California court: Parents have no constitutional right to home school their children
March 7th, 2008I’m glad to see that Albert Mohler has weighed in on the utter insanity coming from the California, where an appeals court ruled that parents must have teaching credentials to educate their children at home.
As part of the ruling, the court argued that “parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children.”
So now the government is in the business of denying people rights that are not explicitly spelled out in the Constitution? I wonder when they’ll start cracking down on people eating Big Macs, because I don’t find that right in the Constitution, either.
As Mohler noted:
This is a controversy that demands the attention of all parents. After all, if parents have no constitutional right to educate their own children, what other aspects of the parent’s choices for their own children lack protection? This question reaches far beyond educational decisions.
UPDATE: The Home School Legal Defense Association has started a petition for the California Supreme Court to depublish the opinion handed down by the loonies on the appeals court. Please go and add your name to the list. This is serious business, my friends, and something that warrants your time — even if you do not home school your children.
Update posted with a link to a petition for you to sign.
Thanks Tim. This is a huge rights issue. I’ve passed it along and hope others do he same.
crazy, even by California standards
I can understand homeschooling for legitimate purposes like for special needs kids with learning disabilities and such. I think that what most conservative homeschooling parents do in practice is indoctrinate children by teaching them creationism instead of evolution.
It’s been implied that Creationism is true and that it’s scientifically supported by factual evidence. I challenge any creationists reading this to make a non-religious case for creationism. Make your case for creationism using only science. If creationists can’t do this, I think it makes it clear that the term “creation science” is an oxymoron.
I say good for the California. Children should be exposed to the fact of evolution and not raised in ignorance. It’s not fair to them. America needs to raise the standard of education in order to keep up.
Cineaste,
Here you go again, taking this to a creationism versus evolution debate. We get it. You don’t like creationism or ID or any theory that disagrees with with your view that evolution is an irrefutable fact. Understood.
This, however, has to do with parental rights. This decision is too broad in its scope. While this family may not be an ideal case for homeschooling, there are many more that are. My sister-in-law had been homeschooling their kids for years with an Art degree which would not meet the CA standard for educational credentials. She submitted a lesson plan every year to her local school as the state required. She soon found out that her kids were MUCH more advanced in their studies than most of the public school students. She recently had to stop homeschooling for financial reasons. She placed her kids in public schools and they were ahead a grade level.
I always find it strange that failing public schools blame the student’s performance on parents for not setting a good educational environment at home. However, when good parents pull them out and establish a well-balanced, devoted educational environment at home the government cries fouls.
This boils down to one thing: Money. When students are not in school, the district does not get the federal money necessary for them to mismanage and overspend on educational programs that are causing US students to fall further and further behind the rest of the world.
“When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty — to Russia, for instance, where
despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy [sic].”
Abraham Lincoln
Source: August 24, 1855 - Letter to Joshua Speed
I can understand homeschooling for legitimate purposes like for special needs kids with learning disabilities and such.
What would the “and such” be?
How does one discern when home schooling is appropriate and when it is not? By what standard upon which do you base this?
j razz
If parents are going to botch the job of educating their children by not teaching them real science, then why not require certification? Children have a right to an education and this ruling helps make sure it will be a proper education. Good Good Good.
Some homeschoolers are affiliated with private or charter schools, like the Longs, but others fly under the radar completely. Many homeschooling families avoid truancy laws by registering with the state as a private school and then enroll only their own children.
Yet the appeals court said state law has been clear since at least 1953, when another appellate court rejected a challenge by homeschooling parents to California’s compulsory education statutes. Those statutes require children ages 6 to 18 to attend a full-time day school, either public or private, or to be instructed by a tutor who holds a state credential for the child’s grade level.SF Chronicle
Homeschooling is a privilege, not a right. Many homeschoolers are legitimate but many more are set up just because Christians don’t like the curriculum, evolution, in public schools.
I think that what most conservative homeschooling parents do in practice is indoctrinate children by teaching them creationism instead of evolution.
I think that what most liberal public school officials do in practice is indoctrinate children by teaching them philosophical naturalism masquerading as science.
See, two can play that game. But we’ve had our debates about evolutionism vs. creationism, and this thread’s not going there.
What game?
Cineaste,
Since you admit that many homeschoolers “are legitimate,” do you think certification is necessary for those people to be considered legitimate, or do you think they can be legitimate without certification?
I am planning to homeschool my son, who is only 2 years old right now, and I plan to teach him that the theory of evolution exists, just so that he is not ignorant when he reaches college or speaks with peers who are in public schools. But i will teach him with a disclaimer, stating that evolution is only a theory, and therefore, cannot be proved (only true scientists will agree with this; the others are just ignorant) because after all isn’t science purely based on observation?
My reasons for homeschooling actually have nothing to do with evolution (such a one-issue debate anyways, isn’t it, cineaste? ;)). As a Christian, I want my son to learn about faith, Christine doctrine and Jesus Christ along with his academic education.
For me, as a Christian, creationism is based on faith (as is evolution since it cannot be proved), the faith that God created the world in six days and on the seventh day He rested. And as the Bible states, faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen(Hebrews 11:1). However, there is another aspect of creationism named scientific creationism that is actually studied by scientists who are not Christian. It is based on knowledge of DNA, fossils, and other scientific concepts that aren’t even in the Bible. You can check out www.icr.org if you’re really interested.
