Religious curricula being used/offered in a public school?

[bluemongoose]

I dont understand the argument about it is not just that it is Christian curriculum but a specific type of Christian pushing curriculum. Is it because the parent might check out this curriculum and be brainwashed by it???

 

I am not trying to be snarky, but it kinda reminds me of the times when the extremely conservative side wants a book banned (like Harry Potter) and everybody else says that they should be mature enough to choose for themselves what they want to read. (and rightly so)

 

If the library is for parents/adults to check out curriculum and is not provided by public money, then I wouldnt care if it was Christian, as certain type of Christian, Buddhist, or any kind of other religious type of curriculum. I would just choose what worked for me and mine, and ignore the others.

 

And what does it matter if a parent checks out a book and thinks it is one type of Christian material, and while using it at home finds that it is one of those types of Christian materials and decides that it doesnt follow their views? What is the problem with making their own decision to stop using it and return it at any time?

 

I guess I just dont see the value in policing the varying types of Christian or other religious materials in a library and deciding which are those types and therefor deemed unfit for another adult to use.

 

(this is assuming that it is legal at all to have said library with Christain curriculum or other religious curriculum)

[Catwoman]

It seems clear to me that a public school lending religious materials for parents to use as a part of a student's curriculum would be unconstitutional.

On the other hand, it would be perfectly fine for *parents* to create a *private* lending library for use by the school's parents.

I think I already said that I didn't think a public school would be (or should be) allowed to distribute or loan religious materials to their students' families.

 

My comment was in reference to the poster who said she borrowed similar materials and then threw them in the trash because she felt they didn't belong where they were, and my feeling was that if she was concerned, she should have filed some sort of complaint, not taken it upon herself to decide exactly what others should or shouldn't be allowed to have. If it's illegal to have the materials on the shelf, she should have approached it from that angle, not made her own unilateral decision about it. I didn't disagree with her view on the religious materials, but I did disagree with her method of dealing with them.

 

As for private lending libraries, I wouldn't care at all what individual parents decided to do.

[albeto.]

I dont understand the argument about it is not just that it is Christian curriculum but a specific type of Christian pushing curriculum. Is it because the parent might check out this curriculum and be brainwashed by it???

 

I am not trying to be snarky, but it kinda reminds me of the times when the extremely conservative side wants a book banned (like Harry Potter) and everybody else says that they should be mature enough to choose for themselves what they want to read. (and rightly so)

 

If the library is for parents/adults to check out curriculum and is not provided by public money, then I wouldnt care if it was Christian, as certain type of Christian, Buddhist, or any kind of other religious type of curriculum. I would just choose what worked for me and mine, and ignore the others.

 

And what does it matter if a parent checks out a book and thinks it is one type of Christian material, and while using it at home finds that it is one of those types of Christian materials and decides that it doesnt follow their views. What is the problem with making their own decision to stop using it and return it at any time.

 

I guess I just dont see the value in policing the varying types of Christian or other religious materials in a library and deciding which are those types and therefor deemed unfit for another adult to use.

 

The separation between church and state means that the state cannot endorse, or give appearance of endorsing, one religion over another. Using curricula like BJU or Abeka would give the appearance of endorsing fundamentalist, protestant xianity over Cathocisim, Islam, Paganism, etc. That's not the state's call to make, and is not allowed to give the appearance of making that call. The charter school providing fundamentalist xian texts for use as curricula is unconstitutional (dependent upon the specific legality of the charter school in the state, some restrictions may apply, etc etc etc).

[Catwoman]

I'm not trying to be snarky here, but why do people type "xian" instead of Christian? :confused:

 

"Christian" isn't really that long a word, and Xian is a province in China.

 

Again, not trying to be snarky. I'm really wondering.

[bolt.]

"X" is a stand in for the Greek letter it looks like (the first letter of Christos in Greek) and has been a common theological abbreviation for the word Christ for thousands of years.

 

Some people are posting from phones and would like to save all they typing they can. Most people can tell homonyms apart by context, so I don't really think the existence of the province in China is a big deal.

[justasque]

I dont understand the argument about it is not just that it is Christian curriculum but a specific type of Christian pushing curriculum. Is it because the parent might check out this curriculum and be brainwashed by it???

