sonlight core d bizarre history

[SarahW]

I'm not really that into all these debates so I'm sure this is a silly question--how do these silly dates support Sonlight's extreme protestant/missionary POV??

 

Since the OP's main question was how big a part this was of the curriculum, I think this is important to think about.

 

When I was reading through the sample I saw the IG instructed some edits to a story about George Washington, removing some religious content, with the note that the why would be explained later, but I didn't see the explanation. Maybe someone who had the new guide can fill me in? But since there does seem to be a push to Providentialism, my running theory is that this is a Providentialist twist of Landmarkist-style history.

[NASDAQ]

The condescending tone in this thread is worse than any of the historical inaccuracies. Basically, people are puffing themselves up about how knowledgeable they are about history and us other poor homeschool moms just don't know what we are doing. We don't realize that we are teaching our children the same thing as never having landed on the moon. How are we not to be insulted by these comments, opinions and attitudes. I was trying to find some neutral ground in my post that suggested maybe we have different priorities and that no one is wrong or bad. Maybe you all agree with that but the general feeling of these comments do not reflect that. These sorts of comments being made reflect how absurd Sonlight is and how terrible it is to teach history with it.

 

If you're teaching your child that the Libyans were doing math in the western North America in ancient times, then you are teaching them that no one landed on the moon. We can't all be historians, or scientists, or what have you. That's why we purchase instructor's guides. And if someone who _does_ have expertise, I want them to mention it if they find something hinky. Because those of us who aren't as familiar with American history are relying on trusted materials to convey reasonably accurate information.

 

This whole thread drives home even more why I make humanities a priority over historical fact.

 

As women...as moms and as homeschool moms we have got to learn to treat each other better, with kindness, understanding and accepting people where they are. Not allowing BEING RIGHT to be more important than the person. So many times on this board and other homeschool boards, being right seems to be the most important. That is sad....way more sad than the historical inaccuracies being talked about.

 

As a woman - a real woman, with a uterus, and children that I home school -- I'm capable of talking about factual information without being personally threatened. I want to impart that ability to my children, too. This isn't about you, or any other mother using Sonlight. It's about something strange in Sonlight's IG.

 

Also, you can't make your children understand "what it was like" to be a Jew in the Holocaust or a slave during the Civil War. You can teach them about it, and they can read fictionalised accounts of it. But suggesting that a child somehow shares in the experience of being in a concentration camp because he read a fictionalised account is strange and seems to be appropriating suffering.

 

ETA: Not to insult any real women who might be lacking a uterus, etc.

[albeto]

But suggesting that a child somehow shares in the experience of being in a concentration camp because he read a fictionalised account is strange and seems to be appropriating suffering.

 

This was exactly the take-home message I got from using Sonlight. By learning to identify suffering throughout human history, I (and my son) got the impression we were encouraged all the more to spread the "good news" that Jesus can end that suffering, at least in an eternal sense. If this is Sonlight's educational goal, then facts are really nothing more than a means to an end, and not important in and of themselves.

[umsami]

 

 

My frustration is with the larger concept that history is just some loosey goosey (timey-wimey) subject like literature, or art - just do what you like with it and carry on. History is a science. A social science, ok, but there are methods and procedures that need to be followed. We would never accept a science curriculum that said that man never landed on the moon as valid, so why is it that when a history curriculum makes the same sort of error everyone seems so apt to just shrug and say whatever?

 

There are plenty of people who have rather low criteria for what constitutes science as well. There are science curricula that promote that dinosaurs and people lived at the same time, even though the dinosaurs died out roughly 65 million years ago (save for their ancestors the birds), and the earliest humans show up around 2.5 million years ago.

 

There are plenty of people who doubt global warming, even though 97% of scientists believe in it, and there is ample evidence to support it.

[JennyD]

Why did they go there, I wonder?

 

Well, speaking as a Jew living in Tennessee, I can certainly tell you why they all got up and left. You just can't get a decent bagel around here to save your life.

[PachiSusan]

Well, speaking as a Jew living in Tennessee, I can certainly tell you why they all got up and left. You just can't get a decent bagel around here to save your life.

 

Still laughing!!!

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[LucyStoner]

1. I am glad I recycled their catalog.

 

2. If it's ok to teach kids that Jews colonized the areas that became bluegrass state hundreds and hundreds of years before the Vikings crossed the Atlantic, it is also hunky dory to teach them that Harry Truman was a Nazi operative who off-ed Roosevelt? or that those killed in the Salem witch trials liked to be burned or that Harry Potter is nonfiction and I am Hermione Granger? Or that negative numbers don't exist and that the correct way to multiply is to add 17 to every product, making 2x2=21?