However, I believe that creationism should be taught as an alternative to evolution, or at least another theory. And if that is not done in schools, students whether Christian or not, remain ignorant.
Now back to the topic at hand, shame on CA, telling parents what they can and cannot do! If only those legislators could take that same approach with the parents of public school students who give a flip about their child’s education or behavior, and require them to have some more involvement.
An underlying issue for this debate is whether the government of California is a creature created by the people of California, or if the people of California are subjects to be molded by the state government (which in this case means a very small number of judges).
Our political philosophy has, in theory, held that a legitimate government is a creature of the people, created by their consent and dedicated to their common good. It would be a very odd thing for such a created entity to take as one of its primary purposes the educational creation of the very people who undergird its legitimacy. And that, in essence, is the corallary to a view that sees parental educational oversight as a privilege rather than a right.
If educational oversight by the state must come, and I think there should be some standards, they should at least come from a state entity that is popularly accountable, such as the legislature (whether evolution is one of these is another story; why devotees of evolution are so worried about creationism is a mystery. It’s not like these kids are going to thwart the evolutionary process. Seems like there is more than one stripe of evangelical).
“God created the world in six days and on the seventh day He rested….
Case in point. This is why I totally agree with CA that parents need certification. This may be legitimate for Bible study, but I don’t think it’s a proper education.
Tim, will you allow me to respond to Kim regarding this? If not, please let her know that she can email me.
My question for Cineaste: How on earth would you know about “most” homeschoolers? How could you possibly know what goes on at the kitchen tables of thousands of people across the country, and how do you have knowledge enough to judge the results?
I school my kids at home. We know several families in our community who also homeschool. I don’t have the moxy to even judge the people I DO know, much less a nation full of a variety of those whom I don’t.
The proof is in the pudding.
“I don’t have the moxy to even judge the people I DO know, much less a nation full of a variety of those whom I don’t.”
Carolyn, I’m not judging you. I’m just looking at the math. The proof is indeed in the pudding.
According to a 2000-2001 Barna survey, [32] [33]. The study indicated that home school parents are 39 percent less likely to be college graduates, 21 percent more likely to be married, 28 percent less likely to have experienced a divorce, and that the household income is 10% below the national average. Barna found that homeschoolers in the U.S. live predominantly in the Mid-Atlantic, the South-Atlantic, and the Pacific states. It found that homeschoolers are almost twice as likely to be evangelical as the national average (15 percent vs 8 percent), and that 91 percent describe themselves as Christian, although only 49 percent can be classified as “born again Christians.” It found they were five times more likely to describe themselves as “mostly conservative” on political matters than as “mostly liberal,” although only about 37 percent chose “mostly conservative”, and were “notably” more likely than the national average to have high view of the Bible and hold orthodox Christian beliefs.
It says the parents are 39% less likely to be a college graduate. In public schools, teachers need a certification to prove they are educated enough to provide a proper education to children. Why shouldn’t parents be certified as well?
“If only those legislators could take that same approach with the parents of public school students who give a flip about their child’s education or behavior, and require them to have some more involvement.”
I have a good friend that teaches K-2 special education at the same public school that my son attends. While she sees a lot of disabilities in her classroom, for the most part she says the issue is a lack of care and involvement on the parents part. This leads to behavioral problems as well as academic shortcomings. However, legislators unfortunately can’t force parents to care about their child’s education which is why for many kids in America public school is their only hope of receiving an education It may be the only time that they are able to interact with adults who do care, care about their grades and performance.
“However, I believe that creationism should be taught as an alternative to evolution, or at least another theory. And if that is not done in schools, students whether Christian or not, remain ignorant.”
My husband and I are both professing Christians as well as public school educated -my husband even received an engineering degree at one of those liberal state universities
. We have a son in first grade public school as well as two at home who will be entering public school soon. They are absolutely educated in creationism. We teach our boys Biblical truths in our home and through our local church. I fail to see how Christian students are ignorant of creationism just because they don’t receive that education in the public school system.
Listen, I absolutely support a parents right to control their child’s education. We attend a church that has a rather large home schooling network. I just don’t agree with the idea that parents of homeschooled children care more about their child’s education. We put a lot of time and effort into homework, school activities, and general conversation about our son’s days in first grade. It is also not uncommon for us to call or send a note to check up on his behavior/academic performance. We also balance that with family devotions, AWANA, children’s church, and Sunday school.
As followers of Christ we have to be careful that we don’t allow this issue to become divisive within our congregations. A child’s schooling is a personal decision, one that should be approached with much consideration, and that decision should be respected among fellow believers as well as the government.
We have a balance of accountability and privacy and freedom. The way the law is written here, your right to homeschool is not based on your educational background, so is not denied based on it either. The kids have to be evaluated once per calendar year and if they are not making progress commensurate with their ability the parent/teacher is put on probation for one year. If at the next evaluation the child is still not progressing according to their ability, you have to put them in a public or private school. I can have them evaluated by standardized tests or by paying a certified teacher to do it.
The above is from a friend of mine who is homeschooling in FL and has homeschooled in both TX and OK.
