I got in trouble in a Secular FB group for suggesting....

[BusyMom5]

SAXON MATH.  The original poster was looking for something with more review, so I suggested Saxon- it sounded like the best program considering her needs.  Its completely secular- used in schools all across the country.   Does anyone know why it would considered NOT secular???  After that, I took myself out of every group with the word "Secular" in the title.  It feels like certain people have co-opted the word into a whole new meaning- and I'm not sure what that new meaning is.  Apparently the list of "not allowed to discuss" programs had changed, and it clearly has Saxon Math listed now (I would understand if they included DIVE). 

Anyway, I logged in and had a notification from the moderator- I was wondering what on earth I said!  It had a copy of my "banned" reply, with a copy of the rules and a note not to recommend again.  I'm over it.  I left every secular group I was in.  And no, this was not SEA- I left that one a long time ago.    

So- anyone know why?  When did this happen and what did I miss????

[Katy]

We used Saxon years ago and I never saw anything that wasn’t secular?

[Drama Llama]

I've used Saxon in public schools.  It's definitely secular.

But in the HS world, I feel like I've seen a lot of places where people list what they are doing in every subject, and Saxon is the only secular piece.  I also can't really think of someone, off hand, who uses Saxon and is a completely secular homeschooler. Of course that's anecdata.

I think that someone probably made a mistake.  That happens. 

[bolt.]

I think it probably depends on whether and how Saxon "produces" and/or "partners" with the DIVE people. I know that many exclusively secular lists will exclude products that can be described as, "One part of the curriculum is secular, but these other resources that go along with it in bundles from the same manufacturer are to be avoided due to religious content." -- Which is a pretty high standard, but it makes some sense if you are trying not to confuse people. I can see only wanting to only recommend sources in a "whole" way. It avoids the complexity and mixed messaging of trying to break down: "From manufacturer xyz: we only recommend products a, b, c, f, and h."

[BusyMom5]

It was not a mistake- it is very clearly in the rules NO SAXON, right alongside No Life of Fred.

And the publisher is Houghton Mifflin. 

Edited January 28, 2022 by BusyMom5

[Drama Llama]

Just now, BusyMom5 said:

It was not a mistake- it is very clearly in the rules NO SAXON, right alongside No Life of Fred.

I was assuming that the person who wrote the rules made a mistake. 

[gardenmom5]

did you let the moderator know it is a secular curriculum that is used in public schools?   She may have confused it with something else.

 

I do recall when I first started trying to homeschool dudeling - the reviews for wtm were all over the place.  "too religious" from the secularists, and "too secular" from the ultra religious.   I joined two groups (not sponsored by SWB) that used it.  One religious, one secular.   Boy, did I get dizzy.  They were mirror images of each other - and bashing each other.  I had to leave them both. 

 

 Then I found the Hive.  happy day.

[Farrar]

SMH. Saxon is old school public schools. Just because lots of Christian programs use it... I assume this was SEA?

ETA: I just looked at SEA, and there are lots of Saxon math posts, so not SEA. Sorry, SEA for besmirching your very strict rules, lol. But now I really want to know what group had super strict rules like this!

Edited January 28, 2022 by Farrar

[catz]

I had to unsubscribe to SEA related stuff if that is the group you are talking about. They are very dogmatic about what type of posting and even conversations they allow there.  And I'm not Christian and have always homeschooled secular-ly.  

[MEmama]

Idk anything about Saxon, but this doesn’t more weird to me than when I used to ask for secular curriculum and people would suggest all kinds of religious stuff, insisting I could “just leave parts out”. Well no, that’s not how that works! Nor did I want to support certain companies, even if they had one math book or whatever that didn’t include religion. 
 

I think a lot of people can’t see past their own preferences and filters. I wouldn’t really about it though. It’s most certainly not just a secular thing! Lol

[Moonhawk]

Maybe my DH is secretly the moderator, because his first rule when we decided to homeschool (after being homeschooled himself) was NO SAXON, lol.

[KSera]

17 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Idk anything about Saxon, but this doesn’t more weird to me than when I used to ask for secular curriculum and people would suggest all kinds of religious stuff, insisting I could “just leave parts out”. Well no, that’s not how that works! Nor did I want to support certain companies, even if they had one math book or whatever that didn’t include religion. 
 

