Q re: Why do people use religious curricula

[asta]

I will say straight away that I am not looking to start a fight. This is a genuine query.

 

When I first started homeschooling DS in 5th grade, every other HSer I knew was using a religious curriculum. And I don't mean "well, it was printed at Memoria Press"; I mean RELIGIOUS - as in, even the word problems in mathematics were along the lines of "If Joseph walked 3 miles in one direction, and Mary walked 2 miles toward home..."

 

When I queried these different families at the time, they all gave reasons amounting to "well, it is our faith, and the children need to learn it".

 

Ok. I am teaching my kid with an entirely secular curriculum. I also happen to be teaching him theology. Without fail, people comment on how well versed he is in theology. Yet there is none in his history, literature, mathematics, science, etc. curricula. I may insert lessons if they are appropriate to a reference in history or literature, but religion certainly isn't the main focus of all of his studies.

 

I believe I am thinking about this again (DS is in 9th grade) because I am so fed up with finding appropriate materials that can be taught to an individual vs a group, and which have appropriate supporting materials. It is dang hard to rewrite everything and to make up lessons. Yes, I know this is something I have taken on (schooling my child), but it just seems so ludicrous that such a huge portion of the homeschool curriculum market is taken up with very religious materials.

 

On top of that, part of me really wonders what a couple of generations of religiously homeschooled (as opposed to homeschooled with religion) youth are going to face if/when they go to (non-religious) colleges. Just as I feel it is my duty to teach DS theology (it exists, he needs to know it), I am stunned by the number of people who don't teach evolution based science, literature other than biblical, etc. I don't think one has to drink the kool-aid (eg: many people don't believe in evolution - fine - but the argument "it's not true!" doesn't hold water in a university science lecture), but why aren't more people teaching / more companies publishing both sides of issues, secular and religious?

 

I'm rambling, I don't know if this was at all clear. Hopefully, someone will understand what I'm asking.

 

 

asta

[Jenny in Atl]

I think (as a secular hs'er), it's akin to the pendulum having to swing off in the opposite direction (as far away from secular public school texts as possible).

Most of the earliest hs'er were either deeply religious or so-called hippie un-schoolers, and I don't think they were in the market for curriculum. So, demand was there for faith-based materials.

 

As more and more diverse families enter the homeschooling world, I think, I hope.. we will see more choices in curriculum. It does seem like this is starting to happen.

[chiguirre]

I think the problem is most acute when you get to highschool. In the early years, it's reasonably easy to piece together something you like. I use lots of religious materials even though I'm an atheist, but at this level (K-2) the religion tends to consist of Bible stories tacked on. Since they're important stories to know, I don't mind them in curricula. Looking forward, this is about to change to more doctrinal indoctrination in the upper elementary years and I'm going to have to do some more careful thinking about what I want to use. By highschool, I'm sure I'll be pulling my hair out. OTOH, I do hope the market will drive the development of better secular, HOMESCHOOL products.

[angela in ohio]

It's not ludicrous to me that most homeschool materials are Christian. There are two reasons I see: (1.) many of the curriculum companies are doing it as a ministry or calling - to put God-honoring materials in the hands of homeschoolers - and so their materials are Christian, and (2.) the largest portion of the homeschool market is Christian, so those who do it for profit are catering to that. At the point where there is enough demand for other types of material, it will be available. Someone needs to take the initiative and sacrifice to make it so, if they believe strongly enough in having other materials available.

 

I also think it is a "grass is greener" thing, as I look at the multitude of materials and programs that I could get for free except that they completely contradict (and sometimes malign) our beliefs - community programming, public school textbooks, etc.

 

IRL the only homeschoolers I know who take a "head in the sand" approach to the world aren't sending their dc to college anyway, and I don't know more than a handful of families like that. Most Christian homeschoolers I know, our family included, are teaching both sides of every issue. That is how you truly prepare your child to face the world. My dc know more about evolution than secular homeschoolers we know. They know exactly what the arguments are on the other side; I want them to hear them at home first. Most of the homeschoolers I know are preparing dc to attend secular colleges or have dc attending secular colleges, and they are preparing them well. We live in a pocket that only represents a certain segment of homeschoolers, though. :)

 

Statistically speaking, the faith of most Christian children will not survive college, though. So many families, both homeschoolers and not, are not preparing their children for the challenge. That is a completely separate issue from the type of curriculum available, I feel. Whether you teach your children to defend their faith and whether you use Christian curriculum are two separate issues. One is a tool, the other is a lifestyle. It might be the tool you use to accomplish your goal of relisiously trained children, or you might choose to do it another way.

 

I would think it would also depend on how many children you are schooling. If you are schooling one or two, it is easy to sit down and discuss things in a secular book from a religious viewpoint. When you have many dc doing many different grades, you start to tend toward more "help" in this area, I'm sure, relying on materials you don't need to supllement so much.

