X Post for those interested in Connect the Thoughts

[dancer67]

I copied and pasted this from my response to my other thread, for those who are interested. And yes, if you email the Author, he is quick to respond.

 

Now the history is chronological, so that in itself sort of fits into the classical mode.

 

But the biggest and most obvious difference is that Classical Education focuses on memorization, and CTT discourages this. This curriculum wants a child to think for themselves, and come up with ideas and opinions based on the information presented. They are encouraged to go out an look at things, touch things, imagine things. And, they are encouraged to take charge of their own education.

 

I like this aspect of it. That there is no real right or wrong answer. The author feels that as long as they are understanding the material, that is what matters.

 

There are four steps

 

Locate

Word study

Read

and exercises

 

(I think I have that right. Peela correct me if I am wrong)

 

So the reading is harder, but before the child reads anything, the author wants the child to know trhe location of where the passage is taking place(so go to a map or globe, locate it, now the child has a mental image of the actual place)

 

Harder vocabulary words that are in the reading. So the child is reading and understaning the material.

 

Then exercises are done. This can be draw something(art does not count it can be a stick figure, doesn't matter as long as the child has the right idea of the passages, or assignments), investigate something and write about it.

 

The upper school is 11 and up, and the author claims the works come from many high school and college texts. And from what I have read, it seems this way.

 

I love the electives/current events they have. From the website:

 

CURRENT EVENTS

 

Course Title Identifier "HOW TO TAKE A VACATION COURSE" 22205 "World Problems - ENDANGERED SPECIES" 21756 "World Problems - GLOBAL POVERTY & HUNGER" 21678 "World Problems - HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES" 23251 "World Problems - RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE" 21677 "World Problems - TERRORISM" 22182

 

 

They also have a course in Manners.

 

Then they also have Master Courses. From the website:

 

MASTERS

 

Course Title Identifier "Master's Screenwriter Course" 21556 "Master's Course in Television Writing" 21555 "Master's Course in Short Stories and Novels" 21600 "Master's Poet and Lyricist Course" 21558 "Master's Course in Creative Nonfiction" 21601 "Master's Course in Playwriting" 21599

 

Writing is CTT strong points. The author does not have a grammar program, and does not believe in them. He feels the more writing and reading a child does, the better their grammar is.(And I agree with this). He does say that you can use a grammar program of your choice if this is what you wish.

 

What I like about this so far, as that there is no bias from the Author For example, both Creation and Evolution is presented. It is up to the child to develop their own thoughts and beliefs on this. You are presented with the facts, see both sides of it and the child can form an opinion on it.

 

We are only on the first subject now "How to Do CTT", but I am hopin Peela will chime in here and giver her thoughts as well.

 

I will update more, as we get a little further. We are only doing one at a time to see how it goes. But so far so good. I can tell you my 11 yo is thrilled to see she can do harder work, and come up with her own opinions for a change.

 

I was wondering if there was anything else out there in case this did not work out.

[Cindy in NY]

Thanks for posting this. I really like the looks of this and am off to join the Yahoo group. I would love to hear from any actual users.

[dancer67]

The yahoo group is really good because any question that is asked is answered by the author himself.

 

There have been a few users that have chimed in, but my answers have mainly come from the author. So I was hoping to find more people who have used this for a while.

 

I haven't used it long enought to comment on how we like it, but so far so good.

[Terabith]

You know, I'm not sure that I would love it for elementary grades (though I might....), but where it seems to shine, to me, from the information on the web site, is as a logic stage history curriculum. It looks really superb for that, and as I haven't seen a ton of great logic stage materials..... Excellent.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I looked at the website and initially thought it was interesting. However, I think it's pretty obvious that the author isn't a math person. While that isn't a problem in writing and history, it is a problem in science. I don't like that the author takes the math out of chemistry.

[Peela]

Well, it is all new to me and I hate to be reviewing yet another curriculum (its embarrassing for those who have read my comments on so many over the years) but after one week we are flying.

I agree- the secular chronological logic stage history looks really good. My kids have only done one lesson and it went well- they are starting where we are at- Medieval- and the first lesson involved reading about Byzantium and Constantinople and why it was positioned where it was, and they had to write about where they would place a city and why (present time). They both loved it and took it very seriously and wrote far more than the 50 words suggested. I honestly feel they learned more than if they just had to tell back why Constantinople was positioned where it was. They had to connect the past with the present and make it relevant to them. Thats not 'classical', in my understanding, but they were enthusiastic and put extra work in.

