# Content knowledge test(s) for parents



## Grimmson (Feb 7, 2011)

Question of consideration for those here at the PB:

Should parents for the sake of accountability, prior to teaching an academic subject to their children, be given a content knowledge test( or tests) by the state or the church prior to that teaching of that particular subject taking place to their children? If not then why? What should be the consequences if parents, like homeschooling parents, fail that test? Should it be like public school teachers being refused a teaching certificate or endorsement if they cannot pass such a test, and therefore in the case of homeschooling unable to teach that subject to their children? What qualifications do they have to teach if they themselves do not know the subject that their supposedly teaching? Please justify your answer. The question could also be extrapolated to the area or teaching subjects of theology as well.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 7, 2011)

If the State decided the content and determined my qualification to teach some subjects then I would surely fail the content knowledge test for subjects made mandatory by the state such as evolution, etc.

I think it would be wise to compare any homeschool student to other standardized tests, but I would never want the State to judge my competence when their state-run schools are so awful themselves.


----------



## jwithnell (Feb 7, 2011)

When a home school Mom or Dad is not competent to teach a subject he is usually wise enough to use a co-op program, a tutor or a canned curriculum. In many cases I've brushed up my knowledge while going along with my kids -- quick, what is a gerund? I might fail a test prior to starting a class, but it comes back rapidly while working through the subject.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 7, 2011)

1. Are professional teachers required to take an annual test?
2. How would you account for another inequality that such exams would entail? Professionals typically teach the same subject year after year, while parents are overseeing the education of children who are advancing through twelve years of curriculum. Professionals, if only by osmosis, gather some expertise in their subjects over the years; parents must move on with their children to the next level, year after year.
That last point might be taken as an implied argument against homeschooling, except for this:
3. Such a system of required exams also overlooks the major difference between public education and homeschooling. In the former, the students sit under instructors--the teacher is more or less active while the students are more or less passive. In the latter, the situation is reversed. Homeschooling works best when students become active, self-directed learners. Parents then are simply overseers and motivators. In that scenario, their need to know the material themselves is minimized.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 7, 2011)

_gerund_ is a chore that old people do. It is short for geriatric errand.


----------



## rbcbob (Feb 7, 2011)

My wife did not finish high school and was nervous about homeschooling our children. Our youngest is now 20 years old and in second semester at the university of Louisville, on academic scholarship and in the honors program. I think my wife did a pretty good job. Despite this there are those who advocate the State prohibiting such moms from teaching their own children at home!


----------



## fishingpipe (Feb 7, 2011)

No. 

An answer from the perspective of certification, from Michael Smith, president of the Home School Legal Defense Association (www.hslda.org):

The recent Court of Appeals decision in California was a throwback to the 1980s and early ’90s, when teacher certification was a sacred cow in many states and home-schoolers were regularly prosecuted for truancy. Since then, more than 30 states have addressed home schooling and not one legislative body requires teacher certification as a teacher qualification, and most states impose no minimum education level for home-school teachers.
The main reason states have moved toward home-school freedom is because research shows that home-schoolers on average score 20 to 30 percentile points above the national average on standardized achievement tests. Research also demonstrates that home-schooled children score higher on college scholastic aptitude tests. These results have been achieved despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of these students are taught by parents who are not teacher certified.
Another consideration is whether teacher certification is justified for public school teachers. The state should be required to prove that its licensing or credentialing requirements are valid and a good use of taxpayer funds.
Research in the last decade casts serious doubt on the relationship of teacher certification to a student’s academic achievement. In a 2007 article in Education Next, several economist/ educators studied teacher certification in New York City. The title of their article says it all: “Photo finish: certification doesn’t guarantee a winner.” The report concluded that teacher certification status matters little for student learning.
Additionally, California’s public schools are failing to measure up to national standards. On the most recent national assessment of educational progress conducted by the U.S. Department of Education, only 30 percent of California public school fourth graders were proficient in math, an astonishing 47 percent of California fourth graders were not at the level of basic skills in reading and 77 percent were below the level of proficiency.
The bottom line is that there is no evidence to support the requirement for teacher certification in either home schools or public schools.​


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 7, 2011)

If parents screw up their children's minds and values, then they screw up their children's minds and values. There is no way to prevent this and it has never been the state's responsibility to do so. This is why the Bible regards parenting as so important. You really have a lot of power over how your kids turn out.


