A few weeks ago I ran into a lady who was homeschooled as a child, when she went to college she said that she had to relearn history bc she was taught it from a Chistian point of view. Now, I am totally 100% for teaching a from a Christian view point, but my question to those out there is should we also put a "worldly view point" in with teaching history if we are useing Chirstian base curr.? Would this not help them when they go to college. Please tell me your opinon.
Hmmm. I wonder what curriculum she used. The curriculum I have used in the past has a Christian view point but includes everything that Ems would cover in a public school setting. I guess it all depends on what type of curriculum a parent purchases. History is my favorite subject because it allows me to review what I already learned in school as well as learn information that the system left out.
This is a topic that irks me. It's not just history; it's many subjects. As a trained scientist and Christian, it depresses me no end that some people prefer to teach pseudo-science instead of mainstream science. When homeschooling, we used a Christian curriculum but made it clear to our children where the textbook was making ideological statements instead of factual ones. In retrospect, the Christian high school our children attended adopted a better approach: They used the regular PS textbook but encouraged very thoughtful discussions in class when covering hot topics - no matter what the subject. When my daughter went to university (a Christian university, I might add), she would tell us of several children from 'strict' Christian schools who struggled terribly because they didn't know some of the very basics of 'real' biology. Sadly, many Christian schools of which I am aware have become victims of the new orthodoxy that so-called 'Christian culture' has invented and tries to enforce. Whether history or science or anything else, I feel so sorry for these children. If they later pursue a career related to these subjects, they are going to have do considerable unlearning and relearning so they have the skills and knowledge needed to do their job. That, in turn, is going to make them question their faith - and we should never ever put our children in such a situation. I'm all for understanding the Christian perspective, because it's the very basis of our life and education, but I'm very much against the new orthodoxy. Using only a book (the Bible) that teaches about local kings in a very small region of the world is very blinkered and ignores the history of many great civilizations. Indeed, our faith is strengthened when we realize how God often uses the insignificant and the lowly to achieve his purpose.
i do not know what curr. she was taught from, but I use Christian Liberty Press for my girls and it does have history that ps would teach,but they also have a Bible influence with it.
This year I decided to assemble our history curriculum. The first three quarters were easy enough but I struggled with the last quarter. So I decided to go with Christian Liberty Press as part of the curriculum I already put together. I bought The Middle Ages and will use it along with what I already have. I am not sure if we will make it all the way through but I liked what I read. This is the first time I purchased from CLP.
One of the projects planned is for Ems to make a catapult. Handsome is going to help her of course. Our Lab loves to fetch the ball so Handsome said they will make it so the ball goes to way back of the yard. This will save Handsome's arm and give the dog a workout! LOL
You have to relearn everything anyway. You retain very little from school growing up. Even if you did retain more, college classes go far more in depth. And public school textbooks tend to be very PC and very skeletal, to the point where what is taught in college is so different. College professors generally have their degrees in history and their speciality areas and history is their life. High school history teachers might be sort of in to it, but even so, they are very limited in what they can teach, it is very superficial, and they have to teach such a broad range, not much is really taught or learned. Kids who have learned history from a biblical point of view are often ahead just because they get more in to it and study things more in depth and in a better quality way. I think your friend is just experiencing a grass is greener on the other side syndrome. Plus, it is easier to say someone else is at fault than to admit that a college class can be hard work or such.
I like the way Veritas Press has handled our history thus far. We did Egypt last year and are doing Ancient Greece/Rome this year. Last year, my kids learned all about the ancient Egyptians, including their beliefs and rituals, their daily lives, their pharoahs, etc. As the Bible was impacted by Egypt [think the patriarachs and Moses], those Bible stories were incorporated into the history lesson. I minored in classics/philosophy/logic, so I haven't noticed anything so far that they've lacked and I'm qualified to know if they were.
How do you have a "Christian based" history curriculum, and how would it differ from any other? History is history, seems pretty clear cut.
steve, can you give me an example of what christian type of science is wrongly being taught, we are only beginning our hs journey, and use a christian curric, so im curious as to what some of them are lying about?
i try do use library books as well as my curric for history and science both but because i want them to have a well rounded complete history/science of the world not just bits or angles. I want my kids to have the best, so I choose curric that will give them everything they need. then add to that what I know they need to know as well. We add in movies, story books of time period and everything to get well rounded history.. they know more than their ps counterparts but at least they have a completel history of the world when they graduate.. and my ds18 took entrance tests for College and scored higher than most students that took it.
I went to Christian schools and a Christian college and didn't have a problem. Yet, when I look at history to teach my children I realize how much I was never taught. I asked my dh who went to public school if he learned x, y, or z and he did. Ancient history was not given much attention and all mythology was avoided. So when college testing came around I had no clue about those things. Date fear was always present. I think that is why I never had normal exposure to ancient history. Date fear was also present in science. I am disappointed with a lot of the Christian science products out there as there seems to be that "date fear" and "they are wrong" focus instead of what is observable and measurable in science. I expose my kids to evolution and all points of history and teach them to look at all things critically to determine if something is based on fact or opinion. So much in science is opinion - at least that is what I have learned. Anyway, as the teacher I am learning quite a bit! This year we are digging into ancient history and exploring the oceans in great detail. Looking forward to it!
embassy, dont worry, I went topublic schools in two countries ad two states... there is way more that my children knwo that I never knew!