 

I am also enthusiastic about the Manners course (a secular manners course, basically, but basically just how to empathise and be nice to people!), the Whose in Control Course (dont let those voices on the TV, or anyone at all, tell you what to think- think for yourself)- and the current affairs courses- I have bought the Emerging Third World COuntries one- dd15 did the first 2 lessons and wrote a fantastic assignment and then later made a connection to something else she was reading and chatted about it to me. That honestly doesnt happen much around here so I was happy.

 

I have felt for a long time that the classical path we have taken has left the kids rather ignorant of the present world they live in. Fine for a kid who is curious and interested in politics etc, but mine aren't particularly. They wont go looking for the information themselves, so while they have read many classic books, they dont have a clue about many other things in the world they live in, even though they browse the newspapers regularly. Other topics in CTT include terrorism and world poverty.

 

I am glad my kdis have the foundation they do...but CTT is appealing to me in its relevance to their lives right now and engaging them in thinking for themselves and asking them for their opinions. But truly, its only been a week....I cant tell you how its going to be in a month or a year, only that it appeals and I have been at my wits end trying to enthuse my kids about school. They just dont care, they just want to finish it as soon as possible to move on. The fact that several times in our first week they wrote assignments much longer than they needed to, bodes well.

 

As for science...yes, I dont know. My kids do classes with a science teacher so I am not reliant on CTT. However I have them doing Science Basics because I like it's approach.

 

I think CTT would give an excellent education. If you are hell bent on your kid definitely going to college, you would still have to make sure things like maths and science are covered to the standard you need. Neither of my kids are sciencey so it's not an issue for me.

[lovemykids]

You know, I'm not sure that I would love it for elementary grades (though I might....), .

Me neither. Hmm, have you looked at Trisms? Oak Meadow is another program that looks good for logic stage and up only.

 

I looked at the website and initially thought it was interesting. However, I think it's pretty obvious that the author isn't a math person. While that isn't a problem in writing and history, it is a problem in science. I don't like that the author takes the math out of chemistry.

:iagree:

I also think that you can teach your child to think and form opinions without a program, through a study very similar to Classical education. ;)

Ala, WTM! But maybe not "by the book", which is, incidentally, what SWB stresses anyway;take the suggestions and make it your own.

 

Peela, here's to your success. Let us know how it goes, okay? :lurk5:

[LadyAberlin]

You know, I'm not sure that I would love it for elementary grades (though I might....), but where it seems to shine, to me, from the information on the web site, is as a logic stage history curriculum. It looks really superb for that, and as I haven't seen a ton of great logic stage materials..... Excellent.

 

 

Yeah the reading program seems to be whole word approach and I'm a phonics person.

[Terabith]

Yes, from looking at the web site, I don't care for the reading program. The creative writing isn't the way I would choose to teach writing, though if I had a child who was truly interested in creative writing, it would be good. I would not use the science for high school students.

 

It does seem particularly adept in history, especially logic stage. I like look of the current events program immensely, especially as a rhetoric age program. I think it would be interesting to learn more about the earth science courses. I haven't seen much I've liked in the way of logic stage earth science, and that does look very thorough. I think the manners and "living your life" courses look awesome, and I am VERY excited by the Information: Right or Wrong, How to Do Research, You or Them, and the Starter/ Elementary Living Your Life courses. They look very interesting.

 

The elementary science course on measurement looks like it could be valuable, and I think the Science Basics course in the lower school looks very valuable. That is a subject that isn't taught enough.

 

While I'm pretty attached to Story of the World and Sonlight American history, I'm thinking of using the Starter/ Elementary history curriculum as a survey next year. The prehistory especially looks like it might make a good precursor to Story of the World. And the elementary level Big Ideas in History (religion, politics, science) - wow! That sounds so exciting to ME! What a valuable addition to the study of history.

 

All in all, it looks like it fills a very unique niche and has a lot to offer. I am excited!

Edited July 26, 2009 by Terabith

[Terabith]

I am wondering, however, when the rest of the curriculum will be available? It says that other semesters will be available by winter 2008.....

 

What is there looks fabulous, but will there be more?

[dancer67]

Can someone explain this? I thought Classical Education was more geared towards memorization, copywork, and dictation. How does a classical education have a child "think"????

