May. 7, 2006 Educational Philosophy Part II: Educating for Liberty
 In 1843, Mellen Chamberlain interviewed Captain Levi Preston, a 91 year old American who had fought at Concord and Lexington in the Revolutionary War. The Captain's answer provides a good insight into the minds of the men who fought. They were perhaps not so swayed by individual taxes, perceived oppression or the philosophis of Locke and others. "Captain Preston, why did you go to the Concord fight, the 19th of April, 1775?"
"Why did I go?"
Yes, my histories tell me that you men of the Revolution took up arms against intolerable oppressions. What were they?"
"Oppresions?" Captain Preston asked. "I didn't feel them."
"What, were you not oppressed by the Stamp Act?"
"I never saw one of those stamps...and I am certain I never paid a penny for one of them."
"Well, what then about the tea-tax?"
"Tea-tax! I never drank a drop of the stuff, the boys threw it all overboard."
"Then I suppose you had been reading Harrington or Sidney and Locke about the eternal principles of liberty."
"Never heard of 'em. We read only the Bible, the Catechism, Watts' Psalms and Hymns, and the Almanack."
"Well, then, what was the matter? and what did you mean in going to the fight?"
"Young man, what we meant in going for those Redcoats was this: we always had governed ourselves, and we always meant to. They didn't mean we should."
The Captain hints at a yearning for liberty and freedom which was not reactionary in nature nor was it born of philosophical debate. It seems a matter of cultural heritage, handed down from father to son as he emphasizes, "..we always had governed ourselves, and we always meant to." However, even this, in the absence of true oppression, is hardly worth the bloodshed that would surely result from an obscure colony taking on the most powerful military force in the world belonging to an empire upon which the sun never set. The political text of early America was the bible. The main speakers in the debate were pastors speaking from the pulpit. The message was that man was created by God for His glory. We were to be governed internally by Christ, answering to God rather than to man. These were held as inaliable rights endowed to men by their Creator. These points were discussed and debated in churches, in homes and in the public arena, with many of the leading thinkers returning always to their bible as the foundation of their beliefs. As I think on my purpose in education, I can think of no higher purpose than that of liberty. This word has a considerable history, one which I may explore in subsequent posts. For now, I will explain only what this word means to me in terms of education. For me, it is roughly synonymous with "Christian self-government." Webster's 1828 defines it thus: Freedom from restraint, in a general sense, and applicable to the body, or to the will or mind. The body is at liberty, when not confined; the will or mind is at liberty, when not checked or controlled. A man enjoys liberty, when no physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions. Christian liberty is not anarchy. We may reject notions of outside force or control as governing our actions, even as we submit to their authority. Sovereignty rests neither in the outside force of the state nor within the individual, but with God. The Christian is governed internally through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and it is in this state that man has the purest expression of liberty. Scripture summarizes this concept more clearly: And I will walk at liberty; for I seek thy precepts.
--Psalm 119:45 Isaiah tells us: The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD,
--Isaiah 61:1-2 Notably, Jesus is handed this very passage when he speaks in the synagogue and he announces to His audience that the scripture has been fulfilled in their ears (Luke 4:18). Through Christ's sacrifice, we have been set free from the bondage of sin. As I educate my daughter, my primary goal is to teach her to read the scripture for herself. This entails both the ability to decode the words and comprehend their meaning. Going beyond that, I also expect her to be able to reason from the scripture and make applications in her life. She should be able to view the bible as her main text book in spiritual, moral and political affairs. God provides for us an absolute standard against which to measure all ideas and actions. To know true liberty, our children must learn to measure themselves against this standard regardless of external pressure from culture.
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
--2Corinthians 3:17
|
•
Comments (2)
• Post A Comment!
• Permanent Link
|
Apr. 24, 2006 My Educational Philosophy, Part I
I have kind of an informal rambling on general thoughts on education in my sidebar, but I thought I would formalize it a bit more. I'm going to divide this into three parts (I think): my beliefs about education, my goals for education and how I plan to go about getting there (actions).
Beliefs
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
--Revelation 19:16 God is completely sovereign. As such, He directs our paths and we answer to Him not man in all we do. I believe that the Christian is to be governed internally, by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in voluntary obedience to Him. Since the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Psalm 111:10), our first and primary task in education is discipling our children to understand the nature of God.
The Nature of Knowledge
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
--1Corinthians 3:19
Mary Slessor, former missionary to Nigeria, said she did not consider a man educated until he understood that God was Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So that is where she began. This challenged me to really begin looking at knowledge in a different way. I view the basis of knowledge to be the recognition that God is holy, we are sinners, there is but one path to salvation and all of scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness. This is the firm foundation upon which a solid house may be built.
