The Eternal Importance of Christian Education

A friend began a facebook discussion today on the general topic of placing one's child in the government's care (read: public school, day care) for such a large portion of that child's life. She took the very sensible position that God does not give children to parents for that purpose.

This stimulated further thought in my mind for much of the rest of the day. There are the usual list of reasons why you should give your children a Christian education, such as:

• Superior academic education, compared to public schools in general
• Less dangerous environment
• Doctrines like creation and salvation are taught, not stifled

Today, however, I was on a deeper wavelength. I want to communicate on this deeper level now.

God has given me and my wife four wonderful children (my friend is anticipating her fourth's arrival within the next several months). The moment we conceived them, they became our responsibility—a profound responsibility—to rear, to discipline, to love, to train. They are not, nor ever have been, nor ever will be, the government's responsibility. In order to fulfill the God-given responsibility, there are a number of things we must do; one of these is to provide them with Christian education.

[Parenthetical: Some parents will choose to homeschool their children in order to meet this responsibility. As long as the education they provide is both thoroughly Christian and strong in academics, I have no problem with that. Others, including us, will choose to partner with a Christian school that will teach the Scriptures in all subject areas and support our family and our values as Christians. Such a Christian school needs to be both thoroughly Christian and strong in academics, too.]

The child, ultimately, will be inevitably impacted by the education he is provided. If a strong Christian education is provided, then he will be more likely to follow in the path of Christ-likeness and go on to serve God for the rest of his days on earth. He will be more likely to avoid the guilt and consequences of sin. He will probably have more joy and peace in his life, and if he marries someone else who loves and serves God and seeks to be more like Christ, he will likely have a happier marriage than most.

But more importantly, if a child is provided a Christian education—particularly at a young age—he is much more likely to accept Jesus Christ as his Savior and spend eternity in heaven. That is not something most day cares or public schools are going to encourage; indeed, the truth will most likely be stifled or ignored.

If you have children, make up your mind: Are you going to take the responsibility to provide your child with Christian education that will positively impact their lives both now and for eternity, or are you going to hand over your responsibility to the government, leaving them open to temporal misery and possibly eternal damnation?

NOTE: I certainly don't want to imply that eternal damnation is the certain fate of those who attend public school today. Please understand that my meaning is that the risk of a child turning away from God and Truth is heightened when the child is put into an environment where God's truth is maligned, ridiculed, neglected, or blasphemed. For a parent to consciously take that risk with his child's soul is inexcusable.

And on the other hand, there are certainly Christians among the many public school teachers out there, who are striving to be lights in the midst of darkness. May God bless them and give them success as they try to reach out to the students in their care.

Arizona Seeks to Reassign Heavily Accented Teachers

FOXNews.com - Arizona Seeks to Reassign Heavily Accented Teachers

I am a firm believer that if you are planning on living in our country, you need to make haste to learn our language...and you need to make sure that your children learn our language, too. [That language is English, by the way.]

Consequently, it is of the utmost importance that English teachers in our public schools are fluent in English. This makes just as much sense as having math teachers who are skilled in math, chemistry teachers who have mastered the basic principles of chemistry, etc.

Therefore, kudos to the Arizona Department of Education for taking an effort to make sure English teachers know English.

The union had no comment.

Question for further research: Why were teachers hired to teach English, if they were not fluent in English?

North Carolina Radical Educators

A proposal has been put forward in North Carolina that would change the graduation requirements for history classes. Instead of the one year of World History, one year of civics and economics, and one year of U.S. History (typically in that order from 9th grade to 11th), this proposal would change the requirements to a year of "Global Studies" in the 9th grade, and change the U.S. History course so that it only covered events from 1877 to the present.

Read more details here.

The teaching of history in our public schools is already abysmal enough. This is simply a brazen attempt to force liberal indoctrination on the children of that state. This "Global Studies" course sounds like the kind of propaganda the United Nations would approve of.

But the most glaring flaw is to intentionally avoid teaching about the first half of our country's history—ignoring such things as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, early debates about the proper scope and power of government, the first century of our nation's growth, the Civil War, and slavery. All of these are significant topics that demand study by our youth. Anyone who thinks they are not relevant to the high school curriculum is either delusional or ignorant.

I hope that North Carolinians rise up and protest this inane proposal. Their history curriculum no doubt needs improvement, but this proposal is a disaster.

Read one particularly eloquent opinion here.

Detroit Public Schools: Another Outrage!