 

I guess I am a little confused. Oh, and I have read the new WTM book, and SWB stresses memorization. Thoughts???(Maybe I missed something)

 

I may post this is a seperate thread, as I think this is worth exploring a little. I am new to classical education.

[Snickerdoodle]

I'm sure many people can answer this much better than me.

 

Memorization is building a framework and a world view by which to filter and process information.

 

I like this aspect of it. That there is no real right or wrong answer. The author feels that as long as they are understanding the material, that is what matters.

 

I have been thinking a lot about this thread today especially the part which you wrote above. I'm not feeling very comfortable with it but I can't exactly put it into words yet.

[Snickerdoodle]

Is Connect the Thoughts a scientology based program?

[amtmcm]

Is Connect the Thoughts a scientology based program?

 

I don't know anything about Scientology, but my impression from reading many of the samples was that it has a Unitarian approach. The objective seems focussed on understanding and learning tolerance for other's beliefs:

 

http://www.connectthethoughts.net/lower--history.php

 

"They learn about each religion thoroughly as they arrive at that point in history, going to temples, churches and mosques, and speaking to worshipers as part of their studies. This removes the "unknown" quality to religion, and makes others more easily accepted by the student."

[Snickerdoodle]

It seems the author is a scientologist.

[Snickerdoodle]

Now the OP stated in another thread:

 

I know I want the best education for my daughter, so if she were to ever have to reurn to school for high school, she is well prepared, and has her own ideas and opinions, so that there will be no "indoctrination" taking place.. She will have her own beliefs, and be able to stand her ground, while backing up her rebuttals with facts.

 

 

I still don't have all my thoughts in order but, this thread has got me thinking a lot about worldview....

[amtmcm]

 

 

I still don't have all my thoughts in order but, this thread has got me thinking a lot about worldview....

 

:iagree:

 

We are Christian and I plan for my older DD to use World Views of the Western World for Highschool. But even so, I might consider buying a CTT guide to use as reference for discussion questions. I like how the curriculum is laid out, and I don't mind teaching tolerance for other religions, but I want my children to have their primary foundation in Christianity.

[Matryoshka]

Can someone explain this? I thought Classical Education was more geared towards memorization, copywork, and dictation. How does a classical education have a child "think"????

 

I guess I am a little confused. Oh, and I have read the new WTM book, and SWB stresses memorization. Thoughts???(Maybe I missed something)

 

I may post this is a seperate thread, as I think this is worth exploring a little. I am new to classical education.

 

Okay, I admit that I'm not particularly Classical in my approach, and have only skimmed through the WTM book, but my understanding was that memorization was stressed in the grammar stage. In the Logic stage and Rhetoric stages I thought they were supposed to be using and analyzing and thinking about the facts - that memorization in the younger years was just the foundation?

[dancer67]

It seems the author is a scientologist.

 

 

Snickerdoodle

 

How do you know this? I am curious. I did mention religion on the yahoo group, and received a private email from the author telling me he removed my post from the group, as religion is not allowed to be discussed on his Yahoo group. The group was there to discuss the education of our children. And he hoped I was not offended.

 

So this is why I was asking.

[lovemykids]

Can someone explain this? I thought Classical Education was more geared towards memorization, copywork, and dictation. How does a classical education have a child "think"????

 

I guess I am a little confused. Oh, and I have read the new WTM book, and SWB stresses memorization. Thoughts???(Maybe I missed something)

 

I may post this is a seperate thread, as I think this is worth exploring a little. I am new to classical education.

 

In classical education children are given a rigorous education. Some think that this will lead to the same type of intellect developed in the greatest minds in history, as they were also given a classical education. So I wouldn’t say that this type of education develops non-thinkers. LOL. On the contrary, it represents a return to actual education rather than dumbing down facts, or breezing through material. Many of the books used were taken out of public schools and different methods crept in, producing the mediocre education that many parents are unhappy with today.

~ Grammar Stage, Grades 1-4 focuses filling children’s minds with facts to build comprehension

~ Logic Stage, Grades 5-8 is used to achieve a higher level of understanding of the previously acquired facts, allowing students to think through arguments, and analyze information logically

~ Rhetoric Stage, Grades 9-12 concentrates on using the two previously learned stages and combining them to write and talk about all of the subjects taught

Um, also you as the teacher can take hold of your child’s education and teach them to think. This can be done with almost any good material. Logic can also be started at a young age. There are numerous opportunities for “thinking†in a classical model of education.