I wonder why the collegiate statistic is what it is? Almost every home schooled child that I have come across has outperformed their peers. The children quote above references are no exception.
Now, I have come across some families that were homeschooling their children that did not take it seriously and appeared to have done it so they would not be inconvenienced by taking their children to and from school and having to deal with the school teachers and others finding out about what they subjected their children to. And yes, these parents claimed to be Christian, but did not evidence any substance to back up such a statement. (I know of two such families personally).
j razz
Abe - you prove my point. It’s not right for legislators to enforce rules and regulations on parents’ involvement with their children’s education. So, why impose rules on requiring parents to be certified to teach children at home. Either way, it’s imposing on parental rights. I was not implying that parents who homeschool their children care more - I was simply trying to show the absurdity of requiring parental involvement as equal to requiring credentials to teach at home.
As for homeschooling vs. public school, I know plenty of Christian families at my church whose children attend public school and it has never been a divisive issue. Again, it goes back to parental rights and what they see as being best for their children. My church also provides AWANAs, Bible studies and Sunday school for children and youth. Of course, this all begins at home whether children are in public school, private school or homeschool. The majority of teens and young adults who come from Christian homes and remain Christian are those who saw authentic examples of Christianity lived out in their home by their parents.
Kim- I guess I misunderstood your first post as it appears you and I are both saying the same thing.
Emily- (sorry I am can’t figure out how to change the name)
One other quick thing, does anyone know of a place that you can buy books that don’t teach evolution. Our boys love dinosaurs and sea animals but all of the books we own on those subjects support the theory of evolution. I’d love to hear any suggestions!
Here is a quote from Redstate I’m guessing it’s a conservative blog based on the name. Anyway, it sums up this debate nicely…
“On one hand I’m sympathetic to parents who don’t like the public school system and want to home school.
On the other hand I’m concerned that some bat crazy loons who have no ability to properly educate children on how to read, write, add and multiply have no supervision and do not have to pass any qualification exams in order to home school.”
I’d only add biology to read, write and multiply.
“On one hand I’m sympathetic to parents who don’t like the public school system and want to home school.
On the other hand I’m concerned that some bat crazy loons who have no ability to properly educate children on how to read, write, add and multiply have no supervision and do not have to pass any qualification exams in order to home school.”
But what’s wrong with this ruling is that it throws the baby out with the bathwater. It’s the educational equivalent of prohibition. Since some people abuse alcohol, let’s ban it completely. We all know how that worked out.
On the other hand I’m concerned that some bat crazy loons who have no ability to properly educate children on how to read, write, add and multiply have no supervision and do not have to pass any qualification exams in order to home school.”
Would it not make more sense to institute “qualification exams” like FL, OK, and TX (and I assume other states) do as opposed to ban homeschooling altogether? Talk about completely missing the fence!
j razz
Cineaste-
Why is the annual testing to test the child’s progress and the parent’s teaching ability not sufficient?
From what I’ve been reading, they are not banning homeschooling. They are requiring the parents get certified. Teachers need a teaching certification, why not parents as well?
My personal hope is that this certification will require parents to demonstrate a proper knowledge of biology and the sciences, as well as the 3 R’s. I think this decision is so hopeful and progressive. It’s the first really good news I’ve heard on the homeschooling issue.
I disagree with the whole concept of teacher certification in general, even for public schools, so I’m certainly not in favor of requiring parents to be certified.
Oh, and I should add — this business of requiring certification for parents is tantamount to banning homeschooling. What parent is going to take the two years necessary to be certified just to be able to teach their own kid? So yes, it is banning homeschooling — at the minimum for the amount of time that it would require parents to become certified.
If you don’t have certification, you can’t homeschool. That would effectively ban it for those who are not/cannot get certified due to time restrictions, monetary restrictions, health restrictions, etc.
I fail to see the reasoning behind such a move (from a logical standpoint).
j razz
I disagree with the whole concept of teacher certification in general, even for public schools, so I’m certainly not in favor of requiring parents to be certified.
Wow! Why? Shouldn’t we expect public school teachers to have a minimum level of education to make sure they are competent? Without certification, we can end up with a high school dropout teaching our kids, only badly.
What parent is going to take the two years necessary to be certified…
I haven’t heard anything about what the certification requirements for parents are or will be. Are you sure about this 2 year deal? I think the question now is, what will this certification entail?
Cineaste,
Check your e-mail. I’ll send you my rationale. It’s not something I want posted publicly.
On one hand I’m sympathetic to parents who don’t like the public school system and want to home school.
On the other hand I’m concerned that some bat crazy loons who have no ability to properly educate children on how to read, write, add and multiply have no supervision and do not have to pass any qualification exams in order to home school.
The obvious solution - which many states have adopted - is to require regular testing of children to make sure they’re learning. Way before the No Child Left Behind Act made public schools compete by the same rules, my siblings and I were tested every year. And we all routinely scored several grades ahead of where we should have been given our age, despite my brother and I having fairly serious learning disabilities.
My initial judgment after reading the news reports is that this ruling - like a lot of other things that California has come up with - will get tossed out in fairly short order. Still, it’s yet another example of what happens when you let judges write the laws.
