Collision

Last night I was watched the documentary Collision with my husband and a whole host of college students. (Lots of fun!)

The movie is a documentary of a discussion concerning whether Christianity is good for the world. The debate is between anti-theist Christopher Hitchens and well-respected Christian Douglas Wilson. It was well-done for the most part. (My main criticism is in the actual filming….sound quality is poor in some scenes and camera movement is too busy at times.) Both men are well-educated and able to speak at a philosophical level that was intellectually invigorating. Neither was afraid to poke a little fun at the other’s beliefs which added some great comic relief. They spoke in different venues which provided an opportunity to see more of their personalities.

Things I liked about the debate:
1. I enjoyed the hard questions that were put to Douglas Wilson. I loved to hear him answer, not with an “all the answers” attitude but with factual discrepancies in the presupposition of the actual question and in the axioms from which the question was asked. In other words, the anti-theist has some holes in his logic!
2. I really like the demeanor of both men….very professional, very knowledgeable, very kind even when difficult things were said.
3. I loved that the Bible can stand the “heat” of criticism. The Bible is a complex set of literature. It cannot be easily tossed aside as an ancient “fairy tale” book. It can stand up under literary criticism. Douglas Wilson on more than one account was able to point out how quickly Hitchens dismissed a particular passage but in so doing missed the point altogether.
4. I loved that I was challenged to think better, to read more, to study harder, and to engage more. I really do enjoy learning and I love it when I am highly motivated to learn. I totally plan to read Hitchens’ books, some more C.S. Lewis, and some more of Wilson but most of all, I plan to study my Bible more!
5. I liked the last remarks!

www.bondedtogether.wordpress.com

Suzuki Style of Teaching/Learning

I am linking a website here that explains how Mr. Shinichi Suzuki came to develop a system of teaching music to very young children with astoundingly successful results.  This method has been applied to several areas of study as well.  My favorite aspects of this style of learning are that it includes the importance of the parents and that it applies to all children.

Thoughts On Education and Educating

This week I was able to attend a conference for parents who are mentoring their children’s education. It was an all day affair and was very inspirational and helpful to me as I needed some time to focus on the upcoming school year.  It also provided some great food for thought that I have been chewing on since I attended on Wednesday.  One of my favorite speakers was there, Andrew Pudewa, most known for writing a curriculum called The Institute for Excellence in Writing.  (He is a great communicator….use of humor, personal stories, and challenging information makes the time slip by very quickly.)  I want to summarize one of presentations because it provided clarity for me about what I am doing as I enter the high school years with my daughter Rebekah.  (For those of you who might read this and not know me, I am preparing to mentor Rebekah’s high school years.  She will study at home as opposed to the traditional classroom and as for socialization, by far the most common objection to home study, she is well-connected now in sports and has enough friends to keep her on facebook for hours if we would allow it!)

Mr. Pudewa stated there are three forms of education.

1.  The conveyor belt — the form used in public and most private educational classrooms.  The curriculum of this model is textbooks.  The methodology is lecture.  The goal is what to think.  The result is a job or entry to college.  This model only leaves a small amount of room for individualism and for speed of learning.  You have to learn what is in “the box” for your grade on the belt and you have to do so at the predetermined speed of the belt.  In some cases it provides a boring approach to learning and limited opportunities for actual study (you don’t need study because you have the textbook with all the information that you “need” to get the “grade.”)

Of course he is generalizing above, and did remark that their are some amazing teachers in this country but even so are limited by “standards” determined without regard to WHO is in their classroom. While I would add that the conveyor belt is not all bad because it is the only way some can get any education,  I do agree that it has serious limits and that you can graduate from the belt and be pretty empty-headed with no serious thoughts about life-time learning.

2. The Professionalism Model – this model was practiced in America years ago, some call it the apprenticeship model.  It is still practiced today but by a very few people.  In the model the curriculum is case studies.  The methodology is competition (learn to be the best in your field so that you will offer the best service and make the most money).  The goal is when to think (particularly in your field) and the result is a career. This model has the obvious advantage that a person could invest in the area of his/her interest and spend quality time learning what is helpful and appropriate to a specific field.  Possibly this model could make a comeback in America because of the level of specialization needed in so many fields.

3. The Leadership Model – this model is not practiced as much in America.  The curriculum is classics (not necessarily old books but books that are written by great minds).  The methodology is mentoring (someone to hold you accountable to study and to provide some direction based on your interest and possibly find some tutors to aid your questioning).  The goal is how to think and the result is leadership.