 

I am not trying to be snarky, but it kinda reminds me of the times when the extremely conservative side wants a book banned (like Harry Potter) and everybody reacts that they should be mature enough to choose for themselves what they want to read.

 

If the library is for parents/adults to check out curriculum and is not provided by public money, then I wouldnt care if it was Christian, as certain type of Christian, Buddhist, or any kind of other religious type of curriculum. I would just choose what worked for me and mine, and ignore the others.

 

And what does it matter if a parent checks out a book and thinks it is one type of Christian material, and while using it at home finds that it is one of those types of Christian materials and decides that it doesnt follow their views. What is the problem with making their own decision to stop using it and return it at any time.

 

I guess I just dont see the value in policing the varying types of Christian or other religious materials in a library and deciding which are those types and therefor deemed unfit for another adult to use.

 

The problem is that it is a first amendment issue.  Schools are allowed to teach *about* religion, but they are not allowed to provide religious instruction.  This is because we want to avoid government endorsement of a particular set of religious beliefs.  We want to avoid creating a community where one religion is the "right" one, as endorsed and promoted by the government.  Religious freedom is a core American value.

 

The problem is not that the public school would deem particular materials "unfit for use", rather it is that a public school should not be in the position of endorsing religious materials as "fit to use".  A parent can use whatever they like to teach their children.  A public school, however, cannot endorse or provide religious curricula.  

 

Does this change if the school did not use taxpayer money to purchase the curricula?  I don't think so, as the school is still endorsing its use by providing it to parents as part of the curricula lending library.  In addition, school resources are being used to house and distribute the curricula.  Again, this problem can be avoided by creating a *private* lending library.

[albeto.]

I would be wary of challenging this in Co? (my own opinion) Aren't they the state that said Sonlight wasn't Christian enough for their conference? It shows to me that the state homeschool groups are willing to take the fight. Does she want to go up against that? I think this is one of those gray areas that will have to ironed out about public money and homeschooling. 

 

The question I'd research is whether you can take public charter money to buy religious material (religion instruction or religious publisher) outside of the scope of lending library. 

 

The other question I would ask myself is I WANT to make this a big deal. If this is the type of materials the average homeschooler in her area uses, and it would be easy to switch groups, then I might find another group. 

 

It could be a gray area, an untried legal area, and honestly I see someone like HSLDA jumping all over this as "persecution". 

 

I agree that this would make me question the beliefs being touted by the group. If I felt like the conservative only, no tolerance for others agenda was being used then I'd switch groups. If the group is open to all, I might stay. If I felt like this group would require a SOF if they weren't a charter ( we would if we could - wink, wink, nudge, nudge), that's how I'd look at it. 

 

I think it is a big deal, and I think the OP putting herself in the line of potential fire (Jessica Ahlquist anyone?) is a daring move. It's not one many people have the liberty, or desire to take on.  I would encourage the OP to contact an organization like Freedom From Religion Foundation. They can take this up on behalf of the citizens of the state of Colorado, because this should not be one woman's private battle. 

[justasque]

I think I already said that I didn't think a public school would be (or should be) allowed to distribute or loan religious materials to their students' families.

 

My comment was in reference to the poster who said she borrowed similar materials and then threw them in the trash because she felt they didn't belong where they were, and my feeling was that if she was concerned, she should have filed some sort of complaint, not taken it upon herself to decide exactly what others should or shouldn't be allowed to have. If it's illegal to have the materials on the shelf, she should have approached it from that angle, not made her own unilateral decision about it. I didn't disagree with her view on the religious materials, but I did disagree with her method of dealing with them.

 

As for private lending libraries, I wouldn't care at all what individual parents decided to do.

I agree.

[albeto.]

I'm not trying to be snarky here, but why do people type "xian" instead of Christian? :confused:

 

"Christian" isn't really that long a word, and Xian is a province in China.

 

Again, not trying to be snarky. I'm really wondering.

 

Sorry, typing fast. X is a shortcut picked up from when I wrote notes in college years ago. Kinda like "w/" for the word "with" and "b/c" for "because." "X" is a short cut for "Christ."

[albeto.]