Let me add an additional angle to this because of the way that the court ruled, that only “certified” teacher-parents may homeschool. I am very concerned about the propensity that these kinds of regulations have to place what can be an arbitrary stranglehold on professional licensure. Many states are now flirting with putting ideological restrictions on licensure, i.e., if a person does not agree with the political stances of the union / the state department of education / the NCATE folks, then s/he can be denied licensure. So far, most if not all of these cases have been resolved before reaching legal status, but they will continue to pop up until the legal elements are resolved. These stances have nothing to do with teaching excellence or competence, but only with ideological comportment. If, then, a person disagrees with a “dominant” perspective on any hot-button issue, then s/he could be prevented from holding licensure. The same can apply to other licensure areas, like pharmacy, medicine, nursing, and other professional areas. The problem is not with professional licensure, which is a quality control issue. The problem is with ideological assertions unrelated to the profession or which may even transcend the profession (such as certain ethical stances), which are just plain thought control. And that latter reason is why this is just the camel’s nose under the edge of the proverbial tent, which is why the homeschoolers are raising the alarm.
I personally don’t like homeschooling; I think it is another example of Christians in society withdrawing into a sub-culture versus engaging society and being the “salt and light,” But my take on this is that the government shouldn’t be able to say I can’t teach my children on my own if they are able to keep up with what happens in the classroom (in terms of standardized testing, etc.). Roger hit the nail on the head earlier I believe, that at some point, this has become an issue to the CA govt. because of revenue.
As far as the point regarding certification, I’ve had a few teachers in my academic career that if I didn’t know they had to have some sort of certification, would’ve guessed they didn’t. A piece of paper from a university or college does not make you an effective teacher.
Just when I think the general perception of homeschooling has finally shifted in our nation, this type of legislation and resulting discussion ensues. As a homeschool parent I can only close my eyes and sigh upon hearing/reading such narrow and uninformed comments from homescholing critics - most of whom never pursue even cursory research of the facts.
Here’s just one study (of many) showing the academic effectiveness of homeschooling http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp Not surprisingly (at least to those of us who homeschool), homeschooled kids perform better in virtually every academic exam/setting than their traditionally schooled counterparts. These results also have no correlation to the economic and education background of their parents.
Public schooling failed my son. By the 3rd grade he still was unable to read effectively and couldn’t write even the most basic of sentences. They tested him repeatedly, pulled him out for special classes and pushed him on to higher grade levels despite his failing academic grades. As parents, we worked every night with our son, to no avail - the system just wasn’t working.
We began homeschooling and within one year our son was reading and writing at grade level. As a freshman in high school, his vocabulary and reading comprehension tested at college level.
(notice how I haven’t even mentioned religion)
Homeschooling isn’t for everyone, nor should it be for everyone. But try telling my son that he shouldn’t have been homsechooled - you can reach him at college in a year!
Not surprisingly (at least to those of us who homeschool), homeschooled kids perform better in virtually every academic exam/setting than their traditionally schooled counterparts.
Of course. I don’t think anyone is disputing the advantages of homeschooling. In practice though, what’s happening is many parents use it as a front to teach creationism instead of the proper science; evolution. So, I think that certification is a good thing. Certification tests might at least demonstrate that parents know exactly what evolution is instead of misconceptions like, “evolution is just a theory or evolution is a faith based belief.” I issued a challenge in the comments above that I don’t believe any creationist here is up to meeting, even if they were allowed to respond. There’s a thread on over on Nick’s Musings where if you care to post details (if it’s okay with you Nick), I’ll be glad to respond. Kim?
Anyway, I think this is much ado about nothing for conservatives because we all know this judgment will be overruled shortly.
“But try telling my son that he shouldn’t have been homsechooled…”
I think your son should be home schooled. No one is saying otherwise. I think the issue at hand, as mentioned by Albert Mohler is weather or not parents should be certified.
weather=wether. Sorry, typo.
If you think my sole goal in homeschooling was to teach creationism…well, i think your focus may be a tad narrow, cineaste…….nothing could be further from the truth.
I also have yet to meat any other homeschool parent whose primary goal (or even tertiary goal) is to avoid discussing evolution with their children.
For the record, neither my husband nor myself are certified (according to this ruling’s standards) and I don’t know any other homeschool parent who would meet this requirement. Yet, it has had zero bearing on the success of my son’s academic and social growth.
Moot point or not, the fact that others may hold a similar assumption/view to yours regarding the motivation to homeschool would concern most homeschool parents.
Proper science at one point also taught that the world was flat……
Proper science at one point also taught that the world was flat……
That’s from the Bible…
“The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these: I saw, and behold, a tree in the midst of the earth; and its height was great. The tree grew and became strong, and its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth. (Daniel 4:10-11)”
Also, real science (experiments) didn’t start until Galileo’s time. Before that, it was all Aristotle the philosopher with the four elements earth, wind, fire and water, etc…
interestingly enough, in texas (where i am), science is not even one of the courses that the state requires homeschooled students be taught. the only courses required are: reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics and a study of good citizenship. however, since i believe that science is a necessary course, i plan to teach it to my son (and the fact that my husband is a scientist with a microbiology degree helps as well.)
i have no intention of arguing creationism vs. evolution, a debate that will continue until Christ returns. in my earlier post, i was simply stating what i plan to teach my son, which is both evolution as a theory and creation as truth. you can argue and say that it is not a proper education. but then again, who determines what kind of education is proper? and for most people, the issue comes down to faith either way.