September 30, in addition to begin the deadline when the state of Michigan is supposed to get its state budget passed, is what we call "Count Day" here in Michigan. The short version of the story is that (a) it is the day when school districts must get an "official" count of their student populations, and (b) that official count is multiplied by a per pupil allowance to determine how much $$$ the district will get from the state for the year.

You don't have to be a multiplication or public policy expert to see that districts want both numbers (the "count," and the per pupil allowance) to be as large as possible.

The Detroit Public Schools (DPS) school district is among the very worst in the civilized world. Its graduation rate is around 25%, pitiful by any standard whatsoever. Its student population has gone from about 160,000 just nine years ago to a projected 83,777 this year—a decline of more than 47% in under a decade! It is unsafe and has a bureaucracy that socialists envy. Its financial integrity is mocked by Bernie Madoff. Blogprof has a running list of commentary on DPS, if you want to immerse yourself in its failures.

So what do you do on Count Day? Do you attempt to restore financial integrity? Do you announce new academic expectations? No. You bribe students to come to school.

Articles in the WSJ and Detroit News give further details. It is a disgrace of the highest order...and that's saying something, considering how disgraceful DPS already is.

Singing the Praises of the President

By now most of us have heard about the video of the elementary kids singing the praises of President Obama. I find it repugnant, and, like so many other things, I am severely disappointed that the media isn't pouncing on school administrators for this. You know, like they would have if two years ago children were singing the praises of the last president.

Now we learn more about the principal of the school. Dr. Denise King (someone please tell me who granted her a doctoral degree) is an Obama fan, and attended Obama's inauguration last January. Consider the following:

• Pictures she took at the inauguration made it into the school yearbook...despite the fact this was not a school field trip.
• Pictures of the president adorned the halls and various classrooms of the school. I have no problem with hanging a picture or two of the president on the wall (students, after all, should know who the president is and be able to identify him), but it sounds like this school went a bit overboard.
• Photos of "Obama-themed activities" were in the yearbook. I wonder what exactly those were....?

However, there were two facts about the principal that I found particularly troubling:

• According to parents who spoke with Dr. Denise King, "The principal of a New Jersey elementary school where young students were videotaped singing the praises of President Obama is making no apologies for the videotape and says she would allow the performance again if she could" [Emphasis mine].
  
• According to public records, Dr. Denise King hasn't voted since 2004! The article states, "A search of public records revealed that King, 46, of Cinnaminson, N.J., last voted in 2004 and had not declared any political affiliation. No records of political contributions could be found."

On the upside, the article made me feel better that my children are not in public schools.

Thoughts on President Obama's "School Speech"

Today, President Obama went to a high school in Arlington, Virginia, and gave a televised address to school children across the nation (video is available at whitehouse.gov). His remarks were controversial in advance of their release on Monday, but as it turned out, the bulk of the speech was a very acceptable encouragement to students to work hard and do their best and complete their education. Any president—or governor, or school board member—could have delivered most of this without any controversy whatsoever.

There were a few lines of the speech which he could have done without ["I'm working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn."], but the quotes below are actually quite accurate and worth the time required to speak them:

"But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world - and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that's what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education."


"And no matter what you want to do with your life - I guarantee that you'll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You're going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can't drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You've got to work for it and train for it and learn for it."

[Personal Note: In my professional employment, I meet a lot of school dropouts who would have done much better had they heeded those last two sentences.]


"Maybe you don't have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there's not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don't feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren't right.

But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life - what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you've got going on at home - that's no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That's no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That's no excuse for not trying."

"But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won't love every subject you study. You won't click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute."

[Personal Note #2: I am a math teacher. That last sentence is unalterably true. Focus on the word "seem."]


"So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you."

There comes a time when it is appropriate to agree with something your political opponent says, simply because it's right. As a parent and a teacher, I have no problem agreeing with the President on the quotations above. Student do need to recognize that education is important, that it sometimes requires a lot of effort, and that some things are more desirable or easier than others; and they must remember that perseverance is a desirable and important quality. As teachers and parents, we need to expect great things and great efforts from our students.

If the President had given me the responsibility of delivering the speech, aside from a handful of edits, I could have done so in good conscience with a smile on my face.

The only other issue was whether schools should have showed the speech to their students. As with many other public school things, I think this is an issue best left to local consideration. The local superintendent, principal, or appropriate authority figure should have been able to make the call.

As it turned out, public pressure probably forced the President to shift his focus to the above, less controversial topics. That's a good thing. There is nothing wrong with the President of the United States delivering a non-political encouragement to school students to give their best efforts. Indeed, it's a good idea!

High School Credit...for Athletics?