 I don't really think the existence of the province in China is a big deal.

 

No, but interesting trivia.

 

:)

[albeto.]

The Bible has sex and violence. "Biblical" homeschooling material generally doesn't.

 

Biblical homeschooling endorses the bible, which contains (and endorses) sex and violence. A public school endorsing biblical material is endorsing the bible. That's not allowed in our secular nation. 

[albeto.]

Wouldn't bother me -just donate some stuff of another religion and see if it's accepted.....

 

Our charter school is next to a church and some parents are in an uproar over just that fact!

 

Heh, you reminded me of this poster:

 

 

 

 

 

:laugh:

[Catwoman]

"X" is a stand in for the Greek letter it looks like (the first letter of Christos in Greek) and has been a common theological abbreviation for the word Christ for thousands of years.

 

Some people are posting from phones and would like to save all they typing they can. Most people can tell homonyms apart by context, so I don't really think the existence of the province in China is a big deal.

It looks terribly awkward to me. I had never seen it abbreviated like that until fairly recently on this forum. And because it's also a "real" word, it doesn't even look like it should be pronounced as "Christian."

 

I'm not sure I buy into the "save all the typing they can" excuse, because nobody ever seems to abbreviate any of the other words in their posts.

 

I still feel like I'm missing something. Is it supposed to be disrespectful in some way? I don't get it.

 

EDITED TO ADD: I was posting this while albeto was posting her reply.

[Catwoman]

Sorry, typing fast. X is a shortcut picked up from when I wrote notes in college years ago. Kinda like "w/" for the word "with" and "b/c" for "because." "X" is a short cut for "Christ."

Thanks for the explanation, albeto -- I was typing my last post while you were posting yours. :)

[bolt.]

I never assume someone is trying to be disrespectful, unless I really have no other options. We abbreviate tons of things DH, SIL, and all the other family members, often initials for proper names, etc. and such -- and Xmas is really common, so it's not really an odd choice.

[Catwoman]

No, but interesting trivia.

 

:)

I'm filled with useless information.

 

It's the important stuff I keep forgetting. ;)

[Catwoman]

I never assume someone is trying to be disrespectful, unless I really have no other options. We abbreviate tons of things DH, SIL, and all the other family members, often initials for proper names, etc. and such -- and Xmas is really common, so it's not really an odd choice.

I wasn't assuming anything. I was just wondering about it.

[Crimson Wife]

But again, it's not that they're Christian.  I explained this before.  Yes, a single glance will tell you that.  It's that they're peddling a certain type of Christianity and a certain agenda alongside it.  And a few minutes, if you're new and don't even understand the ins and outs of that agenda, and have been told - potentially by your oversight teacher at your public charter school or by the public charter school librarian - that this is a great curriculum or "easy to secularize" or that the religion is secondary to the great content or whatever, then I think it would, indeed, be very easy to be misled, particularly for Christians who are religious but ignorant of the potentially big gaps they might have in doctrine with some of these curricula.  And if that happens to someone by a friend, then that's their own fault for not looking deeper.  If it happens to someone when it's a public school who suggested or provided the resource for them to use as part of their child's public school education, then that's different.  And I'm pretty sure it violates the separation of church and state.

Neither of the lending libraries at the charters my kids have been enrolled with had librarians or anyone affiliated with the school suggesting materials. The library was just a room with bookshelves full of materials that other families have turned in after they left the school. Parents are responsible for choosing which, if any, books to borrow.

[albeto.]

I never assume someone is trying to be disrespectful, unless I really have no other options. We abbreviate tons of things DH, SIL, and all the other family members, often initials for proper names, etc. and such -- and Xmas is really common, so it's not really an odd choice.

 

I think it comes as no surprise to cat that I have no respect for the Christian faith, so her impulse was reasonable. However, it really was just an oversight. I write that way in general, but spell the word out (and even capitalize it :)) when conversing with other Christians, something I don't bother with otherwise. To me it's like capitalizing the first word of a sentence, using the capital "I" or spelling out instead of increasingly popular textspeak. It's just a more formal? traditional? familiar way of writing. You're right about "dh" and "sil" and these abbreviations. Anyway, no offense intended.  