Achievement in other areas serves two purposes. First is to glorify God. We learn more about Him through His creation. This includes works of great literature, science, mathematics, history and all the subject areas. Second is to "subdue" the earth. Essentially this means (to me) that mastery of a subject should lead to useful application to our lives or the lives of others.
Learning occurs by the guiding and direction of someone who knows more than the child. Delivery, or transmission (also known as lecturing), is an efficient means of delivering the facts of a subject, but it makes the student dependent upon the instructor for his ideas. The facts of the subject are important, but they are secondary to the purpose of the subject. True knowledge of a subject comes from an understanding of its principles and purposes. A child needs to learn to reason from these principles and purposes, using the facts of the subject to support his views.
Role of the Child
Children are considered "the heritage of the Lord." (Psalm 127:3) They are entrusted into our care to lead and prepare for service to Him. We are to "train up" our children, a word which in its original language means something closer to initiate or educate. God has a plan for their lives and we have a responsibility to help them discover that plan and prepare them for it. We are to love them unconditionally, accepting them, encouraging them and challenging them. Most important is developing in them a sense of their own worth in Christ.
Because I view each of us as independently accountable before God, I believe we must do our best to instill in our children a sense of ownership and accountability. We need to challenge them and allow them to struggle with their decisions. We need to allow them to fail occasionally, although we certainly do not set up failure for them. We need to set up clear boundaries and clear objectives. When a child does not meet an expectation, I believe he should be held personally accountable. "I forgot" means it wasn't imporant enough to me to take the effort to remember. "He started it" means the child thinks he is accountable to man and not to God. I do not believe that children should be allowed to blame mistakes on environmental conditions because I want to teach them to overcome their environment rather than be a victim of it.
Role of the teacher
I believe the parent holds the sole authority for the education of the child. I do not have a problem with the idea of public education, but in our current system, that involves giving over parental authority to the state. Wherever and however we choose to educate our children, the consequences will be born by the parents.
James chapter 3 gives warning to teachers and tells us we will be held to a higher standard. We cannot expect our children to follow anywhere we do not lead. The most effective teaching is through the leading of godly parents. My children imitate me in everything, both the good and the bad.
A good teacher is temperate, merciful, loving and leads by example. I think that all of Titus, although not specifically directed at mothers raising their children, is applicable to the most desired character traits of one who would be considered a teacher.
educational philosophy, education, home school, homeschooling, parenting
|
•
Comments (4)
• Post A Comment!
• Permanent Link
|
Apr. 19, 2006 Teaching Perspecitves
In my last post, I linked to the Teaching Perspectives Inventory. It is a fun little test to take, particularly if you like those little Quizilla things. Except you don't get a cool picture of a car or a cup of coffee for your blog. This is some serious research put together by some PhD types studying education in Asia and North America. As I stated before, the paradigm is a little off, as evidenced by the fact that I do not fit anywhere in it. Or I am a little off which is also a possibility.
I liked how they put together their framework by asking a variety of questions about education which fall in three different categories: beliefs, intnetions and actions. What we believe about education should naturally be reflected in our stated goals (or intentions) for education. Unfortunately, our actions often reflect neither our stated beliefs nor our goals. Sometimes this is because we do not always really believe what we say we believe. More often, especially in the case of education, it is because we have not thought about it long enough to realize there is a discrepancy. We are most likely to teach our children the way we were educated whether or not this methodology reflects our own beliefs about education and what we hold dear. When all three come together, we will be the most effective in our teaching.
The fundamental difficulty I have with the analysis of the data is that it presupposes an atheistic worldview. Five perspectives are outlined, each of which seems to me to be emphasizing one aspect of a larger, socialist perspective. At first reading, Transmission, with its emphasis on learning content "in its authorized or legitimate forms," and Social Reform, with its emphasis on deconstructing established ways of thinking, appear to be polar opposites. The problem is that there has been enough of a shift in our nation's educational philosophy that the principles behind what is being taught in the first classroom are not substantially different than that of the social reformers. Students may have a broader knowledge of facts within the content areas, but the basic worldview is the same: that the individual is subordinate to the collective.
So, I made up my own paradigm. Because I like where the TPI begins, I too started with reflecting on basic beliefs. I started with a basic philosophy of government, or who is sovereign, and looked at how that naturally would affect the role of the learner and the teacher. I then looked at the goals of education which would naturally be held by that belief system. Finally, I looked at the actions, or methodology, which would most naturally lead to the stated goals. Here is my summary:
Now y'all have a neat little graphic organizer which perfectly summarizes my wordview. And I fit in it. If the rest of the world doesn't, I guess it is because the rest of the world is a little off. It couldn't be me. Really.
teaching styles, teaching, homeschooling, home school, Principle Approach, educational philosophy
|
•
Comments (1)
• Post A Comment!