 

We do use material that is saturated with Christianity. We are countering a culture and preparing our dc to exist in a culture that does not agree with our faith. If we teach them in the home from a Christian aspect in every area, they will be prepared to see the world through that lens, even when it is not evident. ETA: We also often use religious curriculum because it is the best available. Many Chiristian curriculum are more "traditionally" structured, which I think makes them superior to what is used in schools currently.

 

So, there're my thoughts on the issue. Hopefully you can get a perspective from someone who doesn't teach any evolution or other beliefs at home, because I can't explain that one, as we don't operate that way.

Edited April 6, 2009 by angela in ohio

[Remudamom]

Hm, we're Christian and although we have used some "religious" material, we also use secular. We use what fits our family and learning style. We want our children to learn to the glory of God, and that can be done with whatever you use.

[Hillary in KS]

I'm curious, what religious math curriculum were your friends using?

 

I've seen one where they had proverbs or Bible verses printed on occasional pages, but never one like you described. Which program was it?

 

Thanks.

[chiguirre]

BJU has bible story based worksheets in their math. They're not just a verse printed at the bottom of the page, they're cartoons of OT characters doing something math related.

[Danestress]

I find the phrase "drink the kool-aid" when used regarding any religious belief that doesn't involve death by kool-aid. I would find it no less offensive if you were referring to Muslim kool-aid or Orthodox Jew kool-aid. You realize that over 900 real, breathing, living people, many of them children, died in the event that phrase refers to, don't you? People who are teaching children children new earth creationism are not murderers (you know that, of course) and talking about them as people who drink kool-aid is just ...... wrong.

 

 

It's really hard for me to continue a conversation about this after I read such an offensive reference to someone else's religious beliefs. Or political beliefs for that matter, since it's becoming really trendy to talk about drinking the "Obama kool-aid" etc. I have a childhood friend (not a close one, but someone my family spent time with) who was high up at Jim Jone's church but was in America during those murders. I often wonder how this new slang makes him feel.

 

That said, I am definitely someone who teaches my children evolution because I believe the record is strong for evolution, and while I have used some religious materials, I understand your frustration what when you want to find a decent biology book that meets your needs, it can be irritating to find some that aren't filled with religious references that are contrary to your own view. I agree with you that a solid science education would need to include a basic familiarity with the evidence for evolution, even if one does not believe that evidence is convincing.

[mrsrevmeg]

From a Christian perspective, I want my children to know why I do not believe evolution. I agree that saying "The Bible says so" is not the thing to teach. We have looked at Science from a Creationist point of view. The curriculum we use talks about evolution and has information on why old earth evolution is hard to believe. As far as our history goes, we believe that the story of the world is the story of God. We look at what God expects from people and then as we study nations or certain time periods we look at if that people group did things to honor God or shame Him. We read literature from all kinds of sources, not just the Bible. Our math is not like what you mentioned either. We do normal math.:)

[Nestof3]

I am surprised that you have come across so much religious curricula, because I, a Christian, have homeschooled nine years without having to use any. I chose the Pathway Readers and CLP Nature Readers because I like the stories and because the CLP is from a creationism standpoint. I could have chosen any early readers.

 

I can imagine people use religious curricula either to support their faith or because they really like the materials, and they happen to be religious.

 

And about the evolution. My 18 year old did not grow up under a rock. Of course he is familiar with evolutionary theory -- probably as familiar with it as most non-scientists are familiar with anti-evolutionary models. I think you'll find most creationists study evolution/creationism outside of the one chapter in a textbook more than most who hold to an evolutionary model.

 

Thankfully, his college bio professor treats evolution as a theory -- which it should be treated as. Evolution is such a minor part of college biology with the exception of the entire taxonomic system, but one doesn't need to understand all of evolution's claims to understand the organizational system at college intro level.

 

Furthermore, if my children are not capable of learning something for the first time in college, they might as well save their money and not even go. I mean, if nothing new will be taught, what's the point?

Edited April 6, 2009 by nestof3

[chiguirre]

I just wanted to note that although Pathway is published for the Amish market (hence no people are pictured), it doesn't have any religious content at least through 3rd grade. There are no Bible stories at all.

[Heather in Neverland]

For me it is about worldview. We are devout Christians so we look at EVERYTHING from a biblical perspective (picture putting on a pair of biblical glasses). The Bible is the source of truth in our lives and anything that contradicts the Bible is not truth. So we don't compartmentalize our faith, it precedes and permeates everything we do. Teaching all the academic subjects and then teaching "religion" separately is not God-honoring to us.

 

Having said that, we DO teach about other faiths, other scientific theories, etc. It is important to us that our children know what is believed by others as they need to be able to defend their faith. This past weekend my ds and dh went on an outing with the youth group to the Ohio Caverns. During the tour, my ds got into a lively yet respectful discussion with the tour guide about the age of the caves. He could not have done that if he did not know both sides of the argument.

 

So we do use some secular and some Christian materials and I agree with other posters that the supply of secular homeschool materials will be greater when demand is greater.