“interestingly enough, in texas (where i am), science is not even one of the courses that the state requires homeschooled students be taught.”
Surprise, surprise.
(and the fact that my husband is a scientist with a microbiology degree helps as well.)
Please ask him if he could take my challenge.
…a debate that will continue until Christ returns.
You mean, the rapture? Well, if you want to leave behind some messages with me, I’ll be sure to pass them along to people you think will be left behind.
We homeschool our children because we feel it is the best education they can receive. It is far more that the evolution teaching that goes on in the public schools. My wife has no certificate. My children have all performed well above the standards set for their age levels.
As far as CA. what they are attempting to do is wrong in my opinion.
I don’t see why everyone objects so vehemently to certification. Certification could be simple paperwork like completing a form. I don’t think it would be that difficult. Even if they tried to make it difficult, it couldn’t be much more difficult than A GED. No sweat. School teachers, on the other hand, require bachelor degrees. Again, I wouldn’t worry about it because there are so many parents who will complain and don’t want to get home school certification of any kind, that this measure is sure to die.
I do agree with Geno though in that certification should not measure one’s ideology. I think it should measure one’s academic competence.
When I was in 5th grade (1975-76), my teacher (at a public school) was not allowed to say one word to any of us students about evolution. I remember, in fact, our teacher told us she could be fired for going into the topic at all.
Apparently, things have changed over the last 30 years or so.
I find it very difficult to believe that most or even many parents who home school do so because they only want their kids to know about creationism. I can think of several reasons parents today would not want their kids to attend public (or private) schools.
This certification requirement smacks of yet another something that someone wants to get some money from. Shocking.
It’s more than the certification, cineaste. It’s judges creating laws. It’s judges saying that as a parent, i don’t have a right to determine the best course of education for my child. It’s not about teaching creationism or evolution an it’s not even about certification in and of itself - it’s the reasons given for the certification and the larger scope that erodes a parent’s rights. It’s the implication that the government knows best.
“I find it very difficult to believe that most or even many parents who home school do so because they only want their kids to know about creationism.”
But Di, look what they are doing in TX and OK. If Christians are allowing religion in public schools, (House Bill 2211) then how can many parents not be teaching Genesis as fact in their private homeschooling? It’s not Muslims, Atheists or Scientologists, who pushed this legislation through, it’s conservative Christians.
Bill promotes school religion at expense of education
This is so wrong! Schools can try to teach the science of the heliocentric theory (the theory that the planets orbit the sun) but on a test the student can say, “I don’t believe that because I’m a Christian.” and the teacher will be forced to ignore their wrong answer! Geez! It’s an assault on truth.
And Di, here is one of the many websites touting a creationism “science” curriculum for homeschooling…
Apologia Educational Ministries
What more do you need to see?
It’s the implication that the government knows best.
You have a point there, Lisa.
In my post above about HB 2211, you can also see that it can go too far in the other direction as well, at least I think so.
cineaste - i think we will have to agree to disagree about evolution’s status as absolute scientific fact. There’s more data available for such a debate than simple blog comments could contain.
In regards to the California ruling, the issues concern government intrusion into the private lives of citizens - and not just any citizens, but those who are actually taking a proactive interest in their children’s welfare and education.
Given the number of students attending our public schools whose parents can’t even be bothered to show up for parent/teacher conferences, this issue truly does wreak of stinky fish.
I believe it is about money - about the loss of funding for each student pulled from the public school rolls. And it’s wrapped up and cleverly disguised in socialist packaging. “From the cradle to the grave, your government knows best how to take care you. Simply give us more of your money.”
..slippery slope….very slippery indeed….if our constitution truly is a living, breathing document, it surely must be weeping……
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/
Mr. Gatto has a good book I have not read called “Dumbing us Down”. I’ve listened to his lectures and he is extremely knowledgeable oh public education system and its flaws!
“cineaste - i think we will have to agree to disagree about evolution’s status as absolute scientific fact.”
That’s fine Lisa, but just know that the reality is evolution’s status as absolute scientific fact is accepted in every industrialized country on the planet. The only exception to this are a group of right wing evangelicals localized in the Southern and Midwestern regions of the U.S.
…but those who are actually taking a proactive interest in their children’s welfare and education.
Then they’d have no problem getting certified. At least make sure the parents are even literate. Would you agree with that?
“And it’s wrapped up and cleverly disguised in socialist packaging.”
Maybe the public school system is a communist organization? Oh, come on now!
“..slippery slope….very slippery indeed….if our constitution truly is a living, breathing document, it surely must be weeping……”
That’s a bit of hyperbole. The constitution is not weeping because a court wants parents to be academically competent. A far bigger affront to the founding fathers would be the systematic dismantling of the wall between church and state by right wing Christians.
Thomas Jefferson is spinning in his grave at the stupidity of OK and TX passing House Bill 2211. Now any student can claim that the Earth was populated by aliens because their religion is Scientology and have that answer marked “correct” on a test. Doesn’t anyone else view this as very very bad? Am I the only one here willing to stand up and say that? Sigh.
That’s fine Lisa, but just know that the reality is evolution’s status as absolute scientific fact is accepted in every industrialized country on the planet.