----------



## he beholds (Feb 7, 2011)

NO WAY. And I'm pretty sure I'd pass any test they'd throw my way, because I'm a good test-taker--but that is all it would show. I'm a trained teacher married to a public school teacher--we both got awards for our "exemplary" scores on the Praxis tests for our subject. So clearly I'm not afraid of the tests. But do I think me passing that test proves I'm a good teacher? Do I think the people who fail the elementary test a gazillion times (that is a very frequent occurrence ) would be poor teachers? NO. Does anyone at all, minus the feds, think standardized tests even prove what the students know? No. Sure, it's an easy way to maybe weed out some bad seeds, but testing by no means proves anything about knowledge or ability. 

Could you not teach virtually anything? I'm not sure what subject you taught, but I taught English. When I was a substitute filling in for an AP History class for a week, I ROCKED the class. All of the info that I taught was brand new to me and very, very subject-specific. Before I took the assignment, would I have passed the test? Not likely. (OK, above I just said I'd pass any test, but I'm assuming I'd do some cramming before the test.) I was teaching one class about child soldiers in Africa and another class about immigration problems in I don't even remember what part of US history (see, I don't even remember what it is that I taught!). But I did really, really well. It is one of my favorite teaching experiences, even compared with later having my own classroom. 

How did I do well, if I couldn't have passed the test before the week started? I worked really hard to create great lessons on the material and teach them well. I got the materials on a Friday and had to start teaching them on the next Monday. 

I will concede that there are some subjects that frighten me, at this point. (Like some sciences, any higher level maths, etc.) But, el. ed teachers teach all the subjects, and I know there are some out there with less intelligence than me. But they figure out HOW to teach what needs to be learned. Parent-teachers do the same thing. I could see if there were an epidemic of uneducated homeschooled children just making it by in the system (kind of like what we have in the public schools), but the fact remains that most homeschooled students have more knowledge, in the end, than most of their public school peers. If we ever get to the point where the homeschooled kids are graduating en masse without knowing how to read or multiply, then I will welcome the _discussion_ on whether parents need to be tested. (I still wouldn't pull for it, but I'd grant that a conversation may need to be had.) 

Plus, the real point is, why in the world does anyone think it is the government's role to educate our kids? It isn't. It is the parents' responsibility. And I think the public school could be a great thing--it should be parents joining together to share resources. I think it is 100% allowable to delegate certain responsibilities to others. But delegating should mean that the final product still is what the parents want it to be.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 7, 2011)

Should parents be tested in nutrition before they feed their kids or take them to a private restaurant (FDA-approved nutrition standards determining the content, of course)? If they fail, should they be required to send the kids to certified restaurants?

That's what this question sounds like to me.


----------



## JBaldwin (Feb 7, 2011)

I started to respond to this, stepped away from my desk for awhile, came back, and looks like all of you have said what I"ve been thinking. 

In my experience, homeschool parents are much more diligent about studying than the students. In my years of homeschooling, I have relearned algebra, geometry, biology and creative writing. In addition, I've learned the history they didn't teach me in school, and I have a renewed joy of learning that was stolen from me sitting by a desk 7 hours a day 5 days a week for all those years.


----------



## Scottish Lass (Feb 7, 2011)

Wayne said:


> 1. Are professional teachers required to take an annual test?



Nope. We're required to take one before we get our certificate. After that, you only need to renew your certificate--usually requires taking makework classes that may or may not be relevant to the subject.


----------



## Micah Everett (Feb 7, 2011)

I am still at a loss, Mr. Jolley, to understand why you are so opposed to homeschooling. In ten years of teaching at the university level, I have yet to meet a homeschooled student that appeared to be anything less than genius-level compared to his public school-educated peers. No, these students aren't necessarily "geniuses" in terms of IQ score—they simply have a work ethic, desire to learn, and sense of self-discipline that the other students lack. They almost always are "straight-A" students, and some of them start college very early. I have on at least one occasion had a 15-year-old homeschooled freshman in one of my classes. The student that comes immediately to mind made an "A" with what seemed, from his perspective, to be minimal effort. I know this is anecdotal evidence at best, and we've all heard "horror stories," I'm sure, about homeschooling "disasters," but compared with the legions of functionally illiterate high school graduates out there (I used to meet these at the university, as well, until we went to selective admissions a couple of years ago), the percentage of poorly-educated homeschooled children is very small.