[Crimson Wife]

I think it is a big deal, and I think the OP putting herself in the line of potential fire (Jessica Ahlquist anyone?) is a daring move. It's not one many people have the liberty, or desire to take on.  I would encourage the OP to contact an organization like Freedom From Religion Foundation. They can take this up on behalf of the citizens of the state of Colorado, because this should not be one woman's private battle.

Why can't people just MYOB???? If I saw a book by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens at my charter's lending library I wouldn't go about filing a religious discrimination lawsuit. I'd simply roll my eyes and leave it on the shelf. Don't like it? Don't use it!

[albeto.]

Why can't people just MYOB???? If I saw a book by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens at my charter's lending library I wouldn't go about filing a religious discrimination lawsuit. I'd simply roll my eyes and leave it on the shelf. Don't like it? Don't use it!

 

Same reason I wouldn't MYOB if there were blatantly racist curricula offered to parents and my taxes supported it. Same reason I wouldn't MYOB if there were voodoo oriented curricula offered to parents and my taxes supported it. If the charter school indeed has the same responsibilities as the state public schools, inappropriate material like faith based teaching should not be supplied. Biblical education is not an acceptable alternative in public education. Dawkins is a well respected university professor of biology. His material is absolutely appropriate for a public education. Hitchens was a journalist and had no experience in education. If he wrote a curriculum, it would be right up there with Sonlight in terms of professional credibility (although I personally suspect his would have been far better, for a number of reasons).

 

 

Edit: I should clarify that these opinions are assuming the charter school is indeed breaching the law. 

[8circles]

I am a little confused. Is this an charter school, like a virtual school using K12, and offering a lending library of homeschooling materials? Or is this a one day a week, "let's provide the homeschoolers with some socialization and a little oversight" sort of school?

 

If it is the latter, then the parents are indeed homeschooling and I would think that a lending library with donated homeschool materials, religious or secular, would be fine. Whether someone agrees with them or not, the parents would be in charge of selecting appropriate materials. A one-day a week school really doesn't have much influence.

 

If it is the former, I can't think why they would have a lending library of curricula at all. They are already offering one for their students.

Not all virtual public schools have a standard curriculum that students must use. We are part of 2 virtual schools this year. One school uses only Calvert or Little Lincoln. The other has an allotment & I get to choose (request) the curricula - we use Oak Meadow. I posted some of our issues with this school up thread. Technically, all my kids in these schools are public school students.

[Flowing Brook]

When this country was first founded the Bible was its main textbook.  How far we've come.

If you don't like the books being there ignore them.

[justasque]

Why can't people just MYOB???? If I saw a book by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens at my charter's lending library I wouldn't go about filing a religious discrimination lawsuit. I'd simply roll my eyes and leave it on the shelf. Don't like it? Don't use it!

 

 

 This library is stocked with a lot of religious curricula - not just books on religion. (Think Abeka, Apologia, and creationist based science.) She asked the teacher if the books were bought with public funds or donated and the teacher responded that the materials were mostly donated and that they go through a rigorous review to make sure that all materials align with their core values and principals. 

 

Our OP is uncomfortable with a public school providing religious curricula, even if it is donated, and wonders about the legality of this. She's concerned that a public school would proclaim to have religious values and principals and now is even more reluctant to be open with her non-belief. OP lives in a very conservative, Christian community and is afraid to ask too many questions for fear of being ostracized. 

 

 

From the OP. ...

 

6.  I feel like this school, which is well known and considered a very good school in this area, is saying to parents:  This is what we feel is good curriculum to teach your children.  This curriculum espouses the values we advocate at our school.  For homeschooling parents that do not feel confident choosing curriculum this can be a big deal especially coming from such a well respected school - We should definitely use these materials, they are endorsed by XYZ School!

 

7.  These materials are not just religious.  Some are disrespectful to other religions including Christians that are not the same "type" of Christianity.  There is one BJU history text printed prior to the school lifting its ban on interracial dating.  I'm not sure what exactly the text entails but I am surprised a public school is housing the text and advocating its use by homeschoolers."