This news article today got me thinking about several facets of education. The essence of the article (which, I might add, was clearly not written by a professional educator) was that in the past, Texas students could get 2 of their required 26 credits to graduate by taking an "athletics class." Now, the Texas legislature has passed a law that allows students to gain 4 of their required credits by taking "athletics classes."

"Athletics classes," if I understand the article correctly, are basically credits awarded for participation in extracurricular athletics during the school day.

One school board member expressed his opinion with this inspiring comment: "If this is what keeps kids in school, then we should support it," he said.

Sorry, dude, but that's not what we are talking about here. This is a change in the graduation requirements—ostensibly, a change in the academic courses required to gain a diploma in the state of Texas. If I were a music, foreign language, or theatre teacher, I would be pretty ticked right about now.

I have no problem with requiring "physical education" or some comparable "class" as a prerequisite to a diploma. I had to take P.E. in high school, and physical education, if well taught, can be instructive both in the short and long term.

What I object to is allowing physical education or athletics classes to supplant academic courses in the graduation requirements. In Texas, it appears that the two additional athletics courses can only take the place of other electives. This is still not a good idea. The values found in music, drama, art, foreign language, and other similar "elective" classes are important. A student playing a sport after school can still take an art class during school. A student taking an "athletics class" during school likely won't be taking art in the late afternoon—they'll be playing their sport!

As a teacher, my gut feeling is that these "athletic classes" are just allowing the coaches to get some extra time in, during the class day, to prep their athletes. This is happening at the expense of academic classes, and of education in general; consequently, the diploma just received a little bit of tarnish.

That is not a good thing.

Will Michigan Change its Graduation Requirements in Math?

In April of 2006, the all-wise legislature of Michigan passed, and the ever-more-all-wise governor signed, legislation that instituted a statewide set of public high school graduation requirements. These requirements meant that in every school district in Michigan,

Students must complete at least Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II, or an integrated sequence of this course content that consists of 3 credits, and an additional mathematics credit, such as Trigonometry, Statistics, Pre-calculus, Calculus, Applied Math, Accounting, Business Math, or a retake of Algebra II. Each pupil must successfully complete at least 1 mathematics course during his or her final year of high school enrollment. (See page 26 of this document)

This means that if you want a diploma (beginning, in general, with the Class of 2011), you have to earn four credits of math. Three of them must be in Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II. I also blogged extensively on this topic last August, saying the following [this is the slightly-abridged version]:

But the Biggest Problems lie here: The inevitable outcome of the MMC policy will be a combination of the following things:

• The dropout rates will soar. Already, it has been reported that 20-30% of freshmen students failed Algebra I last year—statewide. These students, plus many more who came close to failing, are already discouraged from taking Algebra II (not to mention the other newly-required courses) and will be more likely to choose dropping out than frustration. Dropout rates that were released this week are already dismal enough.
  
• The course known as Algebra II will be watered down...a lot. In order for many to pass, teachers and administrators will feel the pressure to make the class easier so that more kids will pass. This pressure will come from nearly every corner...and it will be effective in most places. Note: The "curriculum standards" will not change, just their application in the classroom. The test scores, on the other hand, will change.
  
• Social promotion will return with a vengeance. Yes, students will be passed along by teachers who, quite frankly, don't want them (and perhaps their ill-mannered, complaining parents) in their classrooms next year. It's already going on in public schools without the newly added pressure. Some teachers will face administrators administering that pressure.
• The disgraceful irony of this will be that the teachers/education system will be blamed. Teachers and schools who hold the line on not watering down the math courses and who do not practice social promotion will take heat for no other reason than a larger number of failing students—when they ought to be commended for encouraging quality work. Admittedly, there are teachers who aren't doing the job as well as they should (but is this not true in every vocation?). Yet I think that ignorant legislators, ambivalent parents, and apathetic students will all be getting less of the blame that will inevitably come when this MMC is shown to be unsuccessful.

In sum, I think the MMC is a bad idea. As a math teacher, I want every student to take as many math courses as they can. I want students to enjoy them and be successful—this is my passion. But not every student is capable of being equally successful, and it may be that other coursework is more appropriate for some students or more conducive to their long-term success. The MMC does not allow much liberty in this regard.

This will eventually become another example of a well-intentioned, poorly-thought-out, dictated-from-the-capital government policy that has the unintended consequence of failure. Significant decisions like these belong in the hands of local school leadership.