• Permanent Link
|
Feb. 20, 2006 Standards in Education
I do not do this very often, but Spunky, who was so kind in her comment to me, has an excellent post you should read. It is better than anything I had considered writing about today.
All of us struggle some with mixed motives in homeschooling. That is part of why I blog. It helps me pause daily to regain my focus and my purpose in eductation. Some days do not go well. Sometimes my daughter seems to know less than she did the day before. Sometimes it seems we are going backwards on character issues. Sometimes it seems like it really would be a lot easier to just go buy some curriculum so that I do not have to spend so much time in preparation...my daughter prefers workbooks, anyway.
The root of the problem, however, is that I am beginning to compare myself to those around me. That is kind of ironic, considering I do not know those around me that well. In reality, I am comparing myself to an idealized notion of what I think things must be like in their homeschool because they sure seem to have things together in church or their two year old doesn't run wild at a field trip or their plans I read on the internet just seem so fluid.
But Christ is my standard. I wrote this a long time ago, and some of you in the bible principles group might recognize it, but it is very relavent here.
What is a standard? Essentially, it is a military term, and even when not used as such, I believe that is the basic sense behind the word. Our dear 1828 dictionary defines it such:
An ensign of war, a staff with a flag or colors. The troops repair to their standard...
The image I have is the standard-bearer holding his colors high so that all on the battlefield can see it, despite the smoke,dust and general confusion of war. it comforts the troops, lets them know the battle is not lost and tells them which way to go. The standard-bearer has a most important task, for if his standard falls, the troops will disperse. He also has a most dangerous task, for he has marked himself and made himself a visible and desirable target for the enemy.
When we desire to raise the standards for our children, we must first be sure of what the standard is, or it will not be clear through the confusion. Of course, that standard is Christ, but we must be sure we are communicating that effectively and that we, too, are remaining focused and not inadvertantly changing standards in the middle of the battle. We must remain motivated to have a motivating influence on our children.
Then we can look at some of the specific challenges. A child who is interested and engaged in learning typically puts forth their best work without prompting. They see the work as interesting, relevant and applicable to life.
We have to keep our focus on the standard which is Christ. If we let it drop to focus on a single assignment, a single skill, a man-made measurement, we as the standard-bearer, will let the standard fall. This serves only to confuse our children as we tell them that Christ is the standard, yet our words and actions often communicate something entirely different.
homeschooling, parenting, education, standards
|
•
Comments (8)
• Post A Comment!
• Permanent Link
|
Feb. 5, 2006 What to do if your child thinks he wants to go to public school
Yeah, like I'm the expert and know the perfect answer that will make everyone happy. But this question was recently asked by Gena over on her blog, and I thought I'd give a stab at my response. My little seven year old actually has asked why she is homeschooled and can't go to public school like her only friend in our entire town. She plays school, dutifully sitting at her desk taking notes and learning math facts.
Reason the first:
And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
--Deuteronomy 6:7
We are to teach the law of the Lord diligently to our children. The bible talks about tying the law so that it hangs on the forehead and across the hand. The forehead is symbolic of our worldview. Our thoughts, beliefs and conversation should reflect a deep faith in Christ. We should be ready to base all our decisions on the Word of God. The hand is symbolic of our actions. True faith does not stop with believing. Christ said that he who hears his words and does nothing is like the foolish man who built his house on the sand. The wise man hears His words and acts on them.
God's primary educational objective is imparting the knowledge of His law to His children so that they may keep and obey His law. He outlines how to do this...take the child by your side and discuss the Word of God continually, applying it to every aspect of life.
This does not work well in the public school environment. The teacher isn't going to do it, and there just isn't enough time left in the day for all that sitting and walking by the way that occurs in the family situation.
Reason the second:
Here is a nice long article about how the father is the head and how that relates to homeschooling. Essentially, my role is this. The responsibility of the education of a child falls on the father's shoulders. He is the leader of the household. He determines the course for his family. All teaching is under his authority. In the ideal model of the public school system which is completely under local control, ie., under the control of the parents whose children attend that school, this would not be an issue. The teacher would be acting under the authority of the parents. At least in theory.
But our courts have ruled that parents give up their rights as soon as they drop their child off at the school door. Literally. I don't think God looks kindly on us abdicating in our roles He has chosen for us, no matter our personal reasons.
Reason the third:
What REALLY goes on in public school? It is not about reading and writing and arithmetic. Just look at what this public school advocate has to say in her assertion that "homeschool is treason."
And she is exactly right. Not that homeschool is treason, but of her assessment of the true "value" of public education. She, as a socialist, finds it very positive. I find it very frightening.