 

I get that many people (probably most) use Sonlight without teaching the fictionalized history. Still, I can't defend any business incorporating this into materials directed at children. Children have a right to education. That right becomes meaningless if as a parent I abuse my power and teach stuff that has no real evidence to support the assertions being made.

[Lady Florida.]

This thread is yet another example of why people are wise to start asking for accountability when education is done at home.

 

And why my view of "leave us homeschoolers alone" has been changing. I'm starting to think we need more accountability, not less. This is something I never thought I'd say.

 

Yet in my FB WTM group, a friend is discussing racist Native American costumes in her local elementary, costumes which are stereotyped and which display tremendous ignorance of history on the part of the teachers and people in charge.

 

Maybe it's more to the point to say that anyone who takes on the responsibility of educating children should take the job seriously and not just choose convenience over truth.

 

The difference however, is in public school, or even a private brick and mortar school, everyone can see it and call them on it. As they should.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentence.

 

The funny thing about facts is, they are true regardless of whether everyone accepts them as such.

 

Facts are sneaky that way.

[umsami]

I bookmarked this many moons ago. It's a free, literature-rich American History curriculum. As far as i can tell, it's secular... at least the books are. Might be of use to some. :)

 

http://www.guesthollow.com/homeschool/history/americanpdf.html

[umsami]

Science should be reproducible and repeatable. So, if you do radiometric dating on a dinosaur bone, and it's 85 million years old. It should be 85 million years old when Karl Michel does radiometric dating on another fragment from that same bone 3 years later in Germany (or whatever).

 

If I do a study that shows that the MMR vax causes autism... then, if others do similar studies, they should come to the same conclusion. (That's why Wakefield was discredited...nobody could reproduce his data. Like not once.)

 

We have a lot of evidence that implies that the Vikings were in North America prior to Colombus. Thus, saying that Colombus "discovered" America is rather dubious (not going into the whole "how can you discover a place when people already live there"?) thing.

 

If we're going to talk about Jews in Kentucky and Tennessee as they relate to American history, then saying that Gen. Grant expelled them during the Civil War would be accurate. It can be backed up by historical accounts (the decree in 1862, newspapers of the time, personal diaries, etc.) However, saying that they lived in that area in ancient times, cannot.

[lamppost]

 

Except those dates and locations are NOT what Mormons believe so that wouldn't make sense.

 

 

 

Yeah, I was going to say- Mormons are the only ones I've ever heard of who believe Jews emigrated to the Americas in ancient times... but the dates given don't match up with their beliefs.

 

 

We will be using BrightFlash next year. Not sure if I'll get my hands on Core D next year but if I do I'll let y'all know if this is included.

[Spy Car]

(You're still a man, right Bill?)

 

 

I believe so. Hold on, let me check....

 

 

......that is affirmative! :D

 

Bill

[PachiSusan]

 

 

I can't watch ANY show with him in it and take him seriously. Dude, get a hair cut!!!!!

[LucyStoner]

 

 

I can't watch ANY show with him in it and take him seriously. Dude, get a hair cut!!!!!

 

 

Yeah, dude needs a better barber. And he should stop giving interviews while obviously as high as a kite. ;)

[Georgiana Daniels]

 

 

What--c'mon now, I love this show! It's totally how we study history.

[PachiSusan]

Yeah, dude needs a better barber. And he should stop giving interviews while obviously as high as a kite. ;)

 

 

I thought I was the only one who thought he looks like a whack. LOL

[GWOB]

This thread is yet another example of why people are wise to start asking for accountability when education is done at home.

 

 

Yet in my FB WTM group, a friend is discussing racist Native American costumes in her local elementary, costumes which are stereotyped and which display tremendous ignorance of history on the part of the teachers and people in charge. Should the homeschoolers in her town be accountable to these administrators who themselves are unfit teachers?

 

Maybe it's more to the point to say that anyone who takes on the responsibility of educating children should take the job seriously and not just choose convenience over truth.

 

 

Let me just out myself and admit I am the friend Tibbie mentioned.

 

Perhaps there should be no accountability at all. If there is no perfect solution, we shouldn't bother with any improvement. ;)

 

 

 

I'm pretty confident in my assumption Nancy Ann does take her responsibility seriously, and doesn't believe she's choosing convenience over truth. My comments aren't about her or home educators like her. They're following the lead of trusted advisers, but these trusted advisers are accountable to no one. Therefore, anything goes.