[asta]

I'm curious, what religious math curriculum were your friends using?

 

I've seen one where they had proverbs or Bible verses printed on occasional pages, but never one like you described. Which program was it?

 

Thanks.

 

I honestly can't remember. It may have been BJU for all I know. I just remember DS coming home from a visit to this person's house completely amazed that religion would be in a math text.

 

 

asta

[Nestof3]

I honestly can't remember. It may have been BJU for all I know. I just remember DS coming home from a visit to this person's house completely amazed that religion would be in a math text.

 

 

asta

 

I think CLE is like that.

[asta]

I think the problem is most acute when you get to highschool. In the early years, it's reasonably easy to piece together something you like. I use lots of religious materials even though I'm an atheist, but at this level (K-2) the religion tends to consist of Bible stories tacked on. Since they're important stories to know, I don't mind them in curricula. Looking forward, this is about to change to more doctrinal indoctrination in the upper elementary years and I'm going to have to do some more careful thinking about what I want to use. By highschool, I'm sure I'll be pulling my hair out. OTOH, I do hope the market will drive the development of better secular, HOMESCHOOL products.

 

I concur that many religious stories are important for understanding literature, social studies and life in general. In fact, I agree with your whole post.

 

I guess, having been raised by a theologian who stressed that one's personal beliefs (religion) were different from theology (the study of those and other beliefs), I get antsy about curriculum that preaches a particular religion.

 

JMO

 

 

asta

[ereks mom]

Hm, we're Christian and although we have used some "religious" material, we also use secular. We use what fits our family and learning style. We want our children to learn to the glory of God, and that can be done with whatever you use.

 

:iagree:

[Nestof3]

I guess, having been raised by a theologian who stressed that one's personal beliefs (religion) were different from theology (the study of those and other beliefs), I get antsy about curriculum that preaches a particular religion.

 

 

I have to say that first, I really don't understand what this has to do with math problems that say "Brother John had four Bibles and Sister Ann had three. How many did they have together?" What sorts of deep theological issues are imbedded in a math problem like this?

 

Second, you say you have a genuine query, yet then you continue to stress how others using religious curricula makes you antsy. It sounds more like you are challenging those who do rather than asking why they do.

 

Third, why do you get antsy? I personally couldn't care less what curricula you choose to teach YOUR children. Why would you care what I use to teach mine, and why are you concerned about how other people's children handle secular college?

 

For what it's worth, we are strong Christians and our eldest so is handling secular college just fine. :)

[Ellie]

Public schools don't have a very good track record as far as the quality of education they've been producing for, oh, 50 years or more. Why would I want to use the same instructional materials they use?

 

Many secular publishers, especially in history and English, introduce a whole truckload of political correctness. Why would I want to use that stuff?

 

There are *many* non-religous scientists who do not support evolution but believe that there is significant evidence to support Special Creation. Why would I want to teach a model that I don't believe is supported by science? Or, to put it another way, why not teach a model that many scientists believe is true which also coincides with what I believe the Bible teaches?

 

If non-religious hsers aren't happy with materials written with a Christian worldview (or any other religion), why aren't they writing their own? You can't blame Christians for doing so.

[Hillary in KS]

I get antsy about curriculum that preaches a particular religion.

 

 

So don't use one.

 

Everyone's free to use what they prefer. I don't "get antsy" when I meet a family who chooses School of Tomorrow or K-12, or Calvert. Why does it matter if a family choose a religious math program (or whatever)? That doesn't sound very tolerant or open-minded to me.

[FO4UR]

I will say straight away that I am not looking to start a fight. This is a genuine query.

 

When I first started homeschooling DS in 5th grade, every other HSer I knew was using a religious curriculum. And I don't mean "well, it was printed at Memoria Press"; I mean RELIGIOUS - as in, even the word problems in mathematics were along the lines of "If Joseph walked 3 miles in one direction, and Mary walked 2 miles toward home..."

 

When I queried these different families at the time, they all gave reasons amounting to "well, it is our faith, and the children need to learn it".

 

Ok. I am teaching my kid with an entirely secular curriculum. I also happen to be teaching him theology. Without fail, people comment on how well versed he is in theology. Yet there is none in his history, literature, mathematics, science, etc. curricula. I may insert lessons if they are appropriate to a reference in history or literature, but religion certainly isn't the main focus of all of his studies.

 

I believe I am thinking about this again (DS is in 9th grade) because I am so fed up with finding appropriate materials that can be taught to an individual vs a group, and which have appropriate supporting materials. It is dang hard to rewrite everything and to make up lessons. Yes, I know this is something I have taken on (schooling my child), but it just seems so ludicrous that such a huge portion of the homeschool curriculum market is taken up with very religious materials.