Reason the fourth:
Children do not have a fully developed capacity for reason. Mostly their reason is based on what their friends are doing and what they think is "normal." And sometimes a bit of that "grass is greener on the other side" mentality. That is why God put parents in authority over their children and told them to honor their parents. So that it would go well with them. If children got to do everything they wanted, it would not go well with them. Even if God did not rig it with that promise about inheriting the land and being fruitful and all that. Kids make dumb choices, like candy over vegetables, TV over books, Nintendo over the word of God and public school over homeschool. My son would like to play in the street if I let him.
And my summary argument for my child? Quoted directly from Katherine Dang of Philomath, "I cannot in good conscience do this thing."
When my son needed iron drops for his anemia, I did not reason and coax, plead and beg and eventually give in to the fact that he, at one, did not want to take his medicine. I, as the informed parent with fully developed reasoning capabilities for the long-term benefits of these drops in comparison to the momentary discomfort of swallowing them, did what any good parent would do. I sat on him, held his arms down, and forced the drops in the back of his mouth so he got most of it down. Now he knows there is no option. Whether or not he understands the benefits, when he has to take medicine, he does not object. He makes all kinds of faces, but he takes it.
tagged: education, homeschool |
•
Comments (6)
• Post A Comment!
• Permanent Link
|
Nov. 7, 2005 My Educational Philosophy
Someone asked me recently about my schedule and "how [I] get it all done." To me, it seems a bit presumptuous to answer a question like that. I only have three children, and I'm home all day. I'm not running a farm, balancing a job or caring for eight. But since someone asked, I thought I might take a stab at it and the result was a hugely long document that I thought no one would read if I posted it all at once. For those who really want to know, bear with me. I'll get to it, but not in this post. First I thought I'd outline my basic educational philosophy and how I got to it.
Most people who read this blog are probably familiar with the biblical principle approach, but for those who are not, it is an approach to education which searches out the biblical purpose for each and every subject. From there, you glean the biblical principles and teach from these principles. As I was working through the study guide, which I still have not finished, I was struck by several ideas.
First was the pervasive notion of how the environment shapes the individual. The view I was taught in college is basically that the teacher controls the enviornment, or input. The teacher trains the child for a response, or output. Rewards and punishments are set up to continually lead the child to produce more and more correct responses. The whole theory of education in American public schools stands on the backs of Pavlov's poor little puppy dogs who got left in their cages in a flood. They stood for days with just their little noses poking out of the water to breathe. When Pavlov was finally able to get back into his lab and rescue his pooches, he made an interesting discovery. They had forgotten everything he had taught them and they could be re-trained to respond to completely different stimuli. That's where the Russians learned brainwashing from. And where we got our national educational philosophy from.
That is kind of a scary thought. Scripture tells us in Genesis chapter one that man is to take dominion of the earth, subdue it and have it wholly. We are masters of our envioronment, not victims of our circumstances. We are personally responsible for our own actions, despite how or where or by whom we were raised. This notion rang very true to me and is closely tied to th second part of the study which stood out to me.
This second part basically holds the methodology used to teach as equal to the material being presented. In fact, in many ways it is more important. Education. according to Webster's, involves the training of a child and involves his character, temper and mind. The German word for education, Erziehung, denotes a pulling. Sometimes, it is like pulling teeth, but the basic notion is of a teacher guiding a child on a path. This path is the methodology we use and it is inherently governmental. Shannon wrote an excellent entry on this topic, It is important to understand exactly what it is you want to teach and then analyze the best route to take. Through this, I have realized that I cannot teach my child to reason from a biblical worldview by using secular methodology. The workbooks, textbooks and endless testing produce little "Pavlov's dogs" in human form. At the sound of the bell, they fill in all the correct bubbles with a number two pencil and leave when they're 18, never to apply anything they learned in a meaningful way.
Where do they learn to research, reason and relate what they have learned? Where do they apply this to their developing character?
We have been reading, Mary Slessor, Queen of Calabar, in Geography. Her thoughts on education intrigued me. She did not consider a person educated unless they understood the nature of God, so that is where she began. I try to begin there with every lesson, although some days go better than others. Math is the most natural for me...He is a God of order. That is why seasons and time and numbers all have a proper order. He is without end. That is why numbers are infinite. He is immutable. That is why the rules don't change and every time you add 5 and 2 you get 7.
I have also been reflecting on the woman God created my Little Mouse to be. He has a purpose for her. While I figure out what to teach and how to teach it, I must always keep in mind that end goal. I must also remember to place higher value on those lessons that will shape her character and temper. She could get through life using a calculator to add, but all the math skills in the world will not teach her to deal honestly with all men.
What does that have to do with my schedule? My schedule is still somewhat in transition as I continue to reflect how to educate my children in a way pleasing to God rather than man. But my schedule, or how I govern my day, plays an integral role in our education.
|
•
Comments (1)
• Post A Comment!
• Permanent Link
|
|
|
|
Page 1
of 1
Last Page | Next Page
|
|
