Home Schooling, Private Schools or Public Education

[reigningfish]

This is a topic I'd like to open up for discussion.

Some Christians feel it's best to send our kids to public school. After all, we can't shelter them too much from the world or they'll end up not being able to defend their beliefs.

Some prefer Christian private schools: Conventional education by trained teachers -PLUS- a moral standard we agree with.

Some prefer home schooling: The ultimate in sheltering, but also lends itself to high academic performance if done correctly.

Yes, I realize that was a lot of generalization. But I'd like to get some community feedback to spur me to deeper thought on the issue.

What do you think?

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

our family has chosen to homeschool.

I have heard the reasonig many times of not sheltering our children and I do not find any good reasoning for that. No offence to anyone who finds that good. Here is why

People are ok with shelteing their children from certain things, like drugs, pornography etc.. but they do not want to shelter them from " the world". Because of this children at very young ages get exposed to other children whom on a normal basis you would not allow in your home to play with your child and influence them. For example, my oldest son began in school and we pulled him out in the second grade. By that time, he was in class with children who swore regularly, and used not only profanity but sexual terms. My son saw a chair thrown at a teacher and teachers disrespected. etc.... Now when your child goes to school they are mixed with all these other children by the age of 5. How is a child suppose to stop themselves from hearing and learning about those things and being exposed to them when they are 5 or 10 yrs old?

Secondly, it makes more sence to raise them right, with their exposure to " the world" growing as parents see fit as they grow in understanding being taught what is right and true and good before expecting them to deal with what is bad and wrong and evil.
It does not make sence to throw someone with no knowledge- who we want to do good- into a world who will tare them apart and laugh, crush them and not care and expect this to not influence the child with the excuse that it will stengthen them. i would say, NO it will harm them, and then it will confuse them.

Also people send their children away for 8 hours a day sometimes with bus rides and all we are looking at 9 hours a day learning the worlds ways being influenced and taught how to talk act think feel desire, during that 9 hours, by people we have not approved, in situations we cannot contain and then we are with our children maybe 4 or 5 hours a night AT BEST often much less than that, and expect that they will be more influenced by our mintues with them then by the 9 hours a day with peers. We are talking about them being out of our sight for 45 hours a week under constant training in worldliness, and being with us 25 hours on week days. Then we have to consider them going to friends houses, us being busy etc...


And ALL flesh is carnal even chidlrends. Flesh is attracted, lured seduced by the world and the things in it. So our children will naturally want to partake of some of those things that we would never allow at home.

Now any of us who grew up in public school know, how long was it before another kid snuck a playboy to school to show the other boys at lunch? Or before the girls started talking about boys, before someone offered us a smoke. Before we started to swear at recess and this is mild. By the time I made it to middle school I already knew girls getting drunk, high, and sleeping around. That was by 11 yrs old! And that was 20 yrs ago! how bad is it today?

It is possible to raise your children right, at home, not expecting the world to raise them for us.(and not to mention the lies the schools teach them) and give them slighty more and more exposure to the world as they grow older and we feel they can handle it.

 

[reigningfish]

People are ok with shelteing their children from certain things, like drugs, pornography etc.. but they do not want to shelter them from " the world". Because of this children at very young ages get exposed to other children whom on a normal basis you would not allow in your home to play with your child and influence them. For example, my oldest son began in school and we pulled him out in the second grade. By that time, he was in class with children who swore regularly, and used not only profanity but sexual terms. My son saw a chair thrown at a teacher and teachers disrespected. etc.... Now when your child goes to school they are mixed with all these other children by the age of 5. How is a child suppose to stop themselves from hearing and learning about those things and being exposed to them when they are 5 or 10 yrs old?

That is a very good point.

 

[Free]

I went to a private school for grades 1-3 and public for the rest. Most everyone that graduated from that private school that I knew were just as worldly as any that I graduated with in the public system. Too much sheltering can be just as bad as too little. But I'm none the worse for wear since it was what I learned at home after school that made the difference.

I think a secular private school with a classical education (not sure what the correct term is) would be the best.

 

[handy]

Interesting that this subject is first in General Talk. I logged on just to say that I won't be around much anymore as I'm now home-schooling our 7th grade daughter.

We pulled her from school because of academic reasons, she failed the first two quarters in all but 2 classes, brought her grades up just a bit in the 3rd quarter, only to have them plunge again.

But, we were seeing a lot of the impact of the "world" on her as well. A little more time at home to instill some more discernment won't be a bad thing at all.

I guess the bottom line is that one's children are human just like everyone else: They will either seek to serve and obey the Holy Spirit, or they will rebel against the Holy Spirit. I'm not sure that the idea that sending children to public school is going to make them more sinful, we are all born with the propensity to sin, all of us. If they seek to serve God, they will continue to do so in a more "worldly" environment. If they are going to rebel, they will do so, no matter how sheltered or protected one keeps them. I speak this from family experience.