As was the “fact” that the earth was flat (Christopher Columbus- a Christian- proved that wrong). As was the “fact” that the Earth was the center of the Universe. As was the “fact” that Pluto was a planet. As was the “fact” that the moon was covered in meters of dust that man would be swallowed up in it if they ever landed there. Just because the majority thinks it so does not mean that it is.
I could go on.
j razz
Indeed. The majority of people believe the Earth is spherical. But, “Just because the majority thinks it so does not mean that it is.” I could go on.
If you want to dispute my statement, “…the reality is evolution’s status as absolute scientific fact is accepted in every industrialized country on the planet,” you’re welcome to. I’m just pointing out that it’s true.
I never disputed your statement. I just pointed out that majorities can and will be wrong.
j razz
An interesting side story to Christopher Columbus…
Who proved the Earth is round?
Ferdinand Magellan famously said…
“The church says the earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church.”
“I just pointed out that majorities can and will be wrong.”
Or, right.
Where history has misled us.
Here is a quote: As is expressed by Stephen Jay Gould, “there never was a period of “flat earth darkness” among scholars (regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the earth’s roundness as an established fact of cosmology.”David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers also write: “there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth’s] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference.”
In 1945 the Historical Association listed “Columbus and the Flat Earth Conception” second of 20 in its first-published pamphlet on common errors in history.
What is even more ironic (given the arguments in this post), I was taught in public school that Columbus believed the earth was round inspite of the common knowledge of his day (flat earth).
Oh the things you are taught while in public school
j razz
Where history has misled us.
(This was supposed to be a link on the previous post)
j razz
I’m not sure what your point is. But, do you agree that if a student says the earth is flat because he’s a Christian, that answer should be marked correct in TX or OK?
It seems to me, and this is just my atheist opinion and you might not accept it as a fact because it’s what the majority believes and it’s what I learned in school; the Earth is spherical. I don’t care what the Bible has to say about that, and I don’t care what the church said about it in the past. I’m just going to be stubborn and say the Earth is not flat and ponder why we are even talking about this anymore. I’m wondering if you will allow me to end one of these threads for once or if you are just going to keep on replying to prevent that.
Other than the social impact, how would believing the earth is flat negatively impact anyone?
Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.
I’m wondering if you will allow me to end one of these threads for once or if you are just going to keep on replying to prevent that.
You are free to end any post that Tim allows you to. I am not stopping you.
I would ask you though why think/insinuate that my goal is to prevent you from geting the last word in. That’s rather childish isn’t it? I hope you really don’t think that.
j razz
Cineaste, comments like this…
I do agree with Geno though in that certification should not measure one’s ideology. I think it should measure one’s academic competence.
…are in opposition to pretty much everything else you’ve written in this thread, when you implied that belief in evolution is as important as the “three R’s” of reading, writing, and math skills, and when you hyperventilate at the horrifying possibility that kids aren’t being taught precisely what you think they should be taught regarding evolution:
My personal hope is that this certification will require parents to demonstrate a proper knowledge of biology and the sciences, as well as the 3 R’s.
It doesn’t take a genius to see exactly what you mean by a “proper” knowledge of biology. You are intransigent in your faith in evolution and in your outrage that heresy is being permitted.
Am I the only one that thinks to himself “self I sure wish I just say YOUR STU*D and end this”. I can admit its not mature or whatever else but sometimes it just works for me!
You are intransigent in your faith in evolution and in your outrage that heresy is being permitted..
Only evangelical Christians seem to believe that evolution is an ideology and not a fact of life. I have as much faith in evolution as I do about the scientific theory that the planets orbit the sun; none at all. Why? Because these are not matters of faith. One doesn’t need a leap of faith to believe them. They are matters of fact. I don’t subscribe to the evangelical version of reality regarding evolution. I just try to stick with facts.
So, I don’t think certification should measure one’s ideology, it should measure academic competence. Bubba, would you agree with a measure for parents to get certified as literate for homeschooling at least? Personally, I’d want more stringent certification, as you mentioned above, but this can be a starting point at least. Basic English literacy. Or, Spanish?
“I would ask you though why think/insinuate that my goal is to prevent you from geting the last word in.”
If that wasn’t your goal then I’m sorry, j. It’s because when you say something like “I just pointed out that majorities can and will be wrong” and then I point out the obvious, “they can also be right.” It just comes off as arguing for the sake of argument. I didn’t, and still don’t see what your point had to do with anything so I thought it was just text filler.
Yeah. I agree with you: majorities can be both wrong and right. I thought we were done with that. I was looking into what you said concerning Columbus (you are right on that- I don’t disagree with you) and found the quote I provided above along with the link.
I found it amusing that this is what I was taught in public school. My point in what I posted then was to point out that Christians did not think the world was flat during the middle ages as it is commonly prescribed, as well as to point out that I learned this erroneous “fact” in public school.
I hope that clears it up a little. Apology accepted.
j razz
“I hope that clears it up a little.”
ROFL! No, not at all. What’s your point?
Cineaste, I stand by my position that you are dogmatic in the worst sense of the word: you’ve moved from stating that evolution is the consensus position of the scientific community now to proclaiming that it is indisputable fact, all to justify your position advocating the criminalization of teaching any other position. Yours is the position of an Inquisitor.