 

On top of that, part of me really wonders what a couple of generations of religiously homeschooled (as opposed to homeschooled with religion) youth are going to face if/when they go to (non-religious) colleges. Just as I feel it is my duty to teach DS theology (it exists, he needs to know it), I am stunned by the number of people who don't teach evolution based science, literature other than biblical, etc. I don't think one has to drink the kool-aid (eg: many people don't believe in evolution - fine - but the argument "it's not true!" doesn't hold water in a university science lecture), but why aren't more people teaching / more companies publishing both sides of issues, secular and religious?

 

I'm rambling, I don't know if this was at all clear. Hopefully, someone will understand what I'm asking.

 

 

asta

 

I kinda agree with you that every math problem doesn't need to be an example from the Bible.:lol: I generally want a program that teaches MATH for math.....:tongue_smilie:

 

History and science and literature, however, are simply intertwined with Faith. (math is actually a testimony of God's order too, but I haven't generally found any secular curric's in opposition to this)

 

ftr - My ds knew about evolution at 5yo (we are conservative, young-earth Creationist Christians). He loved dino's (still does), and got very good at finding cues that the author believes in Evolution and not Creation. I focus on teaching him to sort fact from opinion (even opinions of other Christians). That's a good skill regardless. Just y-day, he had a conversation with a friend about dino's and he was asking HOW this friend knew such things (they were pondering how dinos became extinct) As my kids grow, I hope they will know more about Evolution than most ps graduates. However, I won't use a curric for actually teaching science that is built upon Evolution b/c it would be too much of a hassle to disect every paragraph and explain how this is a contradiction and how that is just opinion...... I think that might be great fun for logic stage, but at 1st, 2nd, 3rd grade we just want to learn about the world!

[katemary63]

For me it is about worldview. We are devout Christians so we look at EVERYTHING from a biblical perspective (picture putting on a pair of biblical glasses). The Bible is the source of truth in our lives and anything that contradicts the Bible is not truth. So we don't compartmentalize our faith, it precedes and permeates everything we do. Teaching all the academic subjects and then teaching "religion" separately is not God-honoring to us.

 

:iagree: Good post.

 

I use things like Progeny Press literature guides because they combine the study of literature ( in all the ways you would study literature) WITH Bible study and character lessons. They use literature to teach good character and Biblical ethics so we end up learning both. Why waste the perfect oportunites to do this that are provided by great literature ( the same literature you would study).

 

I use a Christian history program ( in the older grades especially, BJU is excellent!) because I want my kids to understand history in the CONTEXT of a Christian world view. Pretty much the same with science.

 

With math, spelling, grammar and other such skills, I could care less if the stories, words, or names they use are "Biblical" or not. It doesn't matter either way, so I am happy to buy what I think is the best program regardless.

 

The main point, though, is that we ( our family) are Christians all day every day. It is not a PART of our lives. It is our whole life. It would be strange not to incorporate our faith into our homeschooling. As Christians, we incorporate our faith into everything.

[Kim in Appalachia]

that means it might be overtly religious and it might not be. We use Rod and Staff for math and English, and next year for science. I'm not using their curriculum because I want Bible verses interspersed into the math problems, but because it is a solid curriculum that is user friendly for homeschoolers (I love the daily reviews).

 

I've used Veritas Press and I liked it because I thought it was a good way to teach. I liked the worksheets and weekly review, I liked the cards.

 

I'm using Ambleside (which does not have to be religious) because I like the book selections and reading schedule.

 

I've also done straight TWTM, and used the non-religious books that were recommended. I used it because I thought it would provide a good foundation for my child's education. (I didn't stop using those recommendations because I didn't like it, but because it became harder to do with lots of little ones.:001_smile:)

 

I think when it comes to textbooks, Christian publishers were quicker (but not that quick!) to get into the homeschooling market.

 

I will admit that I avoided some Christian publishers, because their views on some things, but I've come to appreciate and use them when it is a good fit.

 

Now why those publishers feel the need to put Bible verses and stories everywhere is another issue, but you asked about homeschoolers. ;)

 

As far as passing on our faith, that is important to our family, but I don't believe using a certain curriculum to guarantee that.

[katemary63]

BTW, I agree that the "drink the cool-aid." comment was out of line. It really shows a lack of respect for those of us who do things differently then you. If you really didn't want to "pick a fight" then you probably shouldn't have used that phrase.

[Avila]

Just to throw my hat in the ring, I think part of the issue is the definition of what a secular curriculum is. Just because it doesn't mention Jesus or the bible doesn't mean it doesn't have its own agenda.

 

I think a very real reason to use a religious curriculum if you can find one that suits you is to substitute the bias you know is there and can live with with the bias that the publishers want to pretend is not there and that I would have to unteach.

 

Just my opinion.

[Melinda in VT]

I find the phrase "drink the kool-aid" when used regarding any religious belief that doesn't involve death by kool-aid. I would find it no less offensive if you were referring to Muslim kool-aid or Orthodox Jew kool-aid. You realize that over 900 real, breathing, living people, many of them children, died in the event that phrase refers to, don't you? People who are teaching children children new earth creationism are not murderers (you know that, of course) and talking about them as people who drink kool-aid is just ...... wrong.