However, it is somewhat easier to keep unwanted things out of the home if the kids aren't being exposed to them on a daily basis. Especially the younger kids. I know that if our local school wasn't so small, and most of the kids there from Christian families and the type of kids we want to have our kids around, I would have kept homeschooling the kids from day one.

We'll do what's best academically for our kids, which, for now, for our daughter, is homeschooling. Next fall, if she is doing better, she will be able to go to a different school, where she can be educated in a way that I just won't be able to provide for her here at home. There is a strong group of Christian kids at that school, with whom she can "hang" with, and hopefully be spurred in her walk with. But, if that turns out to be a total failure as well, then she'll come back home. I'm not exactly an idiot and can definitely teach her to be an adult equipped to handle being in the workforce.

 

[Cheyenne K]

I don’t have children of my own and won’t for a while, but I can definitely say there are some very big downsides to public education. First and foremost being how overly secular it has become to the point where schools no longer have freedom of religion, but rather freedom from religion - Christianity in particular. I enjoy school, but it annoys me that there are things being taught that everyone else seems to be able to disagree (or agree) with that I can’t because my opinion is Christian and therefore “offensive.†Along with this comes with how ridiculous teaching has gotten regarding certain subjects (evolution, abortion, homosexuality, etc.)
For instance, this passing week was dubbed “Respect For All Week.†During this week, the freshmen were all brought down to see a series of skits about respect. Sounds all nice and dandy. However, one of the plays was about accepting homosexuality/homosexuals. First off, it was mandatory to go to the assembly; I had no choice in the matter. Secondly, a school is for education; not to teach values that should be up to the parents to teach. It’s one thing to have a Gay Straight Alliance after school, which was requested by a group of students and is not mandatory to go to. It is another to have an assembly that is mandatory and to do this. While I don’t believe homosexuality is right, I will tolerate homosexuals. They are sinners as am I. Hate the sin; not the sinner. However, tolerance id different from acceptance and the school was not in the right to have that done.
Aside from moral and Christians standpoints, the value of education has decreased immensely. The curriculum itself has been incredibly watered down. I have seen a huge decline in the difficulty of state tests since I first started taking them. Last year, even my English teacher said that the tests were so easy that her classes with extended time due to mental handicaps finished before the standard time was even up. And in the classrooms, things are even worse. I have ninth graders in my English class that didn’t know the meaning of “reluctant.†I have had a boy in my honors living environment - not biology; biology had a more advanced curriculum and you had to know more for it - ask the teacher why a two-year-old could not get pregnant and what would be wrong with it. Then the fact that the arts and electives are slowly being taken from schools. I have to say that between the lack of respect being taught to kids, leading to them being more disruptive in class, and what has been done to the system, it can barely be called an education anymore.

However, there is a plus side to public education, I have to admit. There are more programs than home schooling. Right now, I am part of the fencing team, which I never would have been in if not for public schools. It allows children to pick up skills in areas they would not have otherwise. And it does not cost much, or sometimes anything at all. In some ways, it does allow children to be more cultured.
As far as Christian principles go, if the child makes it through school completely unfazed in their beliefs and faith in God, that is a huge plus side. I have to say that school provides one of the biggest challenges to my belief out of anything I have ever done, between the attitudes of other teenagers and what we are taught. Keeping hold of their faith will definitely strengthen them. Besides, I often wonder that if a person is too sheltered (not all cases of home schooling, mind you, but some) how their faith will be. Will the culture shock wind up changing them for the worse, should this occur? Once exposed It also allows a perspective of sorts. In public schools, there are many different types of people and many different opinions as opposed to home schooling. It allows a person to gain a thorough insight on various issues without doing much. This could help in many areas of life, particularly in matters of God. If a person can see into where a person of different faith is coming from, it may help in bringing them to the Lord.

So in many ways public schooling can be harmful, but it does have some benefits. I think that children should be exposed to both types of schooling, given the chance. Perhaps home schooling up to a certain age, upon which they are granted a choice of what they want to do.

 

[jasoncran]

fencing who have thought, eppee, sabre and the one other foil? foil is the hardest to learn and compete with. very technical.

 

[Cheyenne K]

fencing who have thought, eppee, sabre and the one other foil? foil is the hardest to learn and compete with. very technical.

Yep. Foil is very difficult to learn. I haven’t any experience with either eppee or sabre yet, as I am only beginning this year. Though there are many technicalities to it and many techniques to learn. Especially in regards to style. I have the bad habit of making very grand gestures when they are supposed to be small and controlled.
Though it does bring me to another plus side of public schools. Space. Our team is both capable and able(forced) to use a gym, run up to the third floor and back down several times, do two or more laps around the third floor, torture - I mean, pre-fencing warm ups, and fencing on multiple strips in the same building with easy access to everything.