It turns out I was wrong on just one point: Before the Algebra II course, in particular, could be fully watered down, the legislature is moving to remove this requirement! According to articles in the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit News, the following legislation is on the move:

• The Michigan House has introduced a bill that "would allow students to bypass the tougher math requirement by taking three years of math, with the only mandated courses being algebra I and geometry. The third math credit could be in a course like financial literacy, which teaches students money management skills." (From the Free Press; emphasis mine)
• The Michigan Senate unanimously passed a bill to grant that "math-related career and technical education courses could fulfill the Algebra II graduation requirement for high school students." (From the Detroit News, emphasis mine)

Interestingly, the Michigan Department of Education opposes the House legislation but supports the Senate legislation. Still trying to figure that out....

Blogprof brought this to my attention earlier in the week; he is strongly opposed to the watering down of the standards. Read his comments here and here. I am also opposed. As a math teacher who works with public school students, I recognize that the standards are unrealistic based upon the reality in the classrooms. They cannot be realistic until all math teaching, from kindergarten on up, is both thorough and rigorous, free of the fluff that infests so much of the curriculum now.

Math educators disagree among themselves what will improve math education most successfully; but all of us believe it can and must be improved. Here are a few of my suggestions:

• Focus both on drill/practice and concepts. Students who drill and practice all the time have difficulty handling real-life problems; students who know how to solve the problems but can't compute accurately are not going to be successful, either.
• Keep calculators out of students' hands before high school, except for certain occasional things where their use is helpful. If you think they should never be used, just tell me what the square root of 11 is to six decimal places, and I'll agree with you. I wrote an entire blog post on this topic.
• Return the setting of curriculum standards to individual school districts. It makes them more accountable for success and failure...as it should be.
• Institute full school choice for all taxpayers. Are you not satisfied with your kids' progress at Lawton? Move them to Paw Paw. Displeased with Detroit Public Schools? [Who isn't?] You get the idea....
  

Most importantly, parents need to be involved—both in encouraging their children and making sure they are provided with a quality education, in math and every other subject. The work of the parents in a child's education is much more important than the work of the state.

Pontiac School District Adopts Dress Code

I am a big fan of school dress codes. Every school (and I would even suggest this for those who homeschool) should implement some sort of dress code so that the students are dressed modestly, neatly, and non-disruptively.

The Detroit News carried a story today that the Pontiac School District will have a new uniform dress code, effective with the start of the 2009-10 school year. From the article:

From preschool through 12th grade, students must wear solid black, khaki or navy dress pants or slacks, knee-length dresses, jumpers, shorts or skirts. Students must wear white, navy, or light blue collared shirts and blouses with long or short sleeves. Turtlenecks of the same colors as shirts and blouses are also permitted.

Beginning the second semester of the 2009-10 school year, blazers may be required for students in grades 7-12.

There are also a number of things not permitted, such as

Clothing that will no longer be permitted includes:


• Jeans or denim fabrics (unless permitted for a school spirit day or a dress-down day)
  
• Tight fitting or baggy, oversized clothing
  
• Team jerseys (can be worn only when permitted), T-shirts, sweatshirts, tank tops, spaghetti straps, strapless or halter-tops or sheer, see-through blouses
  
• Sweat suits, jogging attire, athletic shorts, fleeces, loungewear or sleepwear
  
• Hooded tops
  
• Headgear, including hats, headbands, scarves, do-rags, stocking caps, bandanas and baseball caps
  
• Any clothing, jewelry, symbol or other object that can be perceived by a staff member as evidence of membership/affiliation with a gang
  
• Designer brand sunglasses or dark glasses (if prescribed, medical documentation needed)
  
• Designer brand stitched leather jackets
  
• Outerwear such as gloves, jackets and overcoats in the buildings

I think that this is good. However, let's analyze a few aspects of this, beginning with...

Reasons the District Gives for Having a Dress Code:

• Promote respect for self and others. I think I see what they mean by this, but I would have worded it differently. Dressing in a more professional or neater manner tends to make one think more highly of one's abilities and tends to have the effect of more, and more positive, achievement.
• "To prevent distractions and health and safety hazards that disrupt the educational environment." No argument there. The last thing schools need is problems stemming from students' clothing.
• It was noted in the article that the two Pontiac high schools are merging into a single high school this year, and that this will tend to help the students "blend in" better and become a more cohesive group. This is probably good, and will help to avoid the factions that might come from a "I went to ___ last year" mentality.
• Waivers for religious or medical reasons will be considered. Penalties have been established.