 

 

It's really hard for me to continue a conversation about this after I read such an offensive reference to someone else's religious beliefs. Or political beliefs for that matter, since it's becoming really trendy to talk about drinking the "Obama kool-aid" etc. I have a childhood friend (not a close one, but someone my family spent time with) who was high up at Jim Jone's church but was in America during those murders. I often wonder how this new slang makes him feel.

 

I appreciate you talking about this issue. I have run into this phrase a lot lately. (And in a discussion of software development models, of all things!)

 

When you hear it so much, it is easy to pick it up and lose sight of the seriousness of the original event. Sort of like using "Soup Nazi" and not really thinking of the Holocaust.

 

Anyway, this is a phrase I've been trying to watch in my own language, so thanks for the reminder.

[TXMomof4]

I haven't read any of the other replies, but I would guess it's entirely market driven. Up until recently the vast majority of homeschoolers were doing so for religious reasons. So the vast majority of hs material is religious in nature.

I'm sure as more people hs for different reasons the availability of secular materials will increase. However, that is of no use to you right now!

[asta]

I have to say that first, I really don't understand what this has to do with math problems that say "Brother John had four Bibles and Sister Ann had three. How many did they have together?" What sorts of deep theological issues are imbedded in a math problem like this?

 

Second, you say you have a genuine query, yet then you continue to stress how others using religious curricula makes you antsy. It sounds more like you are challenging those who do rather than asking why they do.

 

Third, why do you get antsy? I personally couldn't care less what curricula you choose to teach YOUR children. Why would you care what I use to teach mine, and why are you concerned about how other people's children handle secular college?

 

For what it's worth, we are strong Christians and our eldest so is handling secular college just fine. :)

 

This is incorrect.

 

I stated that religious curriculum made ME antsy. I said nothing at all about what you just wrote (bolded).

 

 

asta

[dangermom]

In general, I have not wanted to use religious materials, because they usually don't fit our particular religion, and the ones that do don't usually fit with my educational goals. I prefer to be the one who teaches my kids religion, so we do that pretty much on our own. I like to teach them the doctrine of our own faith consistently and the tenets of other faiths as they come up--when they get older I want to do a survey of world religions too.

 

I do use Rod and Staff grammar because I like the books, and because their materials tend to be pretty Biblical--that is, when you have a group of sentences with religious content, it's almost always a summary taken from the Bible and not much else. And I really like Classical Writing, which does the same thing when it uses Bible stories as models (which you don't have to do if you prefer to choose other models).

[PineFarmMom]

I use some curricula that is Biblical and some that is non. My goal is not to subliminally get Bible into them while they're diagramming their sentences or figuring out a math problem...other than R&S grammar, I don't think I've come across anything like that, and R&S is an excellent grammar program, so that would be more why I've used it. I do want them to know that anything that contradicts the Bible is a lie. We discuss those things...helping them to have a Biblical worldview! I hope to assist them in having that filter to run everything through. I guess I had enough in my own formative years of trying to mix the Biblical truth I was getting at home with non-Biblical things I was taking in at school, somehow mixing them up and getting a messed-up mishmash. I can look back and see the negative effect it had. I pray I can help them to filter every experience, relationship, educational experience, etc., through the lense of truth, so they'll be able to tell truth from lies. It's not just about education, but more about teaching them how to walk with the Lord/walk in truth!! It's been difficult enough to work through as an adult...I hope I can give them a head start!

 

Teresa

[asta]

I haven't read any of the other replies, but I would guess it's entirely market driven. Up until recently the vast majority of homeschoolers were doing so for religious reasons. So the vast majority of hs material is religious in nature.

I'm sure as more people hs for different reasons the availability of secular materials will increase. However, that is of no use to you right now!

 

I think you hit the nail on the head. I think that perhaps the curriculum market simply hasn't kept pace with the changing demographics of people who are choosing to teach their children at home.

 

 

asta

[dhudson]

I use material that is God-honoring. Religious is a term that I would prefer to stay away from, it brings to mind something that we do versus being who we are at the core. However, I want my children to understand that God is a part of everything, He is in history, science, literature, and He created that laws that govern math. That's why I don't choose to teach Bible or theology separate. Imho, theology and Bible play a huge part in every other subject so it should be taught as a cohesive whole. I want them to see God's hand in the world around them. Does everything I use have Bible verses attached? No, we use some secular materials because it is better for our family than the alternate Christian materials.

 

We have taught our children what the theory of evolution is, as well as what Islam, Hindu, Buddhists, and other religions believe. In this society, we can't put our "head in the sand" fully even if we wanted to. My children need to know what others believe so that they can defend what they believe. No good debate can come from someone who doesn't understand both sides of the issue.