 

[jasoncran]

that is normal in any fighting art. if i recall the tip is pointed at the opponent and many parries and blocks are used. parrying isthe best as it setup the reposte, imho

of course the parry has a disadvatange in that the attacker can counter it by faking you or seeing you start to parry and withdrawal the attack and find another area to hit.

 

[Cheyenne K]

that is normal in any fighting art. if i recall the tip is pointed at the opponent and many parries and blocks are used. parrying isthe best as it setup the reposte, imho

of course the parry has a disadvatange in that the attacker can counter it by faking you or seeing you start to parry and withdrawal the attack and find another area to hit.

Yeah. Parry and repost is not only best a good portion of the time, but necessary. Otherwise, hitting them will often not count depending on the move before and the technicalities of what you did. Beating the attacker’s sword is another thing that is necessary if you are not on the defense at a particular point in time. It is irritating, but it gives the sport more challenge. Same with the moves on part of the attacker in regards to my former statement.
Unfortunately, this challenge has also given my friend something to tease me about after winning our last match.

 

[jasoncran]

funny how fighting arts are soo similiar. that is manly gauging and distraction used to set up an attack.

arnis based on fencing has some things like what are you doing.

the spainards and all the other europeans used to fence as it was an art of comabat.

the filopinos learned fencing from the spanish and adapted their idea of sabre and dagger techinique.

 

[Cheyenne K]

funny how fighting arts are soo similiar. that is manly gauging and distraction used to set up an attack.

arnis based on fencing has some things like what are you doing.

the spainards and all the other europeans used to fence as it was an art of comabat.

the filopinos learned fencing from the spanish and adapted their idea of sabre and dagger techinique.

I noticed that too. I have a friend who was joining a team at her school, which has fencing but Japanese style. I forget the term used for it; it may be one of the ones you listed. But I was surprised at how alike the two were, given they were/are practiced in two separate parts of the world. Also now watching any movies that are set in the earlier middle ages, I can definitely see the similarities to fencing today.
What I imagine must have been confusing though was before lames and body chords came into play and the fencers simply used blue chalk to mark the white when they got a hit and make the determinations from there.

 

[jasoncran]

kendo, that is a little diferent as the shinai is used and it has more ties to the art of kubudo(cutting with the katana and wakisashai) and also iado(drawing the sword). these arts have archery and some other weapons with them

kendo aslo uses the bokken if i'm correct :crazy

 

[Cheyenne K]

kendo, that is a little diferent as the shinai is used and it has more ties to the art of kubudo(cutting with the katana and wakisashai) and also iado(drawing the sword). these arts have archery and some other weapons with them

kendo aslo uses the bokken if i'm correct :crazy

I remember my friend actually explaining a bit of that to me. Part of it is also due to the cultural differences from what I can understand. The Europeans and Japanese in particular have similar, but very different codes involving fighting and honor. From what I can gather, it’s also a lot more confusing than fencing foil. I would like to learn it someday though, as it definitely seems interesting.

 

[jasoncran]

we are off topic btw, my fault

i think that homeschooling where to give your child a good education should be up to the parent to decide without any legalistic burden placed on them.

 

[Caroline H]

Whoa guys, that was waaaaaaaaaaaay off topic :nag

I also think that it should be up to the parents, as not everyone has the determination it takes to homeschool their children. If you're not committed it won't work. But, my reasons for wanting to homeschool my future children are the same as has been mentioned, ie. more control over what they're exposed to, more detailed attention in their learning, and you can tailor the curriculum to each child's needs and work at their pace. More importantly than all of that, however, is this. Do I expect my children to spend 9 hours a day immersed in the secular world, with all of it's values (which are contrary to mine and my husbands and to the Bible's) and vices, and yet still be "apart" from the world? The Bible calls us as Christians to be apart from the world, we are in it but not of it. But if a child spends more time being influenced by things contrary, and even hostile, to what God teaches us, then what they get taught at home is always going to be secondary. Not all public or private schools are alike, I know this, and so again I say it should be the parents' choice. But I do truly believe that as Christians, we are wholly responsible for bringing up our children for the Lord, and if we send them to any school, we had better be educated as to what that school will teach them.

 

[Timf]

Years ago I had a friend who had children going to college. He told me that for a student loan there was a new requirement that he attend a special class. In the class he was told that the loan had to be repaid. I had to laugh. It sounded like something our government would do. After decades of finding that student loans were not repaid, they came to the conclusion that it was because no one had told the parents that the loans had to be repaid. This is an example of what I call the "educational model". This perspective assumes that all problems can be explained by a lack of information such that having a class or raising awareness solves the problem. In reality, the problem would be solved by having an enforced penalty for those who do not repay the loan.

