Saturday, November 17, 2012

Raised Evangelical: Bob’s Story - IV


We continue with our responses to the "Raised Evangelical" series on the atheist blog "Love, Joy, Feminism" (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism).

 

Section 4: Education

 

Question 1: What sort of education did you have: public school, Christian school, or homeschool? What reasons did your parents give for choosing the method of education for you that they chose?
    In those days there were no such things as Christian schools, and homeschooling was unheard of. The only alternative to the public schools were the Catholic parochial schools. There were a few private prep schools and military academies, but they were for the rich. Why did my parents choose the public schools? The answer was obvious – we weren't Catholics!

 

Question 2: Briefly describe the academic aspect of your educational experience, . . . featuring on the role played by religion. If you were public schooled, did your parents try to counteract anything you were learning at school with different teachings at home (i.e., sex education, evolution)? Or, did the public schools in your area find ways to include things like creationism or abstinence only sex education?
    Our church participated in a "release time" program in our local public schools. If I recall correctly this occurred on school property during school hours and was strictly voluntary. But this was something extra that was tacked on to what was essentially a secular education. I don't think that most people at the time had any conception of a "Christian worldview." 2+2=4 whether you were a Christian or not. And of course most older evangelical Christians at the time would have been educated in the public school system, and wouldn't have seen any major problems with it.
    Sex education was handled at home and was not taught in the public schools at all.
    There were a few areas of conflict, however. Evolution was obviously one. I forgot exactly how our church handled it, but I personally never found evolution convincing. Then there was the issue of square dancing in gym class. Good Fundamentalists eschewed dancing, although on this one I think my parents were divided. There was also an art teacher that my parents thought was a Communist sympathizer or something. And then there was the English teacher who wanted us to read The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. (My parents had me moved to another English class).

 

Question 3: Briefly describe the social aspect of your upbringing, especially as influenced by religion. How did your education experience (public school, Christian school, or homeschool) affect your socialization? Was your friend group religious diverse or more homogenous? If you were public schooled, did your religious background cause you any social problems in school?
    I basically had two "friend groups" (where did this term come from?) – one was the youth group at church and the other was mostly kids from the Honor Society at school. The Honor Society kids were hardly a bunch of rowdies, and so I got along fine with them, except that some of them probably found me a bit opinionated at times. You could almost say that I was a blogger before there was even an Internet!

 

Question 4: Did you attend Sunday School, youth group, Bible club, or church camp? Please describe your experiences.
    I attended all of the above, although I don't remember a lot of what was specifically taught. I do remember preferring to be in classes taught by the pastor himself, since they were bound to be a little more challenging and informative.
    I also remember an episode at camp. One of the counselors urged us to be willing to do whatever God wanted us to day in the way of a career. I really struggled with this. I inherited from my mother a dislike of hot weather. I told the counselor that I was willing to go anywhere the Lord wanted me to go, as long as it was not to a country with a hot, tropical climate! Much to my chagrin, years later I found myself in the Army bound for Viet Nam. And they didn't even give an "invitation" or altar call! It was get on the plane or go to jail. I somehow managed to survive the experience.

 

Added note:

 

    Some of our readers at this point might be tempted to ask, why Christian education? What is so bad about public schools? Some might even go so far as to suggest that Christian education is nothing more than propaganda that leaves students with a false and distorted view of reality.
    So what is so bad about public schools? It depends largely on how one conceives of the purpose of education. If the only goal of education is to prepare people to work for corporate America, then most public schools do a passably good job. The provide their students with the basic math, science and English skills necessary to function in the workplace (although we have heard employers complain about job applicants who can't read a tape measure or find their own addresses in a street atlas!). If, however, education is supposed to serve some higher purpose, to mold character and help students understand life as a whole, then public education is a dismal failure. It fails to provide a coherent worldview and it fails to impart a clearly defined value system. It often fails to give students a basic understanding of their own culture and civilization ("books by a bunch of dead white men"!). The science teacher might be a rigorous materialist, while the English teacher might be a Postmodernist. The student is left in a state of confusion.
    But is Christian education merely propaganda? It all depends on the nature of reality. If God actually does exist, then it is the secularists and atheists who have a warped and distorted view of reality. It makes no sense at all to say that God exists and is somehow the Creator, and then construct an educational system that completely ignores Him. And yet this is the position that most American parents find themselves in when they send their children to public schools.

 


 

4 comments:

  1. If the only goal of education is to prepare people to work for corporate America, then most public schools do a passably good job.

    The goal should be one of broadening the student's knowledge. I do think, however, that we make a mistake by focusing too narrowly on an academic style of education. That was great for me, but some students would do better with an education oriented toward mastering crafts.

    It fails to provide a coherent worldview and it fails to impart a clearly defined value system.

    No, education should not impart a worldview. It should be neutral on that.

    If God actually does exist, then it is the secularists and atheists who have a warped and distorted view of reality.

    Nonsense. Whether or not God exists should not be relevant to the curriculum.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry about that! Somehow the above comment wound up in the spam folder.
    "They [i.e., the ancient Greeks] were the first to recognize that education means deliberately moulding human character in accordance with an ideal. . . this conception . . .always reappears, when man abandons the idea of training the young like animals to perform certain definite external duties, and recollects the true essence of education." Werner Jaeger, "Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture," Introduction.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Somehow the above comment wound up in the spam folder.

    I was wondering where that went. No problem. Life goes on, even if the occasional blog comment disappears. Thanks for rescuing it.

    "They [i.e., the ancient Greeks] were the first to recognize that education means deliberately moulding human character in accordance with an ideal ...

    That is not how I see education.

    I am supposedly an educator. Yet, in my experience, there is no such thing as teaching. The hard work is done by the students in learning. I can organize and present material. I can try to explain and motivate. But I cannot pump knowledge into the student, nor can I mould their character or mind. Only they can do that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that what Yaeger had in mind was Socrates, who of course used the "Socratic method." Yaeger's discussion is fascinating, because it is so relevant for today, especially after the last election. According to Yaeger, in Plato's dialogue Gorgias Socrates is debating the Sophists, who thought that the goal of education was to prepare young people for real life, especially life in politics. But they accepted life as it is, which means, among other things, corrupt politics. What is fascinating about Socrates is that he brought a moral perspective to bear on the issue. To him the goal of education is not just to learn how to succeed in the rat race, but to conform to a higher, ideal standard. The question facing the Greeks, however, is how do you develop this higher, ideal standard outside the framework of monotheism? As a Christian I would naturally sympathize with Socrates and Plato. (To hear Yaeger tell it, the Sophists come across sounding a bit like Nietzsche - the will to power.)

    ReplyDelete