Now let me add some more to this:

Additional Reasons the District Should Have a Dress Code:

• Students need to learn how to look and dress like mature adults. Most public school students, quite frankly, dress like slobs in jeans and T-shirts. It is good for them to become accustomed to the dress and manners of adults. For this particular reason, I am not a fan of uniforms, although they are still preferable to the "jeans and T-shirts" look.
• Dress for success: There is plenty of evidence showing that students' dress has an impact on their accomplishments in school.
• Most students are going to have a job someday where they will have to conform to a dress code. Might as well get the idea now. (On a related note, I think it's OK to kindly and politely communicate to students that adults know better than they do on these sorts of things. Some students think they are the fountainhead of all knowledge and wisdom. This is nothing more than pride and arrogance.)
  

What will be interesting to see is if the dress code actually gets enforced. Whenever there are no penalties, the dress code is ignored; and when there are penalties, people get mad. About ten years ago, when I lived in Jacksonville, that school district adopted a uniform dress code...then let parents opt out their kids...then by the end of the school year, it was nothing more than a bad joke, engendering disrespect for the authorities who came up with the dress code in the first place.

Dress codes without consistent enforcement become a cure worse than the original illness.

I commend the Pontiac school board for their decision and hope that they stand up for it during the upcoming school year.

Ohio School District Catches Cheaters, Cancels Graduation

Ohio School District Catches Cheaters, Cancels Graduation - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

Here's the start of the article:

COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio school district says it uncovered a cheating scheme so pervasive that it had to cancel graduation ceremonies for its 60 seniors — but will still mail their diplomas.

A senior at Centerburg High School accessed teachers' computers, found tests, printed them and distributed them to classmates, administrators said.

Graduation was canceled because so many seniors either cheated or knew about the cheating but failed to report it, said officials of the Centerburg School District.

Superintendent Dorothy Holden said the district had to take a stand and let students know that cheating can't be tolerated.

"I am alarmed that our kids can think that in society it's OK to cheat, it's a big prank, it's OK to turn away and not be a whistle-blower, not come forth," Holden said.

The district says it has identified a student who apparently accessed shared file folders on teachers' computers.

Officials believe the cheating involved at least five tests in a senior World Studies class dating to early January.

Surprisingly, one student who cheated still failed the class anyway. Or is it really that surprising?

Parents Fuming as Texas Schools Let Gideons Provide Bibles to Students

Parents Fuming as Texas Schools Let Gideons Provide Bibles to Students

This foxnews.com story tells us that the Gideons dropped off Bibles at thirteen middle and high schools in Frisco, TX, for one day, as described here:

The Gideons are now taking advantage of a school policy that allows them to leave Bibles on a tabletop in the schools' front offices, though they're barred from interacting with students or remaining there during school hours.

Sounds insidious, eh? Nowhere in the article was it implied that members of the Gideons came into the schools to conduct organized proselytizing. Note these comments by parents:

"If they're God-fearing Christians ... they should be giving those items wherever they worship. School is a place to learn, not a place to worship."

"I am not atheist — I believe in God," she told FOXNews.com. "But I just don't want any religion forced on my child at school. That's why my child goes to a public school."

The point these parents seem to be making is that they want religion to be expelled from their public schools. And this is a shame. A deeper understanding of the Bible and a personal relationship with God would make many of those students better academically, socially, and in other ways. That would make the school better.

Bibles are not the problem, folks; sin is the problem. Why is it OK for sinful practices (For example, think: Sex education) to be promoted in our schools but not OK for Bibles to be distributed? Why is there such antagonism toward the Scripture?

GRPS Foolishness May Be Spreading...

Back in December the Grand Rapids Public School District (MI) announced that F's were not going to be issued on students' report cards, replaced instead by an amorphous "H" (presumably for "held," as in the grade is held pending completion of...something; or for "hope," according to a school district spokesman). This was expected to improve the dropout rate. I blogged about it at that time.

But now, according to foxnews.com, we learn that this foolishness extends from coast to coast! Linked also to this article is another which identifies six more school districts, although an unspecified number of additional districts apparently do something like this. The new code acronym is "ZAP," for "Zeroes aren't permitted."

These additional six school districts do not use the "H" grade (I hesitate to call it a grade, but that is what it is functioning as), but instead lasso the offending did-not-do-homework students into either an after-school activity (we called this "detention" in my day) to complete the assignments or some other situation which demands that the homework be completed. In general, once the students complete the assignment, even if it's late, they can generally get a grade higher than a zero on it.