I think a lot of people can’t see past their own preferences and filters. I wouldn’t really about it though. It’s most certainly not just a secular thing! Lol

While that’s annoying and I don’t know why people do that, it still seems like a different thing. In one case they are acknowledging religious aspects and saying you could leave them out (which obviously isn’t helpful for those who are looking for absolutely no religion), but in the other they’re saying you can’t mention a curriculum because it’s religious when it absolutely definitely isn’t. It doesn’t seem to be in good service of their membership at all. I mean, I actually hate Saxon 😂, but I don’t see any good purpose served by people in that group not being allowed to be told about it

[BusyMom5]

This was not SEA.  I can't remember the exact name, but it was Secular Homeschool Curriculum or something like that- and there was another similar group that had the same rule.  I looked after my wrist-slap.  The note from the moderator said- exact quote with capitals:

"Saxon is NOT secular- do not recommend again"

I can see why most things on their No List are on there...  but SAXON???   Its published by Houghton Mifflin (I went and looked, bc I wondered if that was the case)- still being marketed to public schools.  I understand not liking their methodology, having concerns with the content from an instructional side, but not a secular/religious POV.  

 

And no, I did not reply to the moderator.  I have better things to do with my time.  This was just a place to list my stuff to sell.  

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, Moonhawk said:

Maybe my DH is secretly the moderator, because his first rule when we decided to homeschool (after being homeschooled himself) was NO SAXON, lol.

Lol, maybe it’s something like that. Maybe the moderators are people who were all raised in religious homeschooling households and they all used Saxon, which they hated with a passion and associate with their religious schooling. I still wouldn’t make it rational, though. In that case, they would have to say that you can’t mention any religious curriculum or curriculum which they hate.

[mom2scouts]

I'm a Christian, but I'm open to using secular homeschool materials and, in some cases, prefer secular. I couldn't stay on any of the secular forums I found because they were more militant and cultish than any of the religious forums I found. Other than a few local FB groups, this is the only homeschool forum I use.

[Shoeless]

Saxon is 100% secular. Aren't the Dive cds produced by a different company? They aren't even a Saxon product.

Some of the secular homeschool fb groups won't allow products to be mentioned if they find the philosophy or political leanings of the curriculum creator unappealing. Even if the curriculum has zero mention of religion, if someone says "I find it problematic that the book did/did not cover this topic" or "That product is published by Acme Books and they support XYZ political group", that program is off limits. 

I don't remember the name of the group, but there is one that is even more restrictive than SEA. If you followed their recommendations, you were left with basically zero acceptable science options for high school. 

[KungFuPanda]

Did they confuse it with Seton?  This makes no sense.  Now I want to know the answer.

[Slache]

2 hours ago, Moonhawk said:

Maybe my DH is secretly the moderator, because his first rule when we decided to homeschool (after being homeschooled himself) was NO SAXON, lol.

When I began homeschooling I asked a friend with children my age for advice. Mom said "Use Saxon. Use Saxon and don't switch." Her kids that were my age said "Whatever you do, don't use Saxon." 😂

[Dianthus]

25 minutes ago, Slache said:

When I began homeschooling I asked a friend with children my age for advice. Mom said "Use Saxon. Use Saxon and don't switch." Her kids that were my age said "Whatever you do, don't use Saxon." 😂

So what do you use?

[Slache]

7 minutes ago, Spirea said:

So what do you use?

Saxon. 

[Slache]

8 minutes ago, Spirea said:

So what do you use?

 

Just now, Slache said:

Saxon. 

Because we only use Christian curriculum.

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, mom2scouts said:

I'm a Christian, but I'm open to using secular homeschool materials and, in some cases, prefer secular. I couldn't stay on any of the secular forums I found because they were more militant and cultish than any of the religious forums I found. Other than a few local FB groups, this is the only homeschool forum I use.

same

[Soror]

I remember using it in my ps in the 90s. If they are going to make up random, makes no sense rules, they should have the whys in an info post. Having to randomly guess what curriculum you're allowed to mention when the supposed rules aren't followed is a pia and unfair.

[Soror]

Just now, ktgrok said:

same

Yep. 

 

2 hours ago, mom2scouts said:

I'm a Christian, but I'm open to using secular homeschool materials and, in some cases, prefer secular. I couldn't stay on any of the secular forums I found because they were more militant and cultish than any of the religious forums I found. Other than a few local FB groups, this is the only homeschool forum I use.

Yep. With ever changing rules that don't even allow things that are actually secular. It isn't just secular but all these other things in addition.

[Carrie12345]

It’s been a loooooong time, but something makes me think I remember some mildly… influenced bits in the K-3 materials? Or am I just losing my mind?

We hated 1st-3rd Saxon, so I got rid of my copies long ago and can’t check!

We do use pre-algebra, upward. 