Most education degree plans are heavy on "educational theory" courses and light on actual content knowledge. (I am happy to say that the music education curriculum, in which I teach a few courses, is an exception to this, being essentially a liberal arts degree in music plus the "education" courses needed for teacher licensure.) Yes, credentialed educators, at least at the secondary level, have learned a particular subject area well enough to pass the necessary licensure exams, but memorizing enough material to pass one or two tests and then never being examined on that material again or expected to interact in any meaningful way with ongoing developments in the field hardly constitutes a high level of mastery. (And, yes, I have taken and passed the teacher licensure exams for music. I am not speaking from ignorance of what those tests entail.) Take away the educational theory—much of which is “bunk,” anyway—and you have little material left in each field that a reasonably well-read homeschooling parent could not grasp well enough to successfully guide his children’s learning, as studies and experience have amply demonstrated. And, as has already been mentioned, parents that are uncomfortable teaching certain areas can and do form co-ops in order to support one another and take best advantage of one another’s strengths. There are various online/distance learning resources available for this, as well. 

So, what kind of standard should there be for homeschoolers, and who should establish it? Your assumption seems to be that the state has the right to dictate how each child should be educated, and that if the education provided by the parents to that child is at any point deemed by the state to be insufficient, the state can somehow intervene. (If I have overstated or incorrectly represented your position I sincerely apologize.) Show me anywhere in Scripture where our Lord has assigned that right or responsibility to the state—it's not there. Yes, we are to submit to the authorities God has placed over us (cf. Romans 13), and I would even go so far as to say that our command to thus submit extends to those areas in which we might view the state’s incursion to be excessive or illegitimate. But, as we discussed in the other recent thread on this topic, in this case the educational standards of the state stand in opposition to the teaching of God’s Word in that they omit God from the curriculum. Thus, God’s mandate that we raise and educate our children as Christians, in “the nurture and admonition of the Lord,” necessitates that we choose the standards of Scripture over those of the state. When direct conflict is present, “we must obey God rather than men.”

I still haven’t answered my question. What kind of standard should there be for homeschoolers, and who should establish it? My short answer would be college entrance exams, or whatever requirements are necessary to enter into a trade that the homeschool graduate might wish to pursue. The standard that the homeschooling parent must meet is that his children should emerge from the program of study amply prepared to be admitted to and then succeed in the next level of study, or in a chosen profession. And, even in the odd instance in which a homeschooled student might fail to reach this goal at age eighteen, there is nothing that says that he cannot work to rectify any deficiencies and try again in the future. There is neither a mandate nor a need for the state to be involved in this process at all. 

There is another, vastly more important standard that we must meet, though. One day we will all stand before the Lord and give an account to Him. Praise God, we will be able to stand because of Christ’s atoning death and imputed righteousness, since our own is but “filthy rags.” Still, how dreadful would it be to stand before Him having failed to raise our children according to His commands, and, still more dreadful, to learn that our failure to provide them with a thoroughly Christian education contributed to their eventual apostasy and damnation. “May it never be!”


----------



## JBaldwin (Feb 8, 2011)

Micah, thank you for stating so well, my thoughts. I went through a secondary education degree in my field and was horrified (even then) to realize that those taking the major field of study (without the teaching degree) were required to take more difficult courses than those who were taking teaching degrees in the same field. I had to sit through useless pyschology and education classes while my peers were taking advanced courses. The reasoning given to me behind all this was that those students will be not be teaching, and "you do not need all that advanced material to teach high school". I don't know how things are these days, but that's the way it was when I was in college. 

With over thirty years of experience teaching students in small classes and privately, I've realized that my students do the best when I tailor the information to their individual needs. Some move along through the material quickly, others struggle for a long time and then suddenly "take off" and do better than the ones who grasped the material quickly. Homeschooling allows for the parent to work with the child at that level.