 

My impression from the OP was that it was not just the odd book or two.  It rose to the level of creating an environment where one particular religion (Evangelical Christianity) appears to be endorsed by the public school, to the point that the OP fears there will be real consequences to her family should she reveal that she is not of that "favored" faith.  This should not be the case in a public school.  It is against the First Amendment.

 

In addition, some of the books have content that contradicts the state standards that the students are supposed to be learning.  

 

[MysteryJen]

Just wondering here...what are the levels of First Amendment protections for school libraries (or lending libraries stocked with donated materials hosted by the school) as compared to "regular" publicly funded libraries?

 

Is the school requiring use of the curricula from their library?

[albeto.]

When this country was first founded the Bible was its main textbook.  How far we've come.

If you don't like the books being there ignore them.

 

When this country was first founded, people could enslave other people, women were denied property and voting rights, and child brides were not uncommon.

 

It's easier to ignore books when the state isn't supplying them to the public. 

[*Lulu*]

I cannot believe some of the comments on this thread.

 

Are y'all flippin' kidding me?

 

I don't see anyone saying, "oh, oh, oh, keep the Christian stuff away from me it is so icky!"

 

I see posters questioning if the presence of the materials and the way they are being used is a violation of the law.

 

Either it is legal and the person in the situation has to decide if they want to go a different direction than the charter they are in or if they want to work to change the law, thereby changing the situation, OR it is illegal and the school needs to cut it out.

 

I don't give a crap if the materials were donated, if the way they are being used violates the law it should stop.

 

If the law is unsatisfactory to the Christians they are also well within their rights to pursue making a change. In the interim, though, the law should be followed.

 

Charter schools are a new, often grey, area of education. The issues surrounding them need to be explored and worked out. Questioning the way things are being handled is a good thing, IMO, because it benefits us all to have clarity in public policies.

[Farrar]

I actually wouldn't have a problem with Christian curriculum guidebooks or texts or whatever being in a regular public library.  I think regular libraries should generally provide what people want to read and use (among other things and within limits).  And I think in a regular public library, it is a take what you like and ignore what you don't situation.

 

I also think it's fine (and desirable) for school libraries to have books about various religions.

 

But this is a public school providing these curricular materials to teachers (who happen to be parents in this case) to teach public school students.  I do have a problem with that.  That's where the line is crossed.  And everything I have ever read about where the courts draw the line says that's where it is legally as well.

[Catwoman]

Not all virtual public schools have a standard curriculum that students must use. We are part of 2 virtual schools this year. One school uses only Calvert or Little Lincoln. The other has an allotment & I get to choose (request) the curricula - we use Oak Meadow. I posted some of our issues with this school up thread. Technically, all my kids in these schools are public school students.

I didn't know that. Thanks. :)

 

The only virtual public schools I have heard about seem to all use K12, so I didn't realize that in some states, parents had other options.

[Catwoman]

I think it comes as no surprise to cat that I have no respect for the Christian faith, so her impulse was reasonable. However, it really was just an oversight. I write that way in general, but spell the word out (and even capitalize it :)) when conversing with other Christians, something I don't bother with otherwise. To me it's like capitalizing the first word of a sentence, using the capital "I" or spelling out instead of increasingly popular textspeak. It's just a more formal? traditional? familiar way of writing. You're right about "dh" and "sil" and these abbreviations. Anyway, no offense intended.

None taken. :)

[bettyandbob]

Federal funding can be given to private and religious schools.

 

There was a Supreme Court case on this in the 60s or 70s and there's been on it since. I believe the SC said if the funding was used for secular purpose, did not advance or inhibit a religion, and did not excessively entangle the government in religion then it was ok. Years ago I saw this reduced to "if it begins with a T then federal money can be used : transportation, textbooks and tuna fish (school lunch)".

 

The religious school which accept federal funding cannot exclude persons who are not of that religion and persons who are not of that religion cannot be penalized (lower GPA). I guess if a school requires a statement of faith then they cannot get federal funds. Most Catholic schools accept persons who are not Catholic.

 

The OPs situation I don't think rises to this level of scrutiny. It's a lending library. It's not textbooks used in the classroom. I think I have a problem with the teacher suggesting the materials made it through some careful review which gives it an endorsement. If it was just a bunch of materials offered as published to be friendly for homeschool use, then that might be more acceptable. Basically, a nonendorsement, just there.