[Carrie12345]

Also, I agree secular groups can be nuts. All I want is *transparency*.

[Slache]

24 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

It’s been a loooooong time, but something makes me think I remember some mildly… influenced bits in the K-3 materials? Or am I just losing my mind?

We hated 1st-3rd Saxon, so I got rid of my copies long ago and can’t check!

We do use pre-algebra, upward. 

You're not. John Saxon was a Christian and sometimes some things slipped through because that's just who he was. I think Noah was mentioned at one point? Not as a fact, just in a problem, and it wasn't evangelistic, just kinda there. That's all been written out though.

[Ellie]

4 hours ago, catz said:

I had to unsubscribe to SEA related stuff if that is the group you are talking about. They are very dogmatic about what type of posting and even conversations they allow there.  And I'm not Christian and have always homeschooled secular-ly.  

They deleted my suggestion of McGuffy readers, because it has God's name in it or some such thing. Yes, even though it was used in public schools, because public schools were not as fussy back in the day and would allow "religious" things to be mentioned.

[Farrar]

FTR, I do think it's nice that there are groups out there now that are strict about this and actually moderate it. You can't just "take the religion out" of a program most of the time and unless there's a super compelling reason to consider the program, it's not worth it to try. And older books that are heavy on religious leaning quotes without context or religious themes also obviously, understandably, don't belong in those groups.

It's just sad that apparently there's some ignorance that this very classic old school program isn't secular. Because it obviously is even if it's still a favorite for Christian families, schools, and some all in one homeschool programs.

[HomeAgain]

2 hours ago, KungFuPanda said:

Did they confuse it with Seton?  This makes no sense.  Now I want to know the answer.

I want to know, too!

The public schools at our last home used Saxon math and phonics.  DS11 would have walked out if he was doing that every day in kindergarten (2 hours devoted to each), so we just kept him home, lol.

I'm secular, but I'm not militant about it.  We use Life of Fred, Climbing To Good English, Elson readers...anything that gets the job done or my kids like.  It's why I don't join the secular homeschool groups for the most part.  I might slip up and give a rec for something that has a religious note in it.

[Farrar]

1 hour ago, Carrie12345 said:

Also, I agree secular groups can be nuts. All I want is *transparency*.

Transparency and a tiny ounce of self-awareness. Like, if someone says "secular suggestions" then just be aware enough not to suggest Apologia. Good grief. Or, honestly, vice versa. If a family wants a "history program with a Christian worldview" then like, Howard Zinn is not helpful, folks. And yet every single time on these big local groups. Every time.

[MEmama]

21 minutes ago, Ellie said:

They deleted my suggestion of McGuffy readers, because it has God's name in it or some such thing. Yes, even though it was used in public schools, because public schools were not as fussy back in the day and would allow "religious" things to be mentioned.

Yes, because those wouldn’t be secular. 

[katilac]

6 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

It’s been a loooooong time, but something makes me think I remember some mildly… influenced bits in the K-3 materials? Or am I just losing my mind?

We hated 1st-3rd Saxon, so I got rid of my copies long ago and can’t check!

We do use pre-algebra, upward. 

I wish I could get my hands on an original Saxon book! I remember quite a bit of discussion of religious references in the early books (and an equal number of people who were freaked out because he included ghosts and fairies and such in word problems). 

I am massively intrigued by what Mary Pride said in 1993 (super religious early homeschooler, for those not familiar): 

"Saxon is very moralistic. Unlike every other math text on the market, his books use pejorative terms about sins such as cheating, boastful behavior, laziness, and so forth. Students may have to look up the words to find out what Saxon's talking about (that's the whole point, as he's trying to improve their vocabularies), but after they do, they will have a clear sense that this math text at least condemns certain behavior as wrong. If this isn't Christian, take me out and shoot me." Saxon Math Facts vs Rumors (1993) 

Sadly, the article links to examples of the fairy and gnome problems, but not the "moralistic" ones. 

5 hours ago, Ellie said:

They deleted my suggestion of McGuffy readers, because it has God's name in it or some such thing. Yes, even though it was used in public schools, because public schools were not as fussy back in the day and would allow "religious" things to be mentioned.

To be fair, McGuffey himself said: "From no other source has the author drawn more copiously in his selections than from the Sacred Scriptures. For this, he certainly apprehends no censure. In a Christian country, that man is to be pitied who, at this day, can honestly object to imbuing the minds of youth with the language and the spirit of the Word of God."

In the third reader, he lists 13 things to remember (apparently he was not superstitious). Just over half of them are strongly religious in nature. Remember that God watches over you, pray for God's protection, God sees you do bad things even if no one else does, trust in the Lord, and so on. 