I do not think the classical method is for everyone, but if you read the book you can use it as a tool for choosing your own curriculum. I believe that various resources, geared slightly toward a child’s learning style and that of your own will provide a superb education. And following something like the model of a classical one will also produce good results.

HTH

 

I haven't looked at connect the thoughts for the logic stage yet, I will go check it out. ;) There may be one or two things that I would consider adding to our eclectic classical education.

[dancer67]

I emailed the author directly to ask if he was a Scientologist, and received no response. In the past he was very quick to answer all of my private emails, and questions on the yahoo board.

 

Since asking him this, he has not responded, and he has banned me from the Yahoo Group.

 

I just thought I would let everyone know. I guess maybe I shouldn't of asked. The removal of my religious question post should have tipped me off.

[Snickerdoodle]

and he has banned me from the Yahoo Group.

 

 

 

 

Really?

[dancer67]

Really?

 

Since he did not respond to my private email, I asked him on his Yahoo Group and my message has not been posted as of yet. I have tried to post and he has not sent any messages over from me.

 

It may not make a difference to some, but it might for others. Just like anyone would want to know if the curriculum was Christian or not. Or what the religious views were.

 

He will not answer me.

[CheerMom]

I am in the Yahoo group and have been for a few months. He posted today that someone asked what is religious beliefs were, and that was his private business, and he does not allow them to intrude upon what is taught in his curriculum. He states that he has made a streneous effort in this regard to allow the students to delelop their own beliefs and opinions. He stated that he does not share his religious or political beliefs, nor would he ask anyone what theirs were. I have read the first 2 courses in the Upper School Histroy and Science and found nothing objectional. Very factual in nature, with no religious bias at all. Hope that helps!

[Peela]

Its interesting that you were banned....but his religious views dont comes through in the courses UNLESS you already know that the methods he uses are from the Scientology philosophy. But they are pretty good, common sense ideas, like understanding and difficult words before you read something. Nothing cultish at all. I think he has made a great effort to make the courses useful to everyone.

[LadyAberlin]

Gosh you would think he could have sent you that e-mail about not sharing his beliefs without banning you. I personally wouldn't be comfortable using the program if he is going to act like that. I would like to know what the author of any programs beliefs are. I do think it is my business when they are going to be teaching my child through their books. Even if the author's views differ form mine, I might still want to use the program and just want to know what to watch out for. Anyway I don't think he handled that well at all.

Edited July 31, 2009 by LadyAberlin

[dancer67]

:iagree:

 

 

He will not post any of my questions on the Yahoo Group, nor will he respond to my emails asking about religion or worldviews.

 

It would be negligent upon my part to buy something without inquiring about it, since the religion is a very important part in some people's choosing curriculum. His avoiding my question is clear that he has something to hide.

 

I think he could have responded to my email, or question. It was very simple. It is a question I ask about any curriculum that is new. "What religious viewpoint is this?" "Is the author a Christian?" "Is this secular, and if so, is their anything objectionable to Christians?" "What kind of worldview is the author portraying"

 

As an author of a curriculum, I do not feel that his beliefs are "personal", to me It is what many homeschoolers base their curriculum decisions on. I believe that if he stated he was a Scientologist, it may hurt his sales. Maybe that is what he believes.

 

Now, if he would have just answered my question honestly, then I could have asked him if there was anything objectionable to Christians(which I am a Christian, and ask this of every curriculum I am not familiar with), I may have looked further into this, and even considered using some of his courses.

 

But by him acting unprofessional like this, I would never support his homeschooling curriculum. Scientologist or not.

[Peela]

Perhaps he just got a bit freaked out by the questions you asked (I dont know what they were) because Scientologists are probably rather used to being treated as wierdos and he was trying to avoid that whole discussion.

Someone- I am not sure if it was here or someone who wrote to me privately- said that they, as a Christian, were going through his courses and vetting them for anything that might be remotely offensive to Christians- and that they were doing this on Steven's request.

I believe he is trying, and that he actually is very clear about the fact that his courses are written so as to make kids think for themselves and not to swallow any belief system blindly - which may not be suitable for some people.

The courses suit my secular family perfectly so far, and I feel no fear of being indoctrinated into Scientology from them, so it is not relevant to me that he is a scientologist, if he is.