 

 

To your bolded statement: That is rather defeatist. This system is messed up, so let it just kill itself? Or should we rage, rage against the dying of the light? I personally would prefer to rage. ;) I like to pretend that most homeschooling parents are rather intelligent. Perhaps this board has ruined me ;). I look at the "village" and I just do not want them deciding how I should educate my children. Or perhaps you were specifically targeting Christian home educators? Because I am unabashedly Christian, yet I can no longer use Sonlight in good faith. Is that ok for you?

 

And why my view of "leave us homeschoolers alone" has been changing. I'm starting to think we need more accountability, not less. This is something I never thought I'd say.

 

 

 

The difference however, is in public school, or even a private brick and mortar school, everyone can see it and call them on it. As they should.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentence.

 

 

 

Facts are sneaky that way.

 

 

In the case Tibbie mentioned, no one in the public school called out the offensive behavior. My friend had tons of "likes" on her picture of her white kid in red face paint portraying a Native American chief. No one stepped up. No one called her out. She even posted a pic of a kid in what looked like blackface! It turned out the kid was portraying a semi-famous clown, but still. I think we may be a bit spoiled here on WTM.

 

I am a history nut, though I'm not a trained historian.I left Sonlight because of its revisionist history practices.

 

Parents, we need to be aware. If we are going to be responsible for educating our children, we need to read read read. We cannot just trust any one source.

[albeto]

To your bolded statement: That is rather defeatist. This system is messed up, so let it just kill itself? Or should we rage, rage against the dying of the light? I personally would prefer to rage. ;)

 

That was kinda sorta my point. :) <--- not meant to be a passive aggressive smilie at all, I promise

 

Parents, we need to be aware. If we are going to be responsible for educating our children, we need to read read read. We cannot just trust any one source.

 

 

Threads like this on this forum (as well as the commonly discussed evolution ones) illustrate the need for information and applied critical thinking, not just dedicate reading, when it comes to setting educational standards for children. To think a parent can replace the plethora of specialties that go into designing a quality curriculum is naive, if not disastrous, in my opinion.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

To think a parent can replace the plethora of specialties that go into designing a quality curriculum is naive, if not disastrous, in my opinion.

 

 

That's an odd thing to say. Are most quality educational materials written by childless people?

 

What is it about being a parent that entirely negates one's reasoning skills and/or educational expertise? Do you mean parents are ill-qualified to set educational standards for anyone, or just for their own children? Is it alright if one parent with a PhD in history chooses curriculum for another parent with a PhD in history, so at least it's not for their own child? What about for science? Can parents who have degrees in science choose a textbook for their own children without being naive or bringing about disaster? What about mathematicians who homeschool, or those with English degrees who teach grammar to their own children? More disaster?

 

Since we are naive and courting disaster if we presume to think our efforts can equal the offerings of quality curriculum created by a "plethora of specialties," maybe we should just use the high-quality and accurate public school textbooks, because they are never in error.

 

Or maybe you could just tell us all what to do, because thinking for ourselves is really hard.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Sonlight is turning out to be one wacky curriculum, but that doesn't mean an intelligent person can't ignore, mark out, or shred the stupid parts and still use the schedule, books (most), and timeline and map info with their children. I didn't get any dumber just because I started homeschooling, the brain still works. I am still as smart as many public school teachers, truly. Just because someone puts a note in my binder that Jews settled Kentucky in ancient times doesn't mean I'll believe it or teach it to my children. All it means is that when I find such a timeline in the IG I will stop buying educational materials from that company and stop telling my friends how awesome it is. (Which I have done regarding SL, for many other reasons long before this one came up.)

[GWOB]

That was kinda sorta my point. :) <--- not meant to be a passive aggressive smilie at all, I promise

 

 

 

Threads like this on this forum (as well as the commonly discussed evolution ones) illustrate the need for information and applied critical thinking, not just dedicate reading, when it comes to setting educational standards for children. To think a parent can replace the plethora of specialties that go into designing a quality curriculum is naive, if not disastrous, in my opinion.

 

 

I agree with the bolded, but to imply the government needs to intervene is quite much to this semi-liberal's mind. No, I am not Sonlight's biggest fan, but advocating, or even implying, that the government should maybe correct people who use Sonlight is going too far. Ya know, freedom of speech/religion and all that? While I may not agree with Sonlight's, uh, questionable stances on history, I absolutely agree with a parent's freedom to educate their child in the way they see fit. I admit I cringe at the way some parents choose to educate their children, but really?!?! Advocating for more government involvement in home education? Even this registered Democrat cannot get on board with that one.