 

There have been private Christian schools that for years and years have produced scholars that have navigated the college life successfully being taught out of God-honoring materials so why would Christian home schoolers be less successful at it?

 

I do think that there will be more secular materials available as there becomes more secular home schoolers, however, I don't think that Christian material will go away. I don't know why that should make you antsy.

[PineFarmMom]

I use material that is God-honoring. Religious is a term that I would prefer to stay away from, it brings to mind something that we do versus being who we are at the core. However, I want my children to understand that God is a part of everything, He is in history, science, literature, and He created that laws that govern math. That's why I don't choose to teach Bible or theology separate. Imho, theology and Bible play a huge part in every other subject so it should be taught as a cohesive whole. I want them to see God's hand in the world around them. .

 

That's a good explanation of what we have done. He is a part of everything.

 

Teresa

[Tutor]

I can only speak from my own experience, but I use a mix of curricula from various worldviews. I look for texts that are accurate and topically sound and work well with my childrens' learning styles. I will say that I have ruled out many texts that have an "agenda" since I do not consider them accurate in their teaching. This includes anything from an apparently revisionist perspective or anything with a high JPM (JPM = "Jesuses Per Minute" - if I think someone was simply looking to increase the number of times they mention God, I am suspicious that they didn't pay much attention to topical detail).

 

That said, I don't completely agree with your statement that the "it's not true" in regards to evolution doesn't hold up in the secular university science class. That statement unsupported is frowned upon... and should be. However, the statement, "I'm not sure the theory of macro evolution is supported by the current scientific evidence" and backed up with accurate scientific observations and sound logical argument is respected (at least in formal debate - they may still not agree with you ). That student could even be granted a highly coveted position in a lab researching evolutionary genetics and go on to do her thesis in the area and do well. :001_smile: A good science education is rooted firmly in the scientific method, developing good observational skills, analysis, and theory development, and the presentation of a variety of scientific interpretations of the evidence while showing respect for the the minds and opinions of the holders of those theories... keeping your students focused on whether or not various theories were developed using sound scientific practice then arguing the merits of the theories and encouraging them to develop their own analyses of the theories. Science education, imo, would be greatly helped if more teachers followed the trivium when teaching... observation/ memorization first (no need for lots of whys), then explore possible whys, then develop personal theories and analyze other theories based on that perspective. (I'll get off my soapbox now.)

Edited April 6, 2009 by Tutor

[Paintedlady]

I will say straight away that I am not looking to start a fight. This is a genuine query.

 

 

I wanted to answer your question, but after reading this thread, I'm not sure I believe your original statement. It seems more like you're shaking your head and rolling your eyes at those of us "drinking the kool-aid." I don't believe I'll bother now, except to say that if you want honest diaglogue, it helps to not insult those you're querying.

Edited April 6, 2009 by Paintedlady

[Bee]

When I first started hsing I didn't have a computer. The only books I could find mostly referenced companies that provided hs materials that had some sort of religious content. The few that did not, like Calvert were either too expensive or didn't meet my needs. For me, it was a lot cheaper to buy a math textbook from BJUP than an entire curriculum from Calvert (because they don't sell most of their curriculum as individual subjects). I'd found some old high school textbooks lying around my house that belonged to my mother back in the 50"s when she was a public school student and most had some religious content so for me it didn't seem like using material that contained some religious or high moral content was not a completely new concept in education. I don't teach my children any particular religious beliefs to the exclusion of others (except for the practice and study of any religion that encouraged doing wrong or evil to other living things) but I don't think it hurts them to have some small familiarity with the cultural aspects of various religions. Dh, for example, who was raised in a home where religious beliefs were not discussed or encouraged in any way has no idea what is going on in various episodes of the "Simpsons" and I have to explain what exactly is so funny.

[OnTheBrink]

I wanted to answer your question, but after reading this thread, I'm not sure I believe your original statement. It seems more like you're shaking your head and rolling your eyes at those of us "drinking the kool-aid." I don't believe I'll bother now, except to say that if you want honest diaglogue, it helps to not insult those your querying.

 

:iagree:

 

Saying someone who uses Christian-based materials is "drinking kool-aide" is insulting and it removes credibility from your stance that you're not trying to start an argument, or at the very least, it makes me question the sincerity of the question. I have no problem with honest questions about faith, but if you sling an insult in there, I find the question suspect.

[LMA]

I suggest that you view the Teaching Company's Course called Science and Religion (Lawrence Principe is the presenter).

 

http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/CourseDescLong2.aspx?cid=4691

[asta]

Since I seem to be somewhat less politically correct than many on this board would like, please let me clarify and correct any misconceptions on my point.

 

First, for anyone I may have offended, I’d like to explain that I come from a community were the “drinking the kool-aid†is commonly used and is not considered offensive regardless of the context. A sincere apology for this was not my intent.

 

Therefore I’ll rephrase the sentence in question to open this up for an intellectual vice emotional discussion.