I get the feeling Steven is not very familiar with the homeschooling world, or with classical, or probably with Christians. He is on a learning curve himself. In a way, I like that because he has a very fresh approach. He wrote the courses for his own children, not to make a lot of money in the homeschooling world, and he is free not to share his religion, if he has one, with the public if he chooses (and to deal with the consequences of that, obviously).

 

Today we, as a secular family, went inside a large, beautiful Catholic church to experience what that was like, because that was one of the lessons in my kids' CTT history course. Both my kids and I were touched by the beauty and peace inside, and my son got upset with me for whispering to him at the back while a service was on, because as he said, it was a sacred space and I shouldn't do that. That experience probably gave my kids more respect for the Christian religion than anything they have learned about it previously, because they experienced something for themselves in a certain context, rather than just being told.

[amtmcm]

Gosh you would think he could have sent you that e-mail about not sharing his beliefs without banning you. I personally wouldn't be comfortable using the program if he is going to act like that. I would like to know the author of any programs beliefs. I do think it is my business when they are going to be teaching my child through their books. Even if the author's views differ form mine, I might still want to use the program and just want to know what to watch out for. Anyway I don't think he handled that well at all.

 

:iagree:

 

Or he could have responded that the curriculum is written in a secular manner (which is what it sounds like to me based on Peela's comments). Then you'd know that religion is covered in a historical context only. His getting defensive about it is really a turn off and makes me nervous that he might be "hiding" something in the curriculum, which I'm sure he's not. He should have provided a simple response regarding the worldview of the curriculum.

[Ummto4]

MAy be that's the pet peeves of his, being a Scientolog. Also maybe, he feels he doesn't need to say whatever religion he follows since he thinks that he's done his best to not let his belief creeps in the material and not to offend other religious believers. In real world, it would have been considered rude to even ask about a person's religion anyway.

 

The problem here is because he's dealing with HS-ers. In the HS world, a curriculum author's religion is out in the open, unless it's a math curriculum. It's sometimes a selling point as well, even for the ones who write secular materials.

 

Take TRISMS. While it's made such that it doesn't include a specific worldview, the authors announce that they're Christian. SAme as SWB. TWTM is not made with Christian slant, but we all know she's a Christian. Now, if he does the same and says that he's a Scientolog, I'm sure people will freak out before even read further.

 

So I can sort of understand his dilemma. That's why it takes longer for him to reply dancer's email (may be he needs some deliberation, LOL). And since his yahoogroup is set up to be moderated, then of course Dancer's particular email (About religion) can't be released. By the way, I don't know whether you're still in CTT yahoogroups, Dancer. If not, this is the answer to your question:

 

"Someone asked me recently about my personal religious beliefs. I don't discuss

them, I'm sorry. They're personal. I don't discuss my political beliefs, or

any other of my beliefs, either, nor do I allow any of them to infiltrate or

intrude upon what is taught in the curricula. I've made a strenuous effort in

this regard, to allow the student to develop their own beliefs and opinions. I

would appreciate it if you all could respect my wishes on this. I won't ever

ask any of you what you believe, as I see it as private. Your beliefs are

yours, and no set of your beliefs are a "pre-condition" for my caring about your

children and their education. Please extend me the same courtesy. Thanks!"

Edited July 31, 2009 by mom2moon2

[AuntPol]

Yes, it's very easy to announce you are a Christian, whether curriculum is religous or secular, in the homeschooling world. Why? Because the majority of homeschoolers' religion. Religion is often used divisely. You have to be Christian to join this co-op, you have to be Christian to play on the homeschool football league (major pet peeve of mine and I am Conservative Christian-I think it should be called the CHRISTIAN homeschool football league), etc.

 

 

However, and we all know that is true, if he just announces he is Scientology, the majority of Christians won't even give it a second glance even if there is nothing about Scientology in the currculum. This would be true even for the ones who consider themselves open-minded enough to use a secular curriculum to begin with. I think many atheists, etc would too. I know I personally don't a single soul who doesn't raise his eyebrows in regards to Scientology. Hence, why he is probably trying to avoid the conversation.

[HappyGrace]

However, and we all know that is true, if he just announces he is Scientology, the majority of Christians won't even give it a second glance even if there is nothing about Scientology in the currculum. This would be true even for the ones who consider themselves open-minded enough to use a secular curriculum to begin with. I think many atheists, etc would too. I know I personally don't a single soul who doesn't raise his eyebrows in regards to Scientology. Hence, why he is probably trying to avoid the conversation.