[PachiSusan]

Amen!!! Brava!!!

 

 

 

That's an odd thing to say. Are most quality educational materials written by childless people?

 

What is it about being a parent that entirely negates one's reasoning skills and/or educational expertise? Do you mean parents are ill-qualified to set educational standards for anyone, or just for their own children? Is it alright if one parent with a PhD in history chooses curriculum for another parent with a PhD in history, so at least it's not for their own child? What about for science? Can parents who have degrees in science choose a textbook for their own children without being naive or bringing about disaster? What about mathematicians who homeschool, or those with English degrees who teach grammar to their own children? More disaster?

 

Since we are naive and courting disaster if we presume to think our efforts can equal the offerings of quality curriculum created by a "plethora of specialties," maybe we should just use the high-quality and accurate public school textbooks, because they are never in error.

 

Or maybe you could just tell us all what to do, because thinking for ourselves is really hard.

 

[Elfknitter.#]

I like Sonlight because they pick some great books, and I buy directly from them to reward the time they've spent finding those books for me.

 

 

Last I checked, a qualified children's librarian who specialized in the field of children's literature (and I will say right now for at least 60% or more of you, this is not the case) could do this for free. I know with my background in history, MLS, and knowledge of my core collection! I would be able to at least produce something. May not be what you like, but the collection is determined by budgets, buying cycles, ILL, and other available (or not) reciprocal lending agreements. Working with a librarian might produce something similar.

 

I don't understand the mentality that Sonlight is your end all, be all for history when a schedule like http://www.classicalhouseoflearning.com/ or http://www.guesthollow.com/homeschool/curriculum.html exists.

[Elfknitter.#]

 

 

That's an odd thing to say. Are most quality educational materials written by childless people?

 

 

Sure. And all candies are made by Oompla Lumpas.

 

Seriously? What does tht have to do with anything?

[Colleen]

Sonlight is turning out to be one wacky curriculum, but that doesn't mean an intelligent person can't ignore, mark out, or shred the stupid parts and still use the schedule, books (most), and timeline and map info with their children...Just because someone puts a note in my binder that Jews settled Kentucky in ancient times doesn't mean I'll believe it or teach it to my children.

 

Right on.

 

I admit I cringe at the way some parents choose to educate their children, but really?!?! Advocating for more government involvement in home education?

 

I'm wondering what sort of increased accountability albeto is suggesting, given her own preference for unschooling.

 

 

I don't understand the mentality that Sonlight is your end all, be all for history(.)

 

No need to understand it, as no one here conveyed it.

[Elfknitter.#]

No need to understand it, as no one here conveyed it.

 

Hmm, really...

Good books and a handy schedule are very valuable to me as a busy homeschooling mom.

 

This makes a lot of sense. I've been thinking about it all day. Even after finding this chart I might still use sonlight. I need something with books, a schedule, discussion questions, etc. already done and sonlight is literally the only program I've found that fits.

 

We all have priorities and I don't consider some of these issues to really be that big of a deal. Infact, I am completely mystified by all these comments. I don't see the big deal at all. I don't consider history to be very factual.

 

I'm in the camp that thinks this is weird, but not a reason to reject Sonlight. I remember moving in the middle of 3rd grade and being taught history that was opposite in the new place.

 

It makes some sense in light of this:

Eons ago, SL included the books/notes (the Lamplighter books?), with extensive notes from John. Then they removed them, on John's doing. He felt, at that time, he just couldn't continue using them because of all the inaccuracies.

Then, in 2012 catalog year, Sarita & the powers currently mutilating running SL, decided that really the Christian focus of the Lamplighter books was more important than accurate history, and so the reinserted them into Core D & E (or 3 & 4, or whatever the heck they now call them). I *believe* the notes of John's, then, are the ones from when they used these books eons ago, NOT new notes that John wrote.

This was the thing that led me to just completely and utterly walk away from SL; I'd been sort of weaning myself off them for a while, buying from them only what I absolutely had to, but when they pulled this......yea, final straw.

 

 

I still recommend the two, *free* schedules I listed above for families interested in classical history learning. Oh, and they are by WTM mamas, even.

 

As for why an unschooler might comment on this... Sigh. Really? Just because one unschools, they aren't interested in history? Oh wait, unschoolers are just those liberal hippie, anarchist types who think they educate their children, right? Sheesh.