 

I don't think one has to believe in evolution, but the argument "it's not true!" would inevitably lead to public ridicule and academic failure in any non-religious university lecture hall. Since we all want our children to succeed, it stands to reason that more people developing curriculum and/or publishing companies should be presenting both sides of this issue if they wish what is best for these young adults in the vast majority of university settings.

 

 

asta

[Tammy]

It must be getting close to a full moon...LOL!

[Dayle in Guatemala]

I do teach my dc both sides of an issue (ie: evolution/creation, different religions and their beliefs, etc.) because of the fact that they will be in a secular/humanist world with a worldview different from mine. They may develop a worldview different from mine--mine is different from my parents in some ways as well.

 

But, I use materials written from a worldview which I support because I want God to be relevant to my children and their lives. God is relevant. We make Him, by our own actioins and thoughts, unrelevant. I don't want to put God into a box and say, "Well, He's relevant here in Biblical studies, but, He really doesn't have a place when we read Shakespeare so we'll leave Him out of it." I personally believe that God is relevant to whatever I do in my life, secular or religious. He just is.

 

I think it makes them good thinkers to be able to see how what we believe fits in with what other religions teach. It's actually pretty open-minded of me!;)

 

I don't want my dc to "drink the Kool-aid" of anything. They are intellegent, bright, well-spoken, compassionate human beings and I'm not concerned about them making good choices. I don't think it's "drinking the Kool-aid" to teach my dc what we believe. I don't use that phrase when athiests or secular-humanists teach their children their beliefs. I don't accuse them of being close-minded. I would expect the same respect as well. I expect parents to pass on their views. That's parenting. When we homeschool we take it to another level. But, that's to be expected. I doesn't bother me.

 

I would hope that I'm teaching my children to respect others' beliefs and respectfully discuss differences with others. I would also hope that others are teaching their children the same.

[phathui5]

I just wanted to note that although Pathway is published for the Amish market (hence no people are pictured), it doesn't have any religious content at least through 3rd grade. There are no Bible stories at all.

 

While the content isn't Bible stories, it does all teach character qualities that would be in line with biblical teaching. I remember dd reading one in the first grade reader last week about helping Mother with chores. Ds had ones in his second grade reader last year about telling the truth.

[asta]

I do teach my dc both sides of an issue (ie: evolution/creation, different religions and their beliefs, etc.) because of the fact that they will be in a secular/humanist world with a worldview different from mine. They may develop a worldview different from mine--mine is different from my parents in some ways as well.

 

But, I use materials written from a worldview which I support because I want God to be relevant to my children and their lives. God is relevant. We make Him, by our own actioins and thoughts, unrelevant. I don't want to put God into a box and say, "Well, He's relevant here in Biblical studies, but, He really doesn't have a place when we read Shakespeare so we'll leave Him out of it." I personally believe that God is relevant to whatever I do in my life, secular or religious. He just is.

 

I think it makes them good thinkers to be able to see how what we believe fits in with what other religions teach. It's actually pretty open-minded of me!;)

 

I don't want my dc to "drink the Kool-aid" of anything. They are intellegent, bright, well-spoken, compassionate human beings and I'm not concerned about them making good choices. I don't think it's "drinking the Kool-aid" to teach my dc what we believe. I don't use that phrase when athiests or secular-humanists teach their children their beliefs. I don't accuse them of being close-minded. I would expect the same respect as well. I expect parents to pass on their views. That's parenting. When we homeschool we take it to another level. But, that's to be expected. I doesn't bother me.

 

I would hope that I'm teaching my children to respect others' beliefs and respectfully discuss differences with others. I would also hope that others are teaching their children the same.

 

Thank you for your response, Dayle, this is exactly what I was asking!

 

 

asta

[Peek a Boo]

Since I seem to be somewhat less politically correct than many on this board would like, please let me clarify and correct any misconceptions on my point.

 

First, for anyone I may have offended, I’d like to explain that I come from a community were the “drinking the kool-aid†is commonly used and is not considered offensive regardless of the context. A sincere apology for this was not my intent.

 

well, I'll sit on the UN-pc bench with you.

the reality is that many of our slang statements ARE derived from extreme situations. One can look up "nazi" and see that one needs to understand any statements in context to determine whether the Nazis from the Holocaust are what is being referred to, or the state of being a very-controlling idea/program/person. I guess it might be too soon for some to be using "drink the kool-aid" but I've used it too.

 

Therefore I’ll rephrase the sentence in question to open this up for an intellectual vice emotional discussion.

 

I don't think one has to believe in evolution, but the argument "it's not true!" would inevitably lead to public ridicule and academic failure in any non-religious university lecture hall. Since we all want our children to succeed, it stands to reason that more people developing curriculum and/or publishing companies should be presenting both sides of this issue if they wish what is best for these young adults in the vast majority of university settings.