 

:iagree:

 

I don't think it was right of him to ban her from the Yahoo group either.

[Shelly in the Country]

However, and we all know that is true, if he just announces he is Scientology, the majority of Christians won't even give it a second glance even if there is nothing about Scientology in the currculum. This would be true even for the ones who consider themselves open-minded enough to use a secular curriculum to begin with. I think many atheists, etc would too. I know I personally don't a single soul who doesn't raise his eyebrows in regards to Scientology. Hence, why he is probably trying to avoid the conversation.

 

And people are totally free to do this. One of biggest reasons we homeschool is so we can shape the worldview of our children. If I feel uncomfortable with the worldview of a publisher I don't HAVE to buy or consider their curriculum. He is free to be a Scientologist and publish a homeschooling curriculum, and I am free to not buy his product.

 

It is not wise of him to try to hide such a thing though in an age of Google. These things are not private anymore if you are in the public eye at all.

[dancer67]

Peela and Mom2Moon:

 

Your posts have made me do some serious re-thinking. I had a long discussion about this with my husband last night. And as a Christian, I was quick to judge. One thing that we always agreed we would NOT do.

 

Am I upset that he didn't answer me? Yes. But I can understand why. I am guilty of judgement. And possibly, this question has come up several times with him.

 

I did see the response come over on the Yahoo Group, thank you.

 

I also saw that my Judy Blume thread came over, which tells me that even though I came off as judgemental, even a little rude, he still places my posts on the yahoo loop.

 

That tells me he has integrity.

 

My husband told me that he seems like a man who has worked very hard on a product for the homeschooling community, and to provide for his family. And without putting any of his beliefs in this program. He allows the child to think for himself/herself.

 

Thank you Peela and Mom2Moon for your posts.

[HappyGrace]

It is not wise of him to try to hide such a thing though in an age of Google. These things are not private anymore if you are in the public eye at all.

 

:iagree:

 

The fact that it looks like he's hiding it bugs me. I realize it's maybe because of the negative connotation of Scientology. But especially now that it's out there, he should just admit it rather than doing this.

 

I had already decided against the curriculum anyway. I just thought he kind of may be shooting himself in the foot to not just be more up front.

Edited July 31, 2009 by HappyGrace

[dancer67]

:iagree:

 

I don't think it was right of him to ban her from the Yahoo group either.

 

 

I thought I was banned, due to him not posting my comments over the Yahoo Group, and it had to do with religion.

 

He has, in fact, posted my comments regarding homeschooling on his group this morning.

 

So I apologize for jumping to conclusions on this.

[HappyGrace]

He has, in fact, posted my comments regarding homeschooling on his group this morning.

 

Thanks for clarifying!

[dancer67]

:iagree:

 

The fact that it looks like he's hiding it bugs me. I realize it's maybe because of the negative connotation of Scientology. But especially now that it's out there, he should just admit it rather than doing this.

 

 

:iagree:

 

To a point. I feel that he SHOULD answer the question. By him not answering raises eyebrows with many people.

 

I understand WHY he didn't, but I also feel that it is out there all over cyberworld, and it is easy for people to find this out. And by not answering the questions directly, does make him look like he is hiding something, even though he is not.

 

I judged right away. But that is because he didn't answer me, and I felt he was hiding something. But I know now that he isn't. But I took the time to ask more questions, and look at this curriculum over and over. Most people wouldn't do that.

[LadyAberlin]

I thought I was banned, due to him not posting my comments over the Yahoo Group, and it had to do with religion.

 

He has, in fact, posted my comments regarding homeschooling on his group this morning.

 

So I apologize for jumping to conclusions on this.

 

 

Well see that changes things. His response to the group was also a response to you.

[dancer67]

Well see that changes things. His response to the group was also a response to you.

 

 

Yes, only he wouldn't say what the curriculum was. Secular, what type of worldview it had, was there anything objectionable to Christians, did it speak of Evolution only?

 

But, his beliefs are personal. As this is what he stated on the yahoo loop. And as long as it does not interfere with the curriculum, I respect that.

[Cindy in NY]

Yes, only he wouldn't say what the curriculum was. Secular, what type of worldview it had, was there anything objectionable to Christians, did it speak of Evolution only?

 

But, his beliefs are personal. As this is what he stated on the yahoo loop. And as long as it does not interfere with the curriculum, I respect that.