An example from the fourth reader: "But perhaps some child who reads this, asks, "Does God notice little children in school?" He certainly does. And if you are not diligent in the improvement of your time, it is one of the surest evidences that your heart is not right with God. You are placed in this world to improve your time. In youth you must be preparing for future usefulness. And if you do not improve the advantages you enjoy, you sin against your Maker."

So it's a great deal more than having God's name in it, or mentioning God in the context of reading a poem or story. Religious teachings are part and parcel of the series, as was McGuffey's intention, making the books very far from secular. 

[Lady Florida.]

40 minutes ago, katilac said:

 

So it's a great deal more than having God's name in it, or mentioning God in the context of reading a poem or story. Religious teachings are part and parcel of the series, as was McGuffey's intention, making the books very far from secular. 

Not to mention that back when public schools weren't fussy about allowing religious things to be mentioned, those religious things were always Christian, and almost always non-Catholic Christian. They weren't fussy because they assumed everyone had the same beliefs and they didn't care who they insulted by making those assumptions. ~Says someone who grew up with McGuffey readers and used to wonder about that even as a child.

[MEmama]

9 hours ago, katilac said:

I wish I could get my hands on an original Saxon book! I remember quite a bit of discussion of religious references in the early books (and an equal number of people who were freaked out because he included ghosts and fairies and such in word problems). 

I am massively intrigued by what Mary Pride said in 1993 (super religious early homeschooler, for those not familiar): 

"Saxon is very moralistic. Unlike every other math text on the market, his books use pejorative terms about sins such as cheating, boastful behavior, laziness, and so forth. Students may have to look up the words to find out what Saxon's talking about (that's the whole point, as he's trying to improve their vocabularies), but after they do, they will have a clear sense that this math text at least condemns certain behavior as wrong. If this isn't Christian, take me out and shoot me." Saxon Math Facts vs Rumors (1993) 

Sadly, the article links to examples of the fairy and gnome problems, but not the "moralistic" ones. 

To be fair, McGuffey himself said: "From no other source has the author drawn more copiously in his selections than from the Sacred Scriptures. For this, he certainly apprehends no censure. In a Christian country, that man is to be pitied who, at this day, can honestly object to imbuing the minds of youth with the language and the spirit of the Word of God."

In the third reader, he lists 13 things to remember (apparently he was not superstitious). Just over half of them are strongly religious in nature. Remember that God watches over you, pray for God's protection, God sees you do bad things even if no one else does, trust in the Lord, and so on. 

An example from the fourth reader: "But perhaps some child who reads this, asks, "Does God notice little children in school?" He certainly does. And if you are not diligent in the improvement of your time, it is one of the surest evidences that your heart is not right with God. You are placed in this world to improve your time. In youth you must be preparing for future usefulness. And if you do not improve the advantages you enjoy, you sin against your Maker."

So it's a great deal more than having God's name in it, or mentioning God in the context of reading a poem or story. Religious teachings are part and parcel of the series, as was McGuffey's intention, making the books very far from secular. 

 

9 hours ago, Lady Florida. said:

Not to mention that back when public schools weren't fussy about allowing religious things to be mentioned, those religious things were always Christian, and almost always non-Catholic Christian. They weren't fussy because they assumed everyone had the same beliefs and they didn't care who they insulted by making those assumptions. ~Says someone who grew up with McGuffey readers and used to wonder about that even as a child.

This is really good information— hopefully it helps people understand why secular folks wouldn’t want to include these books. 

[Happy2BaMom]

I have found nearly all FB groups - even groups where I seem to share 90%+ of the beliefs of most group members - to be toxic wastelands, full of snipers and minefields all manned by the same fanatic-eyed True Believers (in.....whatever it is they are True Believers about).   I only dip my toe into groups for a specific purpose anymore (one that can't be met any other way) and then immediately remove myself once said purpose is met. I can't check out entirely, because some services/businesses still only update through FB, but....good lord...FB has NOT improved humanity.

And, yes, the secular groups can be as ridiculous as the religious ones, and vice versa.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Happy2BaMom

[EKS]

Saxon is definitely secular (my experience is with Saxon 2-8/7).  I don't know anything about the DIVE cds.  Life of Fred is not (quite) secular.

Edited January 29, 2022 by EKS

[Ting Tang]

It is secular.  Some homeschool groups are crazy. I've been banned and blocked from two for no good reason. Could never figure it out, and it stinks because sometimes it's nice to have specific curriculum support.