[Colleen]

Hmm, really...

 

Yep, really. It doesn't follow that simply because one appreciates SL, it's their be all, end all.

 

As for why an unschooler might comment on this... Sigh. Really? Just because one unschools, they aren't interested in history? Oh wait, unschoolers are just those liberal hippie, anarchist types who think they educate their children, right? Sheesh.

 

 

No need to get ornery. I may be a fan of unschooling, for all you know. (Then again, perhaps I'm one of those liberal hippie, anarchist types. No doubt some of my über-conservative friends think so. ;-))

 

But seriously, you misunderstood/misconstrued my comment with regard to albeto. Knowing her as long as I have, I'm well aware that she's interested in history. I'm not calling that into question. Rather, I'm wondering how she sees increased acccountability coming into play for those who don't rely on specific curriculum and/or who home educate in a manner that many would consider outside the boundaries of standard accountability practices.

[Elfknitter.#]

But seriously, you misunderstood/misconstrued my comment with regard to albeto. Knowing her as long as I have, I'm well aware that she's interested in history. I'm not calling that into question. Rather, I'm wondering how she sees increased acccountability coming into play for those who don't rely on specific curriculum and/or who home educate in a manner that many would consider outside the boundaries of standard accountability practices.

 

Threads like this on this forum (as well as the commonly discussed evolution ones)  illustrate the need for information and applied critical thinking, not just dedicate reading, when it comes to setting educational standards for children.  To think a parent can replace the plethora of specialties that go into designing a quality curriculum is naive, if not disastrous, in my opinion.

 

I dunno. That seems pretty clear to me.

[Colleen]

I dunno. That seems pretty clear to me.

 

 

How so?

[Elfknitter.#]

What is not clear to you?

[[email protected]]

Reminder: Stick to the issues. Ask and answer real questions. Don't discuss the board. And don't post personally-directed snark.

 

Moderator

[Job384]

Last I checked, a qualified children's librarian who specialized in the field of children's literature (and I will say right now for at least 60% or more of you, this is not the case) could do this for free. I know with my background in history, MLS, and knowledge of my core collection! I would be able to at least produce something. May not be what you like, but the collection is determined by budgets, buying cycles, ILL, and other available (or not) reciprocal lending agreements. Working with a librarian might produce something similar.

 

I don't understand the mentality that Sonlight is your end all, be all for history when a schedule like http://www.classicalhouseoflearning.com/ or http://www.guesthollow.com/homeschool/curriculum.html exists.

 

Funny you should mention this; I actually tried working with a children's librarian, but it wasn't helpful.

 

I would never call Sonlight, or anything else, the end all, be all of history. Sonlight is one of many sources for finding excellent books. I like to draw from them all. In our house, the Sonlight books are most often the ones the kids love and go back to over and over. Sonlight's book list, if used with discrimination, is especially good for selecting books kids like, books that build their enthusiasm for reading. Goofy notes or charts in an IG don't change that.

[Mom0012]

 

 

This isn't a knock on you, I promise. I guess my question would be--why would anyone want to use any curriculum that gets the science or the history that wrong, even if that isn't a majority of the curriculum? KWIM? It makes me question the rest of the curriculum and wonder what they were thinking when they accepted that little bit.

 

Because i suspect most people use SL for the great books and the schedule and do not use the notes, at least not in the early years. I used core d with my kids and it was a great year, but if you've found something inaccurate in the IG and it bothers you, use something else. This seems to be "pick on SL" month. There are books in many HS curriculum promoting a young earth view that most scientists would consider ridiculous, but no one tears those companies apart.

 

 

[Mom0012]

Does anyone who has used core d know if this chart (or others like it) are a big part of the curriculum? I can't tell from the sample if it's just that one chart in one place or if it's something that is used again or has quizzes based on it.

 

No, it is not a big part of the curriculum. It's not something I ever encountered when we used core d. There are no quizzes unless you make them yourself. SL is about reading wonderful books with your children and discussing them. I have always considered the notes irrelevant. The book choices are fantastic and I don't need the commentary that is in the notes.

[WishboneDawn]

 

 

I dunno. That seems pretty clear to me.

 

 

It seemed to me that Colleen was asking for something for specific. Unschoolers would be accou table to whom? What would that accountability look like? Portfoli submissions to an assessor? Standardized tests? Submissions of lists of materials one might want to use for approval?