 

 

[Farrar]

I dont understand the argument about it is not just that it is Christian curriculum but a specific type of Christian pushing curriculum. Is it because the parent might check out this curriculum and be brainwashed by it???

 

I think there are potentially additional issues since the curricula mentioned have issues beyond "just" being Christian.  Some of them are considered bigoted and factually incorrect.  But you're right - it doesn't really matter what specific curricula they are.  The fact that they're religious is all that matters.

[MysteryJen]

I actually wouldn't have a problem with Christian curriculum guidebooks or texts or whatever being in a regular public library.  I think regular libraries should generally provide what people want to read and use (among other things and within limits).  And I think in a regular public library, it is a take what you like and ignore what you don't situation.

 

I also think it's fine (and desirable) for school libraries to have books about various religions.

 

But this is a public school providing these curricular materials to teachers (who happen to be parents in this case) to teach public school students.  I do have a problem with that.  That's where the line is crossed.  And everything I have ever read about where the courts draw the line says that's where it is legally as well.

 

I think that what I was wondering. Are they public school students? Or are they homeschooled students? Does it matter? Should the selection be more varied or should it exist at all? 

 

I agree that there are a lot of grey areas in charter school rules and regulations, especially as they intersect with homeschoolers.  These discussions are hard because all of the states have such different ways of dealing with the situation.

[Crimson Wife]

Dawkins is a well respected university professor of biology. His material is absolutely appropriate for a public education.

Dawkins' books (some of which I have read because I am interested in the actual science-related portions) have a distinct anti-Christian bias to them that many Christians find offensive. I wouldn't give them to an impressionable child for that reason. But I wouldn't go about making a big stink about their mere presence on the shelf at my charter's lending library. I'd just find materials that I consider more appropriate for my needs.

[*Lulu*]

I think that what I was wondering. Are they public school students? Or are they homeschooled students? Does it matter? Should the selection be more varied or should it exist at all?

 

I agree that there are a lot of grey areas in charter school rules and regulations, especially as they intersect with homeschoolers. These discussions are hard because all of the states have such different ways of dealing with the situation.

I think that is where a lot of the confusion within this thread is coming from.

[Crimson Wife]

Is the school requiring use of the curricula from their library?

That has not been my experience at all. The lending library is a resource for families with enrolled students, but its use is strictly voluntary. Nobody is pushing a particular curriculum, the books are simply on the shelves for families to borrow or leave.

[Farrar]

I think that what I was wondering. Are they public school students? Or are they homeschooled students? Does it matter? Should the selection be more varied or should it exist at all? 

 

I agree that there are a lot of grey areas in charter school rules and regulations, especially as they intersect with homeschoolers.  These discussions are hard because all of the states have such different ways of dealing with the situation.

 

I agree that's where the confusion is coming in.  But as I understand KK's explanation, they *are* public school students - they are "overseen" by the public charter school, their names are down on the public school roles and state/local funding is allotted for them, even though they're taught at home by their parents - the parents get to use some of those funds (and others of the funds go toward the oversight and things like maintaining the curriculum library and running enrichment or tutoring programs).  If I've misunderstood, then I might have a different take on what's kosher.

[albeto.]

Dawkins' books (some of which I have read because I am interested in the actual science-related portions) have a distinct anti-Christian bias to them that many Christians find offensive. I wouldn't give them to an impressionable child for that reason. But I wouldn't go about making a big stink about their mere presence on the shelf at my charter's lending library. I'd just find materials that I consider more appropriate for my needs.

 

The books you're referring to are written for public reading, not to be used as a science curriculum.

[albeto.]

That has not been my experience at all. The lending library is a resource for families with enrolled students, but its use is strictly voluntary. Nobody is pushing a particular curriculum, the books are simply on the shelves for families to borrow or leave.

 

If that was the case, I would agree with you. Like farrarwilliams, however, my impression is that this is not the case. 

[kitten18]

My impression from the OP was that it was not just the odd book or two.  It rose to the level of creating an environment where one particular religion (Evangelical Christianity) appears to be endorsed by the public school, to the point that the OP fears there will be real consequences to her family should she reveal that she is not of that "favored" faith.  This should not be the case in a public school.  It is against the First Amendment.