I very much admire your attitude and approach. If we can teach our children how to consider, question, challenge, and relate everything back to the facts around us, they will not be tempted to simply swallow whatever is presented to them. The really sad thing is that science is not about opinion at all; it's based on concrete facts. It's only when the ideologists on all sides influence the classroom that true learning loses out to personal agendas. If you can help your children to see past that, you'll have done a wonderful job.
Oh dear. I wrote the other day that I would avoid this topic because it always, always, becomes a heated discussion. I never mention it in church, for example, because the new orthodoxy even prevents discussion on this topic. It's the current day taboo, which is so ridiculous. We should be able to discuss everything in a calm and reasoned manner and in light of the facts. So, to avoid any controversy, let me answer in a very specific way. Science is a wild adventure. All the great scientists in history went out and did something bold to see what would happen. This is where the scientific method is so very important. You start with no preconceived ideas and do something. As you do similar things over and over again, you build a model. Over time, your model proves to be true more and more often. If not, you discard it and find another. Over time, your model becomes a good working hypothesis and eventually (when nothing can break it) a theory. This means the following are the very foundations of science: - No preconceived ideology. Fred Hoyle was a brilliant scientist, but he set out to disprove God. The evidence pointed to what we refer to as the 'Big Bang', which means a beginning. He couldn't accept that, so he defined what became the 'Steady State' theory of the universe. After some time, his 'theory' was totally discredited by the evidence around us. This is a classic example of trying to fit the facts to your beliefs, turning science on its head. Several groups are guilty of this today. - Science is experimental. Without hard data, we just play with math. With hard data, we can use math to predict all kinds of wonderful things - that can in turn be tested. Whenever we teach science, we should ensure it's based around practical experiments. This is very important, so a child can base ideas around reality and not ideology. - A theory is something very special. It brings order and processes and patterns to our work. One of the crucial things about a theory is that even one piece of evidence will discredit it. When that happens, we must have the guts to understand we were wrong. People like Einstein and others were ridiculed for breaking with the status quo, but you must when the data proves a theory wrong. - Another key thing about a theory is that it can make accurate predictions. If a theory predicts something and the evidence proves something different, again the theory must be cast out. There are textbooks out that that mix real science with ideology - on both sides of the debate. Atheists use science to make claims about God, which is ridiculous. Some groups publish textbooks based on 'Intelligent Design', the basic premises of which have been disproved beyond doubt. All sides must let go of their preconceived ideas and trust the data. When we do that, we find the nature of God is fantastically wonderful and his personality and creativity is far beyond what our minds can comprehend. To publish books on science that are really about ideology is dishonest and harmful to science. Instead, we should invite students to just go out there, learn, experience, experiment, and have a blast. They'll love science all the more for doing this.
I think that christian curriculum is very leery of turning any religion off of their product so they really omit anything that is controversial in history/social studies and science. I went to private, christian school until 9th grade and transferred to public school in 9th. They did science and history/social studies very well in public school and I can look back and say that had I continued in the private school curriculum I would have been a little clueless on certain topics when I got to college. I had very good history and science teachers in public school and I do think the date issue is avoided in private school. Most private school curriculum is very set in a conservative right viewpoint and doesn't even expose students to other viewpoints. When you have never heard other viewpoints except in the context that they are wrong and immoral and unethical and then you get to college and the whole point is to discuss and question and debate all viewpoints then it is very hard on the student that has little to no exposure of these type of things. I had a hard time transferring in the 9th grade to public school and seeing how different things were talked about and discussed and not discredited. We had several discussions and debates after lectures. I don't think that I would have been ready for that aspect of college lectures had I not been exposed to it in public school.
what do you mean by "the date issue is avoided in private school"? Like time lines and that sort of thing?
No, I mean the literal interpretation of the Bible and young earth theory. In private school, we were taught only one way with the curriculum and any other theory was not taught and if it was it wasn't proven wrong with science or logic. I would say science is more likely to have issues than history. Most private curriculums skirt around anything that doesn't agree with their belief and leave it off. It is very confusing to get older and go to a school whether it be high school or college and everyone else have studied and discussed the theory based on science and you have only studied it based on ideology or religion. History pretty much avoids the prehistoric era and skirts around the times that are questionable. I didn't have near the problem in history as I did science. History was just new information from a different viewpoint or times that we hadn't truly in-depth studied with the private school curriculum. I'm just saying that when you don't truly discuss and debate the different theories with logic and science then it does hinder your childs ability to adapt to an environment in high school or college where it is expected for you to question and debate and reason to find what you believe and what is true and what can't be proven true or false.