You write, “I don’t think certification should measure one’s ideology, it should measure academic competence,” but this clearly is, um, not entirely honest because you just defined academic competence as conformity to your ideology.
–
All of your proclamations about the fact of evolution misses a few things:
1) For evolution to be a plausible theory, science must be trustworthy. For science to be trustworthy, man must be capable of rational thought. The theory of evolution cannot possibly account for human rationality.
2) In order to draw broad conclusions from specific observations, science assumes — and indeed must assume — that the laws that govern the here-and-now hold at all places, at all times. This is an assumption that can never be proven, and because this assumption cannot be proven, it is a gross abuse to say that because science reaches a particular conclusion, that conclusion must be “fact.”
3) Like it or not, this assumption that science makes is rooted in Christian monotheism, specifically its belief that the entire universe was created by a rational and self-consistent Creator. Denounce that monotheism as myth, and you undercut the rationale for believing that the universe operates predictably.
About certification in general, Cineaste, I think it’s vastly overrated: the correlation between a teacher’s certification and a student’s performance doesn’t strike me as very strong. Most students go to public schools where all or most of their teachers are certified, and yet the state of public education is dismal.
And considering the education of someone like Abraham Lincoln or my grandfather, I hardly think to myself that they missed out because the teachers they had weren’t certified to the degree that teacher unions demand.
Okay, just for you Cineaste.
Context: Public school education vs. home schooling
Your position: Certain things should be taught if homeschooling is continued to be allowed (measurable by certification). One of those things is evolution as it is scientific fact that is accepted by all industrialized societies. Public school ensures that facts are taught, save for TX and OK.
The majority’s postion: Parents should be able to teach however they wish which includes evolution as theory, just like other theories as long as their fruit is evident by means of their children keeping up with standards (without need of a certificate).
Clarity: Public school is more than capable of teaching erroneous material in regards to historical fact, theories, and science even with certifications as noted above.
j razz
I stand by my position that you are dogmatic in the worst sense of the word: you’ve moved from stating that evolution is the consensus position of the scientific community now to proclaiming that it is indisputable fact…
Bubba, evolution is both. Think about the scientific theory of gravity. Like gravity, it’s an indisputable scientific fact that evolution happens. The theory part comes from figuring out the details of how evolution and gravity work.
“…um, not entirely honest because you just defined academic competence as conformity to your ideology.”
No, because evolution is not an ideology any more than gravity or plate tectonics is an ideology.
“All of your proclamations about the fact of evolution misses a few things…”
I can’t go into details here about evolution out of respect to Tim. We can talk specifics elsewhere if you’d like. We could even talk about my challenge to creationists, if you’re up to it, which everyone seems hesitant to address.
“Most students go to public schools where all or most of their teachers are certified, and yet the state of public education is dismal.”
I agree completely. But, are you saying that you’d be against a certification for parents to be literate in English in order to home school their children or against it?
J, This is what I don’t like about HB 2211…
“This is so wrong! Schools can try to teach the science of the heliocentric theory (the theory that the planets orbit the sun) but on a test the student can say, “I don’t believe that because I’m a Christian.” and the teacher will be forced to ignore their wrong answer! Geez! It’s an assault on truth.”
or…
“Now any student can claim that the Earth was populated by aliens because their religion is Scientology and have that answer marked “correct” on a test. Doesn’t anyone else view this as very very bad? Am I the only one here willing to stand up and say that? Sigh.”
So this…
“Clarity: Public school is more than capable of teaching erroneous material in regards to historical fact, theories, and science even with certifications as noted above.”
…is irrelevant because everyone knows the public school system is far from perfect, but HB 2211 is ignorance on a stick.
My opinion about the CA court ruling is that certification might actually be a good thing because it sets some sort of academic standard for parents. Maybe it will just be completing a form, or a literacy test, or a GED type test with a proper biology section (my preference). As that conservative blog “Redstate” pointed out…
On the other hand I’m concerned that some bat crazy loons who have no ability to properly educate children on how to read, write, add and multiply have no supervision and do not have to pass any qualification exams in order to home school.”
Whoever that conservative was who said that, I agree with his concerns only I’d add biology to the 3 Rs he mentioned. I never thought I’d ever agree with anything from “Redstate” but I do.
Cineaste, evolution is not an indisputable scientific fact: for one thing, it cannot possibly account for human rationality on which science itself based. More simply, macroevolution isn’t directly observable, unlike objects falling due to gravity.
Beyond all this, what I don’t understand is your dogmatic position that teaching anything other than evolution should be criminalized, why disagreement on this of all issues should be treated as heresy. A man can be a successful, productive member of society — even in high professions of law, engineering, and medicine — regardless of whether his beliefs of the origin of man are rooted in Dawinian evolution or six-day creationish, so why do you require indoctrination?
–
About your challenge to creationists to prove creationism “using only science”, I frankly don’t think anyone should take you up on your challenge unless you can prove the assumptions that science must make in order to draw its conclusions.
Prove that universe is a closed and predictable system. Then and only then should your challenge be seriously considered.