 

In addition, some of the books have content that contradicts the state standards that the students are supposed to be learning.  

 

I agree.  As I read more of the thread I get the impression that the school is endorsing this curricula and if it's a public school, that is not okay.

 

 

I think that what I was wondering. Are they public school students? Or are they homeschooled students? Does it matter? Should the selection be more varied or should it exist at all? 

 

I agree that there are a lot of grey areas in charter school rules and regulations, especially as they intersect with homeschoolers.  These discussions are hard because all of the states have such different ways of dealing with the situation.

I'm still not completely clear if this is truly a public charter school or some other kind of homeschool support school.

[MysteryJen]

As far as I know, in CO, the only schools that are public charters, whose students are listed as public school students, and their parents are the teachers are the online charters which provide curriculum to their students. I don't know of any schools where parents can get funds for curricula or activities. I would like to know about those if they exist, though!

 

In the explanation of the OP, using the words "enrichment program" made me think that homeschoolers were involved as well. Especially since a library is being maintained in a building where students gather.

 

 

[Guest inoubliable]

I agree that's where the confusion is coming in.  But as I understand KK's explanation, they *are* public school students - they are "overseen" by the public charter school, their names are down on the public school roles and state/local funding is allotted for them, even though they're taught at home by their parents - the parents get to use some of those funds (and others of the funds go toward the oversight and things like maintaining the curriculum library and running enrichment or tutoring programs).  If I've misunderstood, then I might have a different take on what's kosher.

 

I think this is exactly the case. 

The OP mentions that these materials aren't books in the school's library. They're actually stored and provided independently as curriculum choices available to the parents. Parents pay a refundable fee to check these curriculum choices out for the year. Not sure if that clears up some of the confusion in the thread or muddles it further...

[LMA]

So is this a charter school or an enrichment program for homeschoolers? Is it public? I'm confused.

 

While everyone is comment on Christianity and schools, didn't anyone read my links about charter schools linked to other religions?

 

 

[MysteryJen]

It clears it up a bit for me.  I think that this must be part of an enrichment program provided for homeschoolers. Parents pay a fee for a few classes (one full school day a week). Usually these offerings are mostly all electives, think theater, yearbook, art, etc. They are not part of the charter school or regular district classes (the student population doesn't mix).  The lending library is offered as a "service" for homeschooling parents. A combination of cluelessness and assumption that all homeschoolers must be radical unschoolers.

 

I would be surprised for any of the regular charter school parents to ever check any other curriculum out or to know about its existence at all.

[Flowing Brook]

I think this is exactly the case. 

The OP mentions that these materials aren't books in the school's library. They're actually stored and provided independently as curriculum choices available to the parents. Parents pay a refundable fee to check these curriculum choices out for the year. Not sure if that clears up some of the confusion in the thread or muddles it further...

 

Why is it an issue then.  It is there if parents want it. If not the parents can get something else.

[Guest inoubliable]

Why is it an issue then.  It is there if parents want it. If not the parents can get something else.

 

Because if this is a publicly funded school, religious curricula should not be an offering. That's pretty clear, yes? 

[MysteryJen]

These programs here in CO are just another weird example of public school/home school interactions requiring legal definitions and clarity.

[Catwoman]

KK, has your friend decided whether or not she's going to pursue this? If she does, I hope she's able to do it privately, so she doesn't have any problems with the teachers or other parents.

[Flowing Brook]

Because if this is a publicly funded school, religious curricula should not be an offering. That's pretty clear, yes? 

 

I just think it is ridiculous the way people are trying to take Christianity out of school. Especially since this country was founded on christian principles

[MysteryJen]

KK,

I agree that a publicly funded school should not be offering religious curricula. However, the lending library is not part of the regular school library. Homeschoolers, even if in enrichment programs, are not public schooled students. So if the school wants to hold curricula for their enrichment program as a service (most are donated, I am sure), I am not sure that they have any problems here. If they then wish to make that available to their own regular students with a fee, I am not sure that there is a problem there either.

 

Annoying maybe, but I am not sure they are breaking any laws.