The above comments are primarily from Mr. Pudewa’s speech which are based on a book called A Thomas Jefferson Education. From here forward are the thoughts that I have been thinking through in the past few days.

I agree that the conveyor belt is not optimal.  I went through the conveyor belt and graduated with a shallow education.  If not for the model of self-learning provided by my parents, who do not have college degrees but are much more educated than many with them, I would have continued to be a rather shallow thinker.  I did not choose the conveyor belt for my children but the decision was not easy because it goes against what is “normal.”

The apprenticeship model is difficult in America because the “system” doe not recognize experience like it does degrees.  I like the idea but would want it to be in conjunction with the leadership model.

The final model is most attractive to me for several reasons.  I like freedom. ( Though I struggled with the loss of a career at times in my life…my closest friends know this about me, I really do enjoy that I manage my own time.) I have really learned to love investigating things.  I like to study and I like to push my kids to study.   I love having my kids around me even when they are driving me crazy! I like having flexibility in learning though it has been difficult for me for it to be ok to deviate from “the schedule that I chiseled into stone.”  I really like choosing who can help my children with their educational journey…not stuck with burned-out, just-drawing -a -paycheck teacher/tutors! However I see problems with this being the general form of education in THIS country at THIS time for several reasons.  People don’t have time to be mentors because they need to make money (we have definitely sacrificed to live on one income).  People don’t want to be mentors to their children because they want to pursue a career (and I have really dealt with inner struggle over this one).  People don’t have the self-discipline to actually study at home….tragic but true.  People don’t have vision for what mentoring should look like.  People need accountability but many don’t think they do.

So my final thought is that we must continue to have freedom in this country to pursue whatever form of education is best for our family lifestyle.  The investment we make in our kids must be personal choice so I am going to conclude with an advertisement for my next blog post…..is the right to choose an education style for your family in danger in America?

I’m off to email a friend about the order of 9 American novels for Bekah to read….so much fun!

www.bondedtogether.wordpress.com

Federal Money for Education but with Required Mandates

Here is an article about an extra 5 billion for schools if they will do what Washington wants them to do. At the surface this looks great (well, I mean if you don’t consider the fact that the federal government is worse than broke) because it looks like D.C. has the concerns of our children at heart. And to be fair, maybe some do BUT, whose children are these and who makes the BEST decisions for them? I am really concerned about someone in D.C. deciding what is appropriate for kids to learn in my neighborhood. Education should be a STATE AND LOCAL issue and it should be heavily influenced by parents. Where are the parents these days? We cannot afford to send our kids out the door and never check to see if they are learning to read, write, and calculate! We have to talk to them about their futures, their dreams, and the road to get there. We cannot pass the responsibility to D.C. while we run around chasing the stupid American dream to collect stuff.

Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Psalm 127: 3

Proposition 8 Upheld

It was an amazing day in CA as the court decided whether to uphold the will of the majority of the voters.   The will of the people prevailed. (To me it is sad that we have to have the courts decide if the people are allowed to voice their opinions through voting!)

A temporary victory.  And why is it a victory? Let me just say very clearly that it is not a victory because it denies anyone a right. Proposition 8 DOES NOT deny rights. No matter how many times the homosexuals march in the streets, carry signs, give interviews and blog about it; they are WRONG about being denied rights! They have the right to pursue happiness with whomever they like, in any matter they like. What they have been denied is the right to infringe on the majority by insisting that their CHOICES be condoned by the majority.

So why is it a victory? Is is a victory for education. If our society recognizes homosexual union as marriage, then we will be obligated to teach in the public classroom that it is an acceptable alternative to heterosexual marriage. However, MANY do not view it as an acceptable alternative but, in fact,  a destructive alternative.

I know that many homosexuals want to turn this whole argument into “hate.” I see why they want that, it engenders sympathy. However, I am sympathetic to their problems; I don’t HATE homosexuals nor have any ill-will for them BUT I do not agree with their lifestyles and I refuse to be defined by them as a hateful person because of it.

I call it a temporary victory because they will continue to press the issue.  We must continue to press the issue too.

I press the issue not because I want homosexual people to be denied the right to be happy but because I do not want my grandchildren taught that homosexuality is an acceptable alternative to heterosexuality.