–
Personally, while I think English should be this country’s official language, I don’t think certification should be necessary for homeschooling even in matters of English fluency: let the teacher’s ability in teaching English be determined by the student’s ability to pass a high-school graduation exam. I believe that it’s largely the case that certification is just a way for teacher’s unions to keep their pay high by limiting competition.
My opinion about the CA court ruling is that certification might actually be a good thing because it sets some sort of academic standard for parents.
But, as you conceded in your previous post, teacher certification isn’t correlated with student success.
So rather than enlarging our already time-consuming, expensive, and (as you admit) ineffective teacher certification regime, why don’t we just test the kids - all of them - at regular intervals and intervene if they aren’t learning? It seems to me that the most qualified teachers are those who produce successful students, are they not?
But, as you conceded in your previous post, teacher certification isn’t correlated with student success.
I don’t think they are completely unrelated, Peter. One can be a darn fine teacher and only have a high school diploma. If that teacher is working with a student one on one all day instead of in a class of 30 and that teacher is motivated even more because her student is her own child, then of course that teacher has a huge advantage over even a more educated teacher. But, and here is my point, how much better would it be if that same teacher had a very good education far beyond high school level? How much better would it be if that same teacher taught a proper scientific curriculum in addition to the 3 R’s? And certainly, if the parent is illiterate, that can affect her ability to educate her child no matter how focused and devoted she is.
————————-
Bubba,
“Cineaste, evolution is not an indisputable scientific fact”
Yes, it is. Ask any legitimate scientist in any country around the world.
“More simply, macroevolution isn’t directly observable, unlike objects falling due to gravity.”
I can’t directly observe your heart beating but it’s a scientific fact that it is.
As I said, I’m trying to honor Tim’s request to not go into a detailed evolution debate. If you want to talk details, we can do so on Nick’s blog. Assuming it’s alright with Nick.
…what I don’t understand is your dogmatic position that teaching anything other than evolution should be criminalized
I never said that. Bubba, be fair and don’t put words in my mouth. Please.
“About your challenge to creationists to prove creationism “using only science”, I frankly don’t think anyone should take you up on your challenge…”
Are you sure it doesn’t have anything to do with an inability to meet the challenge?
“Creation science” is not my claim, so it should be up to creationists to back it up. Again, come over to Nick’s blog or email me and we can talk about it. Just let me know if you send a message.
Heavenly Father,
Thank you for the wonderful minds you’ve given us and thank you for giving us the privilege of living in this wonderful country where such debate can ensue. Help me never to take such a gift for granted.
Thank you for cineaste who you lovingly knit together in her mother’s womb and thank you for giving her such a sharp mind. Thank you for her gifts and strengths.
Thank you for Tim, who graciously allows us to take over the comments section and engage in lively and invigorating discussions. Thank you for keeping him and his family safe during the recent storms that swept through his area.
Lord Jesus, help me never to take my days, my very breath, for granted. Help me never to forget that my intellect can never take the place of simple kindness, of generosity and of faith in your saving grace.
Amen.
>Help me never to forget that my intellect can never take the place of simple kindness, of generosity and of faith in your saving grace.
Amen!
I don’t know what will offend Cineaste worse, the fact that you prayed for him or the fact that you refer to him as a her.
j razz
pleased accept my apologies, cineaste!!! didn’t mean to offend - from some previous thread i somehow assumed (incorrectly) you to be a ’she’…..
i think this is one of those times i’m extra thankful for God’s omniscience……
*lowers head and shuffles, red-faced, from the room*
No problem Lisa, I’m not offended. Those were nice thoughts and that’s what counts. I really liked your words about “invigorating discussions.” I love discussing things with you guys and gals, all of you. The forum acts as a crucible because it burns away the impurities of our arguments in a way that wouldn’t be possible if everyone agreed. It’s always my intent that we learn from each other’s views. I’ve learned a lot from you guys. I hope you feel the same. I hope you can learn from me also.
So, even though I am an atheist/agnostic, please accept my amen.
But, and here is my point, how much better would it be if that same teacher had a very good education far beyond high school level?
Based on the results of the public school system as compared to private and home schools, not much better. In many cases, much worse. That’s the point.
And certainly, if the parent is illiterate, that can affect her ability to educate her child no matter how focused and devoted she is.
Perhaps so, but that’s a red herring. There is zero evidence of a widespread epidemic if illiterate parents attempting to homeschool their children.
Cineaste, regarding your claim that evolution is a fact, you write:
Yes, it is. Ask any legitimate scientist in any country around the world.
Ah. Let me guess, any scientist who doesn’t think evolution is strongly supported by the evidence is ipso facto illegitimate.
–
About macroevolution being directly observable, you write:
I can’t directly observe your heart beating but it’s a scientific fact that it is.
This is a poor example, as the stethoscope has been around for two centuries and as open heart surgery does in fact show that a human’s heart is beating.
–
“…what I don’t understand is your dogmatic position that teaching anything other than evolution should be criminalized”
I never said that. Bubba, be fair and don’t put words in my mouth. Please.
What you are advocating is that parents who homeschool their children should be legally required to be certified, and that certification includes their willingness to teach evolution. The net effect of your position is to criminalize the teaching of alternatives: you never said this explicitly, but it is the inevitable consequence of your position.
Hello friends.
I’ve set up a thread for any who want to talk more about the science side of Evolution vs Creation. You can find that here.
Thanks!