There are many other myths about what is called education. Even the word education places the emphasis on the process of presenting information rather than on the process of learning. In truth, bright kids learn more and dim kids learn less. The biggest myth about education is that it is a treasure that can be given to anyone. Thus programs like "Head start" (a proven failure) and No child left behind" are constantly dragged out to pour more and more money in the hands of the government and for education to be a tool of more and more government control.

The reason educators hate measurement and testing is that it exposes them as the frauds they are. They don't like voucher programs because it would leave them with the dim kids and it would prove even more that they are unable to "teach" those who can't learn.

For thousands of years learning has been accomplish through apprenticeship. Modern scientific mandatory public classroom instruction accomplishes the following.

1. Isolate the child from exposure to Christian culture. (the only place where the name of Jesus is forbidden to be mentioned)
2. Expose the child to the religion of secularism (the worship of man in general and self in particular)
3. Destroy the family by removing children.
4. Telling women they are too stupid to raise the children God gave them. (God didn't think they were too stupid)
5. Destroy initiative. (12 years of being told to shut up, sit down, and do what you are told has to have some effect)
6. Early sexualization of children.
7. Social dependency. (making sure children are unable to relate to anyone older or younger than they are).

The public institution of prison and the public institution of school operate in some very similar ways. Real force is used by the inmates and the staff is helpless to intervene.

There are some parallels to giving your child to the State to raise and handing him over to Molech. A second income can provide more material benefits, but as someone once said, "What shall it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul". We shall answer to God for the children He gave us. Should we tell Him that we cared so little for His gift that we sent them somewhere where they would be processed to resist retaining even the knowledge of God.

Public school is evil and of Satan. Christian private school is just a slightly less harmful copy of this corrupt "system". Collective education helps accomplish his goal of collectivizing the whole world. Since he can't be everywhere at once, he needs a collectivized world to leverage his influence. The family was God's model for how we should live. The modern collection of four roommates that calls itself a family is really a shared dwelling where four individual members of different collectives keep their personal belongings.

Satan needs communism and socialism to advance his plans. Where else could he get people to help him than those raised in a collective. Last year the government was 25% of the economy. Next year it is anticipated that the government will be 30% of the economy. One you add in health care and the other elements of the economy at the present rate, we should be a completely communist state in fourteen years.

Like the Soviet Union, we will be bankrupt, families destroyed, men drunk with alcohol, and women with ten to fifteen abortions. It is sad that a country that once knew Christ, decided that trading Him in for a government provider would be an improvement.

Public education has been the single most effective tool for destroying families, removing faith in Christ, the elevation of communism, and the destruction of our culture. We have blinded ourselves by rejecting Him who is truth and we have gathered to ourselves teachers who tell us that everything is getting better and better.

As our nation plunges into the darkness of Christlessness, those of us who still see the light of truth and want to cling to it will have to seek out those few others who see this present world for the evil system it is. We need to offer encouragement and comfort to each other as the world seeks to extinguish the light of Christ and truth.

The time has passed to make a break with the world. Leaving your children in the hands of the world is worse than irresponsible, it is cruel.

 

[jasoncran]

uh, and godless capitalism is better? not all parents could teach. my wife cant as she has no ged, and never graduated high school.

i do agree with the statement by caroline.

 

[Timf]

Actually capitalism and communism are not in opposition. You can make a case that capitalism should be considered economic collectivism. It seems a clever plan for Satan to have supposedly opposite systems converge. As corporations continue to get larger and larger, they eventually merge with the government.

The idea that someone needs to be a high school or college graduate to teach is fundamentally unsound. It may be a legal reality in some states, but a joy and an enthusiasm for learning is more important than certification by the very system that seeks to advance the Satanic system.

Most home school parents first approach the task with fear and trepidation. After a few years they learn from their own experience that it is not the great mystery that only skilled professionals can accomplish.

Most Christians have been raised in the public school system and cannot conceive that it should be any other way. It is a measure of how successful Satan has been that Christians will actively defend and promote his systems.

I urge Christians to take a critical look at public education and ask themselves how they will explain endorsing it to Jesus. The Bible tells us if we are a friend of the world, we are an enemy of God.

 

[jasoncran]

not to sound like someone who is cruel, but my wife cant divide and multiply very well, always has to ask me

some arent very educated, others are and cant teach
some can and do teach

what good is it to home school when you cant do the basics three r's.

i can. and much more
i have tutored algebra before. i have some calculus as a back ground. math is easy for me. english is where i would have to bone up and then their history.

i dont need calculator all the time to do basic algreba. now if you want to get into the first and second deritives of calculus then you will need a scientific calculator. when graphing finding where the extremiums are then the type of curve. the polynomial may have.