If a school district wants to codify its procedures for students who don't do assignments to mandate their attendance in an after-school activity [a.k.a., punishment for not doing homework is detention], I have no problem with that. I would like to note two things, however:

• It appears that no one wants to use the word "punishment" or any synonym that contains a negative connotation. Students are helped and taught, not hurt, when they learn that failure to meet their responsibilities requires a consequence—and "punishment" is one such accurate term for it.
• There needs to be a "point of no return" beyond which, if the assignment isn't completed, a zero is the result. I can even be charitable and give a "day of grace" (or even two, for a first offense) before issuing a zero, but that window of opportunity should not stay open for long. For one thing, the logistics for the teachers are going to be a burden as it is.

And, oh, by the way, how is this working up there in Grand Rapids? From mlive.com we get some more details, but the second foxnews.com article summarizes them nicely:

"But according to figures released earlier this week, the effort may not be working. Just 16 percent of classes failed during the program's initial trimester were converted into passing grades, and in 68 percent of classes students made no attempt to reconcile the grade. Another 15 percent of the classes were failed a second time." [Emphasis mine]

The liberal softie may claim that it's worth doing it for those 16% to get a passing grade, but that's not the point—those students would be permitted to retake the class anyway, despite the "H" grade initially received! I'm happy for those 16%; I am disgusted for the 68%. Evidently for them there was not sufficient motivation to try to redeem their grade!

Let's be honest, for by so doing, the students will learn the lesson: Failure matters. If you have not put forth adequate effort and obtained minimally expected results, you will reap the consequence. It's true in the workplace and true on the field of sport; it is one of the most basic lessons every citizen of this country (and every illegal alien, for that matter) should learn.

Obama and Education: Observations

President Obama discussed the topic of education Tuesday. There are two elements of the discussion that I want to comment upon.

First, he suggested "tightening standards for teachers." I did not find any specifics about what this means.

My view: Much of the "high standards for teachers" now, and particularly since the No Child Left Behind law (grrr...) passed several years ago, amount to collecting the right educational credentials. Most of us who are deep into education recognize that there is little correlation between the true abilities of a teacher to teach, and the size of the credential pile a teacher can (or chooses to) amass. If a way to select teachers can be found that doesn't emphasize transcripts over skills, my ears are open.

Second, Obama supports merit pay for teachers, or in the euphemistic language of the hour, "innovative compensation schemes."

My view: Merit pay is a grand idea with precious little foothold in reality (much like, for example, socialism). If the teachers' unions ever let it take hold in our public schools, I predict it will become an ugly game.

• If merit pay is based on test scores, look for teachers to teach to the test or for administrators to fudge the scores to their advantage. Or just look for fraud.
• If merit pay is based on other statistics, look for the statistics to be manipulated.
  
• If merit pay is based on administrative evaluations, there will be problems both with teachers who try to illegitimately curry favor to get a good evaluation, and with administrators who wield these evaluations as a club to accomplish their own goals or to punish teachers with whom they clash.
• And, heaven forbid, if merit pay is based on what the students think of their teachers, our education system is in monstrous trouble.

If a merit pay system can be constructed that can objectively measure the ability of every kind of teacher to have and impart wisdom and knowledge, to demonstrate and teach good character, and to give their best efforts to succeed and to breed success in their students, then I am for it. I just don't think I will ever see that day on this earth.

A Terrible Idea From Grand Rapids Public Schools

Yesterday, Grand Rapids Public Schools announced that there will be no F's on report cards this trimester: If a student did not pass a class, he will be awarded an "H." It's called the "Success Only Option," and of the 20,930 classes taken by students throughout four high schools, 2,364 of them will be assigned a grade of "H" when report cards come out this week.

None of the four high schools in the district is meeting the federal standards. Lots of their students drop out (about 25%)...typically the ones who get the F's. The idea here, presumably, is that the students will realize that they still have the opportunity to take the class again, or take it online or in some other format (such as summer sessions), so that they can still have the opportunity to pass. The administrator of the district was quoted as saying something along the lines of "Failure is something that all of us experience..., but why do we want to visit that [failure] on 14-, 15-, and 16-year-old children?"

Students will have one term to retake the class, and then the grade could change to an F. An "H" was referred to as a "delayed failing grade."

Teachers, naturally, are not pleased. They realize that these same immature "14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds" also frequently fail to have the maturity to meet deadlines, deal with stress, and reach expectations. Giving them a perceived "out" will make the teacher's job even more difficult (and in a district like GRPS, it's difficult enough—and that doesn't even count their labor union issues) when one of those same immature kids tells them, "Who cares? I'm not going to fail your class! You can't fail me! So what if I have to take it again later?"