 

If you watch the video clips on his website and read the FAQ's it covers the curriculum questions rather well. I have spoken to several user, as well as the author and, as a Christian, I felt very comfortable purchasing several courses.

 

I haven't found anything objectionable in the courses I have looked through. I am going to be looking through the Pre-history and Science Basics courses tonight and I will let you know what I think.

[angela in ohio]

Okay, I admit that I'm not particularly Classical in my approach, and have only skimmed through the WTM book, but my understanding was that memorization was stressed in the grammar stage. In the Logic stage and Rhetoric stages I thought they were supposed to be using and analyzing and thinking about the facts - that memorization in the younger years was just the foundation?

 

This is true. As another PP said, classical education leads to grown people who know how to think well, but it builds on a solid foundation of learning facts. It is the current PS model to jump to wanting dc to "think for themselves" at a young age, while decrying "memorization" and "facts" as old-fashioned and unintelligent.

[dancer67]

If you watch the video clips on his website and read the FAQ's it covers the curriculum questions rather well. I have spoken to several user, as well as the author and, as a Christian, I felt very comfortable purchasing several courses.

 

I haven't found anything objectionable in the courses I have looked through. I am going to be looking through the Pre-history and Science Basics courses tonight and I will let you know what I think.

 

 

Thanks Cindy. Let me know your opinion on this. Oh, and I did watch his video clips and read his FAQ page, but it still was not really clear to me at the time.

[AuntPol]

:iagree:

 

To a point. I feel that he SHOULD answer the question. By him not answering raises eyebrows with many people.

 

 

 

 

I do want to let people know that if anyone at anytime took a class from the Church of Scientology, it will be on the internet. I took a class (or audit as they called it) via home study. A friend of a friend bought it for me back when I was living in LA. At the time, I really didn't know that Scientology was a religion lol (way back in the days before internet). I did the booklet and went to the main LA campus and talked with someone, who told me all these classes that I "needed" -of course more money needed too lol. I thought the whole thing quite silly and never pursued it. Anyway, if you were to google my maiden name, it shows up that I have been affliliated with Scientology. However, I am not a scientologist nor do I play on on TV. In fact, there is nothing good I can say about Scientology. Furthermore, these sites that publish the data will not take my name off the site.

 

I have no idea if that's the case here but just saying you can't always go by what you find on the internet.

[LadyAberlin]

I do want to let people know that if anyone at anytime took a class from the Church of Scientology, it will be on the internet. I took a class (or audit as they called it) via home study. A friend of a friend bought it for me back when I was living in LA. At the time, I really didn't know that Scientology was a religion lol (way back in the days before internet). I did the booklet and went to the main LA campus and talked with someone, who told me all these classes that I "needed" -of course more money needed too lol. I thought the whole thing quite silly and never pursued it. Anyway, if you were to google my maiden name, it shows up that I have been affliliated with Scientology. However, I am not a scientologist nor do I play on on TV. In fact, there is nothing good I can say about Scientology. Furthermore, these sites that publish the data will not take my name off the site.

 

I have no idea if that's the case here but just saying you can't always go by what you find on the internet.

 

That would be so annoying to not be able to take your name off of the list. Yes I looked and he has taken about 5 or 6 scientology courses, but that was back in the 90's and the world wide directory says that he wasn't listed as a member in the most recent issue. So who knows he might have been at one point and isn't any more or could still be. A lot of things can happen in 10 yrs to a person's belief system.

[dancer67]

That would be so annoying to not be able to take your name off of the list. Yes I looked and he has taken about 5 or 6 scientology courses, but that was back in the 90's and the world wide directory says that he wasn't listed as a member in the most recent issue. So who knows he might have been at one point and isn't any more or could still be. A lot of things can happen in 10 yrs to a person's belief system.

 

 

That's interesting. Thanks for sharing Lady Aberlin.:001_smile:

[Peela]

But I think the point is that Steven doesnt bring Scientology into the CTT courses at all, nor are there any "hooks' within the courses to link you to Scientology. The methods he uses may be taught in Scientology but they are very practical and Scientology doesn't own them- things like using real objects whwnever possible rather than just abstract learning, understanding vocabulary so you dont switch off.