 

Accountability sounds wonderful but what are the specifics Albeto has I .mind that would make that accou tabipity acceptable to homeschoolers. When I was a radical unschooler none of the above would have worked for me.

 

 

[Mom0012]

Okay, I read the IG sample http://www.sonlight.com/attachments/DCG/DCG-3-week-sample.pdf

 

John Holzmann's notes on this are on pages 15-17 and the chart OP references is on page 25. Wow, just wow. I really shouldn't be surprised given the level of scholarship that I found out we are dealing with in the slavery and Sonlight thread, but I just can't believe people pass over crap like this and continue to purchase from them because they have some good books or a handy schedule.

 

It's really annoying to hear you say that. The notes are an unnecessary feature of he program. The books are wonderful and have led to so much quality time and discussion with my kids. We've had years of enjoyment and learning together and my kids know and love history. Thinking of the other thread you were so involved in, my children have never learned anything but empathy and compassion from he books SL has selected. We've read about terrible things happening to people and how horrible that is and how fortunate we are. SL has never left my children feeling like it is great to be a slave and if one of he books has some inaccurate history info in it, I say find me a book that doesn't. The notes that are being brought up are just an obscure fact John has thrown into the IG, but I suspect is read by very few at that level.

 

Many companies, including TOG, use a lot of the same books SL does. People use SL because they enjoy learning with it and the books are wonderful. What is so wrong with that?

[Mom0012]

 

 

Eh, do you think John will come back on here to discuss this? :)

 

I hope not for his sake. Even when he admitted fault and said he was going to revise his notes as soon as possible, he was ridiculed and scorned. There was no grace shown to him at all.

[Mom0012]

 

 

Please correct me if I misunderstand. Are you saying that teaching the facts of history is not important to you? I do not understand your comment of "I don't consider history to be very factual". How did you reach this conclusion with all of the information that is out there--actual documentation backing up these things you deny as being factual?

 

I totally understand teaching the Humanities side of history but I don't understand NOT teaching the historical side of history. It brings to mind "those who do not learn from it are doomed to repeat it". Learning what it was like to be a Jew during the Holocaust is important, but not as important as learning what caused the holocaust, why it was allowed to get as far as it did, and all the major and minor people involved in the Holocaust.

 

Yeah, I do think your and my priorities are on opposite ends.

 

I think it's obvious she is referring to three different history books and get three different stories. So much of history is skewed by the perspective of the person telling the story. There is much we do not know.

[Mom0012]

 

If the curriculum isn't based on facts, what is it based on? I would rather have my children read about the life of a European Jew during World War II than a Jew living in Kentucky in the year 64 or whatever. But then, I guess it depends what one means by "historical fiction."

 

 

The curriculum is based on great literature, not the IG guide notes.

[Mom0012]

Okay, I read the IG sample http://www.sonlight.com/attachments/DCG/DCG-3-week-sample.pdf

 

John Holzmann's notes on this are on pages 15-17 and the chart OP references is on page 25. Wow, just wow. I really shouldn't be surprised given the level of scholarship that I found out we are dealing with in the slavery and Sonlight thread, but I just can't believe people pass over crap like this and continue to purchase from them because they have some good books or a handy schedule.

 

 

 

Aren't you using TOG, which uses the infamous This Country of Ours? Or did they remove that book after it got ripped apart on this board as racist? How do you justify using such a book to teach your children?

[JuanitaL]

 

 

Yes, yes. And yet it is usually the same people who cry about how postmodernism is making the world go to sh*its and destroy Christianity. If I was scratching my head I'd be bald.

 

Yes! Excellent point!

[Mom0012]

 

 

This was exactly the take-home message I got from using Sonlight. By learning to identify suffering throughout human history, I (and my son) got the impression we were encouraged all the more to spread the "good news" that Jesus can end that suffering, at least in an eternal sense. If this is Sonlight's educational goal, then facts are really nothing more than a means to an end, and not important in and of themselves.

 

 

I'm not that religious, if at all, anymore. I never have gotten this feeling. I have never thought, " Now I need to spread the news about Jesus" because we just read a book about the Nazis. There are some missionary stories in SL, and even not being religious, I have found some of the biographies of the missionaries inspiring, though.

[stripe]

When I was reading through the sample I saw the IG instructed some edits to a story about George Washington, removing some religious content, with the note that the why would be explained later, but I didn't see the explanation. Maybe someone who had the new guide can fill me in? But since there does seem to be a push to Providentialism, my running theory is that this is a Providentialist twist of Landmarkist-style history.