 

I think Tutor explained this very well. Most people who are NOT interested in studying Creation science tend to think it's just about saying "that's not what the Bible says so there!" Creation science includes an in-depth look at what is involved in the ToE and its faults --you won't see that very much in secular texts ;-)

 

The fact is that there ISN't really a need for new curriculum: most high school homeschoolers are using either easily-accessible high school or college texts if they don't want a text w/ religious ideas.

 

As for using religious math texts, I think dhudson stated it best:

 

I use material that is God-honoring. Religious is a term that I would prefer to stay away from, it brings to mind something that we do versus being who we are at the core. However, I want my children to understand that God is a part of everything, He is in history, science, literature, and He created that laws that govern math. That's why I don't choose to teach Bible or theology separate. Imho, theology and Bible play a huge part in every other subject so it should be taught as a cohesive whole. I want them to see God's hand in the world around them. Does everything I use have Bible verses attached? No, we use some secular materials because it is better for our family than the alternate Christian materials.

 

i would add that basing your understanding of religion/ theology based on one person's definition be taken w/ a grain of salt, and understand that not everyone ELSE agrees with that :)

 

I would actually say that one's personal belief is FAITH, the way we express that faith corporately is RELIGION, and in depth studying of religious and faith ideas that shape our relationship w/ God is theology.

Religious materials are just put forth for people who are already familiar w/ that particular way of expressing their faith. Do you attend a church? One "drank the koolaid" long before the program was even considered if you want to think of it that way.

There's a lot of religious curriculum that i won't use because i don't agree w/ their doctrinal stances in the first place.

 

You might also want to consider that one needn't be AMAZED at seeing math problems worded differently, lol! If youare prepping themfor the Real World, then it might be handy to know that there's a LOT of Christian materials out there. ;)

[Dayle in Guatemala]

You're welcome!:001_smile:

[Dayle in Guatemala]

 

As for using religious math texts, I think dhudson stated it best:

 

I use material that is God-honoring. Religious is a term that I would prefer to stay away from, it brings to mind something that we do versus being who we are at the core. However, I want my children to understand that God is a part of everything, He is in history, science, literature, and He created that laws that govern math. That's why I don't choose to teach Bible or theology separate. Imho, theology and Bible play a huge part in every other subject so it should be taught as a cohesive whole. I want them to see God's hand in the world around them. Does everything I use have Bible verses attached? No, we use some secular materials because it is better for our family than the alternate Christian materials.

 

 

 

 

:iagree:I love this!

[LNC]

I personally chose CLE for math, LA and reading bc of the academic content primarily. I was blown away by their math at a homeschool conference: rigorous, spiral, I like how they taught place value, I loved the flashcard system, the integrated drills, word problems etc. Then I added in the LA I switched from R&S,which I chose bc of the WTM), bc of the workbook & spiral approach. CLE Reading is excellent - the scope and sequence is unlike anything else on the market.

 

That said, my daughter asked to switch from Spelling Workout to Christian Liberty Press Spelling workbooks after book 1 -when she was only 5yo. She loved the look of the books and wanted a book from a Christian publisher bc we were free to choose that if we wanted, so why not! :). I loved the rigorous, phonetic approach to spelling. And what can I say, I love using workbooks!

 

So, when I look at all of our curriculum we do have almost all "Christian curricula", but it is all excellent academically as well!

Edited April 6, 2009 by LNC

[Audrey]

It must be getting close to a full moon...LOL!

 

 

I thought the same thing and yep... it is close. :lol:

[Janet in WA]

 

On top of that, part of me really wonders what a couple of generations of religiously homeschooled (as opposed to homeschooled with religion) youth are going to face if/when they go to (non-religious) colleges.

I think most of us appreciate your concern. But you know, many homeschoolers aren't preparing their students for non-religious colleges. Many homeschool graduates go right on to private Christian colleges. And as for the rest of us whose children have gone on to non-religious colleges -- they've done just fine.

[OnTheBrink]

I agree with whomever said God is in everything, and I like my curriculum to reflect that, but, otoh, I don't need a math book to always refer to the Bible for every lesson or math problem. My dd realizes that everything: math, science, language, history, etc, is a creation of God and has His hand in it, so we don't necessarily need all the curriculum to keep reminding us of that.

 

However, just because we're conservative Christians doesn't mean we ignore what the world teaches or believes. We teach it and examine it, but from our own Christian world view. I think it's rare, actually, that Christians would ignore the ToE completely, especially Christians who expect their dc to live in the world as adults and function in it. I think it's more the insular sects that might ignore worldly teachings on history or science, because their dc will grow up to live in their insular sect (I'm thinking the Amish, or maybe those groups like the FLDS who live in compounds).

 

Anyway, the bottom line for me is, I buy and use what works best for my dd; what either reflects, or at least doesn't counter, our world view; and what has proven to be sound academically.

[katemary63]

There have been private Christian schools that for years and years have produced scholars that have navigated the college life successfully being taught out of God-honoring materials so why would Christian home schoolers be less successful at it?

 

Great point! Hard to argue with that!