Parents should not be pleased, either. As a teacher, I firmly believe that the largest part of high school failing grades and dropouts have their roots in parents who, over time, have not put an emphasis on education and who have not taught their children by their lives, actions, and words that education and graduation are of high importance. Parents who do those things generally have kids who pass and graduate, so why should they be worried? Because their children's teachers are going to have a more difficult task dealing with the immaturity of the other students, thereby shriveling up the time they can give to teaching!

Those who have not been involved in public education (as adults, not students) often are oblivious to how much disruption the more immature students are capable of inflicting. To empower and embolden them by saying "Don't worry, you won't get an F" is going to be like waving red in front of bulls. Classroom decorum will suffer.

But most of all, this terrible idea isn't going to accomplish its goal of getting more students to graduate. To graduate, you still have to pass the required courses. An "H" isn't a passing grade; it is not adequate to get the credit. At best, it will stall the dropout from dropping out. Consider these two students:

1. Student A, after two years, has 7 credits and 3 F's.
2. Student B, after two years, has 7 credits and 3 H's.

Both are equally close to (or far away from) graduating. Both still have 3 credits to get. Both still have the same opportunities to get those 3 credits. The first student may feel despondent; the second may feel indifferent—yet neither of these is good!

The cold, hard truth is that children must recognize the consequences of life. They must learn, through lessons small or large, that failure to meet their responsibilities reaps failure in some area of life. Ideally, they will learn this before high school in things less substantial. The immature student might actually benefit from the kick-in-the-pants that an "F" brings, when he finally realizes that consequences are real, serious, and sometimes life-long. Isn't that a good thing?

Is Evolution Integral to Science? No.

I encountered the following on the internet today. The statement below (which can be found here; the facts about this group are here) is offered by....

The 21st-Century Science Coalition is a group of Texas scientists who have come together for a common purpose: to ensure that Texas students get a sound science education that reflects the most current scientific knowledge and is based on established scientific data. We simply believe that students deserve the best science education in their Texas classrooms.

Good science education is certainly desirable, but it is not possible apart from objectivity, observations, solid reasoning, and facts. This group is actually quite concerned that those in a position to impact state science curriculum standards in Texas will allow teachers to discuss intelligent design and creation, thus decreasing the absolute stranglehold evolution has on the public education establishment in this country. Evolution is not a fact. It has never been observed; it is not observed today. I would like to critique their statement below.

Scientists for a Responsible Curriculum in Texas Public Schools

A strong science curriculum is an essential part of a 21st-century education and should be based on established peer-reviewed empirical research. In 2008-09 the State Board of Education is revising the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) curriculum standards for the sciences.

Scientifically sound curriculum standards must:

• acknowledge that instruction on evolution is vital to understanding all the biological sciences; It is not vital. Some of us got great understanding of the biological sciences while receiving a creation-based education. Really.

• make clear that evolution is an easily observable phenomenon that has been documented beyond any reasonable doubt; It has never been observed, much less easily. It is not documented, much less beyond a reasonable doubt.

• be based on the latest, peer-reviewed scholarship;

• encourage valid critical thinking and scientific reasoning by leaving out all references to “strengths and weaknesses,” which politicians have used to introduce supernatural explanations into science courses; and What?!? By choking out a discussion of strengths and weaknesses, critical thinking and scientific reasoning skills are strengthened?!? What sort of ridiculous reasoning is this?

• recognize that all students are best served when matters of faith are left to families and houses of worship. OK. Better there than in public schools, but public schools still need to reinforce the basic tenets of religion and morality in society.

We, therefore, call on the Texas State Board of Education to approve science curriculum standards that prepare Texas students to succeed in the 21st century. I do, too. I just want to see something different than this group wants to see.

Obama Blue Day In Public Schools! What?!?

The Virginia state teachers' union has announced that Tuesday would be an "Obama Blue Day"—teachers were to wear blue-colored shirts to school in order to show unity and support for their preferred candidate.

The Virginia Education Association sent out an e-mail on 9/25 with these instructions. However, it said that this was not intended to encourage teachers to use their classrooms for partisan political purposes, although they could use the occasion to encourage their 18-year-old students to register to vote.

I suspect that some of these teachers, however, are Republicans, and are rip-roaring mad that their union, which sucks away their money like so many mosquitoes, has the audacity to slap them in the face like this. I hope they wear red on that day.

This is yet another example of a great problem of public education: It's OK to say or do what you want—so long as it is liberal, or godless. Had conservatives or Christians done something similar (How about a "Wear green for God" day??), would there be outrage?

"...Male and Female Created He Them."

Thus ends Genesis 1:27, where we learn that God made man in His Own image.

And then today I read the recent "Inclusion and Diversity Newsletter" distributed by my employer, where we get this statement:

for all youth, especially those who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or questioning.