 

I saw that too and found it very surprising. What is that about?

[SarahW]

Aslana, on 08 May 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

 

 

 

This isn't a knock on you, I promise. I guess my question would be--why would anyone want to use any curriculum that gets the science or the history that wrong, even if that isn't a majority of the curriculum? KWIM? It makes me question the rest of the curriculum and wonder what they were thinking when they accepted that little bit.

 

Because i suspect most people use SL for the great books and the schedule and do not use the notes, at least not in the early years. I used core d with my kids and it was a great year, but if you've found something inaccurate in the IG and it bothers you, use something else. This seems to be "pick on SL" month. There are books in many HS curriculum promoting a young earth view that most scientists would consider ridiculous, but no one tears those companies apart.

 

 

I went digging around in Core D, and I have major questions about the accuracy of the books used as well. The "Phoebe the Spy" book is listed on the SL site as a "dramatic true story" but the historicity of this story has been thoroughly debunked. "Walk the World's Rim" seems to say that the NA in Texas lived in a state of chronic starvation, which is simply bizarre and baseless.

 

The book "Incans (sic!), Aztecs, Mayans" is written by John Holzmann and includes this paragraph in the intro:

I've discovered, as I prepared this book, that I came to understand Scripture, especially the Old Testament, in a wholly new way. The Incans, Aztecs, and Mayans lived, thought, and acted much more like the ancient Egyptians, Arameans, Moabites, and even Israelites than any modern people I know. Their way of life, their values, their religious system, their forms of government: I think you'll be amazed at the new insights you gain about the Bible as a result of studying the Incans, Aztecs, and Mayans!

 

p. vi

 

So yes, when I see a curriculum get something really wrong, it is entirely reasonable to assume that the rest of the curriculum is infected with inaccuracy as well.

 

And in this case, yes, it is terribly evident that whoever put together this history curriculum has little understanding of history, no respect for historical accuracy, and is completely unqualified to put together a history curriculum.

 

Nice books are nice, sure. Read nice books to your kids, please, but as literature! Please, please, please don't teach your kids historical inaccuracies just for the sake of reading nice books. There are better books out there that are actually historically accurate, and there are better books out there that are actually good literature. Why try to squish the two together and fail to achieve both?

[Mom0012]

 

 

But don't you think it would be more honest to be upfront about the source of those listed "facts"? It could have been presented as; "There are many theories about who some of the first settlers in North America were, etc." Not just listed some random off the wall dates as if they are proven facts. They have not been proven. It's fine to include them so long as it is done in an honest way.

 

This is reason enough for me to dismiss a program. It might not be reason enough for you. And that is fine. I use and have used books that I know some people have a problem with.

 

 

I don't have the notes, but I suspect they might stem more from some misguided attempt rather than dishonesty.

 

Frankly, I feel fortunate that all this "analysis" of SL wasn't going on when I started using it 8 years ago, or I might have been deterred because I wouldn't have understood that I could enjoy the great books and schedule and that the notes would be irrelevant to me. Many of these same books are used in the majority of HS programs that incorporate literature. The notes don't make them less worthwhile to me. Again, I don't use them.

[JuanitaL]

Well, speaking as a Jew living in Tennessee, I can certainly tell you why they all got up and left. You just can't get a decent bagel around here to save your life.

 

I haven't been there yet - but the next time I'm in L'ville I will be checking out the Sweet Surrender Dessert Café http://www.sweetsurrenderdessertcafe.com/alternative_diets.htm . Everything is dairy kosher. This was the only place I could find when googling Jewish bakeries Kentucky. We have driven past some beautiful synagogues in Knoxville, perhaps TN has more for the Native Jewish American?

[Mom0012]

 

 

Misguided attempt verses dishonesty doesn't necessarily make me feel any better. LOL

 

Anyhow, I don't mind analysis. I know I'm still free to read whatever book I want even if other people don't like the book. KWIM?

 

Yes, I do know what you mean. I'm just glad as a new homeschooling mom, I wasn't infiltrated with the evils of a program that has been a wonderful fit for my family.

 

I don't care if others use SL. I'm not trying to sell it. I just feel a need to point out that these issues that are being brought up truly will not affect the program for most. I have no regrets.

[Wheres Toto]

That's an odd thing to say. Are most quality educational materials written by childless people?

 

 

I don't think she was saying a parent couldn't write a quality program, just that no parent could write ALL the quality programs. None of us (I don't think :001_smile: ) are experts on all the subjects we want to teach. We are relying on the curriculum writers to know what they are talking about.

