you get to raise your children in that religion, too.
I’ve said this in many other threads, but learning about evolution just isn’t all that important. Now, I’m an atheist, and I’ve made evolutionary biology an avocation ever since I was a teenager. But frankly, you can do without it. I wouldn’t want my kids to not learn about it, but that’s me. The kids might have trouble getting into college, but there are lots of things that we allow parents to do that would hurt a kid’s chance of getting into college.
If the school was teaching kids to go out an murder Jews, then it would be appropriate for the state to step in and take action. But teaching Creationism? Sheesh, that’s what I learned in Catholic schools growing up (and Catholics are supposed to be OK with evolution). Should we shut down Sunday Schools, too?
I don’t know, it’s still a what-if. I’d like to see a textbook and talk to a teacher and a student before I make a decision.
We weren’t taught evolution either, by the way. Not really. We were taught about natural selection in high school, but Darwin wasn’t mentioned in elementary school. And I went to a public school.
I do actually think people can be perfectly functioning members of society without understanding evolution. I think you “in the interest of society” argument falls down after basic math and reading and the state-required constitutional exam, really. The rest of a person’s education impacts mostly a person’s future education and life choices, not so much society as a whole. One doesn’t need to understand evolution to pull espressos at a Starbucks or fix cars or computers.
If your church wants to teach creationism fine. But this is a school and not a church. Biology and evolution are science, creationism is not. In a science class I expect students to learn science. If they also go to a bible study later and learn creationism fine. At the end of the day it is for them to decide.
I do not think severely skewing the information kids get on evolution is doing them a favor. It is only supporting the parent’s notions of the way of things. God forbid our kids grow a mind of their own and make their own decisions.