These categories are not the same as those found in Scripture. There are only two kinds of youth: Male and female.

What our world does observe is that these two kinds of youth choose from among a variety of lifestyles, some of which are clearly unbiblical. I suppose those who are "questioning" may be seeking which lifestyle they wish to follow (be it good or bad), but the others in the list are unbiblical and sinful.

News That Should Concern You, Part 2

In this Foxnews.com story, it is reported that at least two dozen universities are now offering coed dorm rooms. Not coed dorms, mind you—they've been around for years—coed rooms. The basic reason given is that it will "allow some or all students to share a room with anyone they choose — including someone of the opposite sex."

Certainly, some parents are concerned...and they should be. [And in the case of public universities, your tax dollars may be paying to support these choices.] One girl's father said,

"When you have a male and female sharing such close quarters, I think it's somewhat delusional to think there won't be sexual tension," the 52-year-old Feldman said. "Maybe this generation feels more comfortable walking around in their underwear. I'm not sure that's a good thing."

However, he is letting his daughter make the decision. I would call that a severe parenting error.

What sort of philosophy is your child getting when he/she goes to a secular school or university? If it's a philosophy that says this is "no big deal," please look into another school!

When Public Education Cannot Succeed

I had another sub assignment today in a local public high school. And I observed a lesson seen before, but brought clearly before my eyes again.

A lesson which, for the record, applies to all of education: Public, Christian, Sunday school, or otherwise.

The teacher whose geometry classroom I inhabited today left a bit too little for the students to do—I could see that right away. So I planned to spend the first 10-15 minutes review what [to me, especially] were familiar topics, in order to help them succeed on their worksheets. This went fine; but then several students absolutely refused to do the assigned work, preferring instead to talk, goof around, sleep, or generally distract all their neighbors. And then they complained that they didn't know how to do the geometry!

There are several problems here. But the fact which was made frightfully obvious today was this:

Learning cannot take place when the student is in rebellion to the teacher.

Public education is inherently handicapped in various ways, including its inability to effectively discipline and the general lack of support our society gives in holding up authority. The fact that students refuse to obey their teachers is the fruit reaped from seeds earlier sown.

These children did not appear to be stupid, unintellectual, or whatever politically correct (or incorrect) term you care to use. The reason they had not been learning was because they did not want to submit themselves to the authority and teaching of the teacher.

And is this not also true spiritually? Can we learn the lessons of God when we put ourselves outside His authority—when we are, quite bluntly, in rebellion against His leadership in our lives? Will we not then become "fools" (to invoke the Proverbs term) also??

Why My Children Don't Go To Public School

There are actually many reasons why....here is one of them.

Today, for the first time since I completed my student teaching in December 1992, I spent an entire day in a public school classroom. As I will likely do a number of times in the days and weeks ahead, I was a substitute today in a local, fairly rural public high school, where I subbed for a teacher of World History [2 sections] and Health [2 sections] and (for those of you who know me, feel free to laugh—I think it's funny, too) Weight Training [just one co-ed section].

Although my day as a substitute went reasonably well, it was very sad to see the social condition of most of the students. Not being an expert on this particular school's rules, I do not know how much of the following is in violation of those rules, but judging by the widespread occurrence of these things, my guess is that they are not violations or simply not dealt with:

• Horrendous dress, both in terms of modesty (girls in particular, showing far too much of themselves), sloppiness (ripped clothing, especially), and messages (irreverence to authority, rock groups, general foolishness)
• General lack of manners. Although the students were generally friendly to the total stranger now among them, their manners could be classified as relatively crude. Apparently boys wearing hats in the classroom is an acceptable practice.
• Unacceptable behavior between boys and girls (unacceptable to God, that is). Having a co-ed class in weight training while in gym clothes isn't very healthy, either.
  
• Bad language. Two particular words, both of which start with "s", were heard more times today than I can remember.
• And just a miscellaneous: Since when were flip-flops over bare feet considered acceptable school dress? I had always been told there were health-related reasons for requiring feet to be covered (and, FYI, it was about 55° this morning)

These are not acceptable ways for my children to behave. I and my wife, as parents, have a God-given responsibility to bring them up to be Christ-like—to be salt and light in a sinful world. To put them in an environment where they are both influenced by so many kids like these, and implicitly taught that such things are acceptable, is to have the opposite effect.

Although some will argue that one can be a Christian, and still be Christ-like, while a public school student (and, yes, there are examples of this), I cannot in good conscience put my children where both the implicit teaching and the numerous examples of their peers influence them in that direction.