 

I've looked at Sonlight a few times, even joined the Secular Sonlight yahoo group. One thing I don't understand. If the notes are unnecessary, and nobody worries about their content since they don't use them, isn't it just a book list? And can't you get the list just by looking on their website or ordering a catalog? It seems like an expensive program if you aren't using the actual program.

 

My only thought on the rest of this is that Sonlight is supposed to be a history-based curriculum. I would expect a curriculum that presents themselves as history based, would get the history factually correct, and then offer different interpretations where appropriate. I might not expect their science to be great since they are a history program, but I would expect the history to be very strong. KWIM?

[WishboneDawn]

 

 

It's really annoying to hear you say that. The notes are an unnecessary feature of he program. The books are wonderful and have led to so much quality time and discussion with my kids. We've had years of enjoyment and learning together and my kids know and love history. Thinking of the other thread you were so involved in, my children have never learned anything but empathy and compassion from he books SL has selected. We've read about terrible things happening to people and how horrible that is and how fortunate we are. SL has never left my children feeling like it is great to be a slave and if one of he books has some inaccurate history info in it, I say find me a book that doesn't. The notes that are being brought up are just an obscure fact John has thrown into the IG, but I suspect is read by very few at that level.

 

Many companies, including TOG, use a lot of the same books SL does. People use SL because they enjoy learning with it and the books are wonderful. What is so wrong with that?

 

Nothing and I think that's a good response. We have to approach the resources we use critically and I think it's perfeftly fair to use the pieces that work for you.

 

I would question using the notes though, even with editing. Enough questions have been raised that a person would have to wonder about the resource as a whole at this point.

[TheReader]

The curriculum is based on great literature, not the IG guide notes.

 

I don't have the notes, but I suspect they might stem more from some misguided attempt rather than dishonesty.

 

Frankly, I feel fortunate that all this "analysis" of SL wasn't going on when I started using it 8 years ago, or I might have been deterred because I wouldn't have understood that I could enjoy the great books and schedule and that the notes would be irrelevant to me. Many of these same books are used in the majority of HS programs that incorporate literature. The notes don't make them less worthwhile to me. Again, I don't use them.

 

Yes, I do know what you mean. I'm just glad as a new homeschooling mom, I wasn't infiltrated with the evils of a program that has been a wonderful fit for my family.

 

I don't care if others use SL. I'm not trying to sell it. I just feel a need to point out that these issues that are being brought up truly will not affect the program for most. I have no regrets.

 

I think you are missing the point of what Sonlight actually is. If you are reading the books, but not using the IG &/or notes &/or other integral parts of what takes that box of books from just a box of books to a full, complete curriculum, then you are following a book list, not using Sonlight.

 

I still own, and will still have my kids read, the books we acquired back when I was buying from/using Sonlight. But we stopped using the IG notes roughly around the time I did Core 2 with my oldest, and then just used the schedule portion, and then I just loosely followed the order of the books, but not the full schedule, and then we ditched the schedule completely.

 

Even though I am reading books to my son(s) that originally came from Sonlight, and even in a similar grouping/order as to what they were originally intended, I do not claim to be "using Sonlight" because, without the IG or without using the IG, it is just a book list.

 

Sonlight themselves say it is the IG (and the notes therein) that set them apart.

 

I don't think she was saying a parent couldn't write a quality program, just that no parent could write ALL the quality programs. None of us (I don't think :001_smile: ) are experts on all the subjects we want to teach. We are relying on the curriculum writers to know what they are talking about.

 

I've looked at Sonlight a few times, even joined the Secular Sonlight yahoo group. One thing I don't understand. If the notes are unnecessary, and nobody worries about their content since they don't use them, isn't it just a book list? And can't you get the list just by looking on their website or ordering a catalog? It seems like an expensive program if you aren't using the actual program.

 

My only thought on the rest of this is that Sonlight is supposed to be a history-based curriculum. I would expect a curriculum that presents themselves as history based, would get the history factually correct, and then offer different interpretations where appropriate. I might not expect their science to be great since they are a history program, but I would expect the history to be very strong. KWIM?

 

very good points. I agree; if one is ignoring the IG, one is just reading good books, not using a curriculum. And double yes, a "history based curriculum" should have, well, accurate history.

 

Ok, but aren't the notes and TMs what people are essentially paying for? If they are better ignored then why not save some money and just buy the books in their list and read them?

 

yes, yes, yes. ditto, ditto, ditto. Completely agree.