Which is why he doesnt even want to talk about it- it really isn't relevant and he has been painstaking in making sure the courses are not affiliated with any religion at all. So a discussion of Scientology is futile and irrelevant unless you dont want to give your money to someone who is one. There is no way a child using these courses would end up brainwashed into Scientology- quite the opposite. They would think for themselves.

I personally think the guy has absolutely every right not to discuss his religion. Gee, that is a very basic human right and if you dont like it, don't use the courses. There is plenty of information on the website to give you clarity on the position of the writer regarding religion or lack of in his courses. Plenty. For all we know he is no longer a Scientologist but likes some of their study methods, or never was one and we are doing a lot of projecting!

I look at the courses and go from there.

[dancer67]

But I think the point is that Steven doesnt bring Scientology into the CTT courses at all, nor are there any "hooks' within the courses to link you to Scientology. The methods he uses may be taught in Scientology but they are very practical and Scientology doesn't own them- things like using real objects whwnever possible rather than just abstract learning, understanding vocabulary so you dont switch off.

Which is why he doesnt even want to talk about it- it really isn't relevant and he has been painstaking in making sure the courses are not affiliated with any religion at all. So a discussion of Scientology is futile and irrelevant unless you dont want to give your money to someone who is one. There is no way a child using these courses would end up brainwashed into Scientology- quite the opposite. They would think for themselves.

I personally think the guy has absolutely every right not to discuss his religion. Gee, that is a very basic human right and if you dont like it, don't use the courses. There is plenty of information on the website to give you clarity on the position of the writer regarding religion or lack of in his courses. Plenty. For all we know he is no longer a Scientologist but likes some of their study methods, or never was one and we are doing a lot of projecting!

I look at the courses and go from there.

:iagree:

 

Again, after rethinking my opinions of the author, I find nothing objectionable in his products, and he has been more then accomodating in answering questions, even going as far as asking members input on new curriculum, and what sales we would like to see on his courses, as the new school year is approaching for many. I know I am looking forward to using his Music Theory 1 course with my dd, so I can finally learn the keyboard!!:D

[JudyJudyJudy]

It is not wise of him to try to hide such a thing though in an age of Google. These things are not private anymore if you are in the public eye at all.

Unfortunately, if he is a Scientologist, he knows that he doesn't have a very big chance of selling his curriculum if he makes that knowledge public, so it makes sense to me that he would attempt to hide such information. What I find sad is that he or any other nonChristian truly has to fear revealing his/her religious beliefs (or lack thereof). I truly find it sad that in 2009 people are still judged based on their religions. I would totally understand the concerns of nonscientologists if his materials pushed the beliefs or reflected the beliefs of scientology, but I think it's ridiculous that some people would choose not to buy his materials simply because of his personal beliefs.

[Shelly in the Country]

Unfortunately, if he is a Scientologist, he knows that he doesn't have a very big chance of selling his curriculum if he makes that knowledge public, so it makes sense to me that he would attempt to hide such information. What I find sad is that he or any other nonChristian truly has to fear revealing his/her religious beliefs (or lack thereof). I truly find it sad that in 2009 people are still judged based on their religions. I would totally understand the concerns of nonscientologists if his materials pushed the beliefs or reflected the beliefs of scientology, but I think it's ridiculous that some people would choose not to buy his materials simply because of his personal beliefs.

 

I actually don't have a dog in this fight since I had never even heard of CTT before this thread popped up. For our core curriculum I try to choose publishers that specifically uphold my family's very specific Christian Worldview (we are Reformed). If I cannot find materials which jive with that, I will turn to more generically Christian materials that are not necessarily in sync with our stream of Christianity. If I cannot find anything Christian at all that is suitable I will turn to secular materials. I do find it odd though that you would deny me the right to spend my money as I wish and train my children as I wish. DH and I do not teach our children about all possible worldviews and then give them an option of picking one for themselves. We teach Christianity as truth, the same as if we were teaching them 2+2=4. I don't really see why I should be required to view all curriculum with complete neutrality with respect to religion. Besides I don't buy the notion that anyone with a deeply held religious belief can completely keep it out of a curriculum such as this one. Math can be neutral...I can't think of any other subject that can be neutral though. Some part of their worldview will come through even if they don't quote their holy book to me or shake their fist at the sky metaphorically in their curriculum. I don't believe in neutrality.

 

But like I said, I don't have a dog in this fight. I only responded to this thread because I thought it folly on the part of the author to try to hide his religious beliefs when directly asked. BUT he is certainly free to do so.