----------



## Tim (Feb 8, 2011)

With regard to whether the state should require a competency test, the answer is easy. The state has no jurisdiction whatsoever in this area.


----------



## TimV (Feb 8, 2011)

I would turn the question around and ask if public school teachers should be made to prove that they could get a job using the skills they teach. I doubt that 98% could, at least here in California. We did a complicated job for an engineering teacher, and he was always interfering and messing things up. I left thinking that in the real world he'd be living under a bridge after a few weeks.


----------



## moral necessity (Feb 8, 2011)

I taught public high school for 13 years, and homeschooled my children every one of them. The state is not an entity...we are the state. This is not socialism. God instructed the family to "bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord", not the state. He told parents to "train up a child in the way he should go", not the state. What rights we have not relinquished for the good of the whole, remain ours, and what duties we have allowed them to perform, remain ours for accountability.


----------



## Tim (Feb 8, 2011)

Let me encourage a slightly different direction here. I think most of us agree that the state has no say. 

But what about the church? Our brother has also asked about that in his OP.

Since the ultimate purpose of home education is the Christian discipleship of children, are there circumstances where the church should intervene with parents? Perhaps not a "competency exam" that we usually consider, but what about situations where instruction is less than Christian or less sound than it might be? What is the church's jurisdiction?


----------



## bill (Feb 8, 2011)

Micah Everett said:


> In ten years of teaching at the university level, I have yet to meet a homeschooled student that appeared to be anything less than genius-level compared to his public school-educated peers.



I don't know if this is a fair statement. I went to a Bible college and many times my professors would require us to do essays and research papers. Requiring the research papers to be 10-15 page minimums and many of the home schoolers in my class were frustrated about having to do such work that was so demanding and many times they (not all) scored very poorly on the assignments. But from that I would not say that public schoolers were better or smarter, but according to your example maybe I should conclude this?

Also I take some issue with comparing home school students with national average scores. There are many kids nationally that don't care about there school work and don't have parents that care. So obviously the scores are going to be down. And I will admit that a one on one student to teacher education has its benefits and can help with test preparation. 

To answer the original question I do believe there should be some test or requirement of the knowledge of the subject before one begins to teach on it. I don't mean if one home schools that they should be required to take there child into the public school, although there are many public schools in my area that will allow home school children to partake in certain classes that the parent does not feel competent to teach. In fact the school my children go to allow home schoolers to participate in band and choir and in fact have many who participate. just a side note

Either way I believe it is important for parents to use other means for teaching there children in areas they themselves lack in. Whether it is co-op, like has already been mentioned or some other means.

---------- Post added at 09:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 AM ----------




Tim said:


> Since the ultimate purpose of home education is the Christian discipleship of children, are there circumstances where the church should intervene with parents? Perhaps not a "competency exam" that we usually consider, but what about situations where instruction is less than Christian or less sound than it might be? What is the church's jurisdiction?



I believe this is my understanding of the covenant. Yes, the church has a duty to intervene.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 8, 2011)

As far as I am concerned the answer would still be "no" if all homeschoolers grew up to be abysmal failures. Parents have a right to feed their children junk food, fail to ensure that they attain good math and writing skills, and to teach them dispensationalism (obviously in a Reformed church, the elders would have something to say about this because the family joined the church voluntarily and made vows). The government's job is to protect from invasion and punish criminals.


----------



## Micah Everett (Feb 8, 2011)

bill said:


> I don't know if this is a fair statement. I went to a Bible college and many times my professors would require us to do essays and research papers. Requiring the research papers to be 10-15 page minimums and many of the home schoolers in my class were frustrated about having to do such work that was so demanding and many times they (not all) scored very poorly on the assignments. But from that I would not say that public schoolers were better or smarter, but according to your example maybe I should conclude this?



I admitted that what I provided is only anecdotal evidence. In my experience, I have not encountered homeschoolers that would have this problem. Obviously you have. Statistics that have been cited by others seem to suggest that the homeschoolers I have encountered are more the norm than those you have encountered. Conversely, barely-literate public school graduates are EXTREMELY common.

I do think that the level of parental involvement in and commitment to the child's education is an important factor here that must not be discounted, whether the child is homeschooled, educated in a private/Christian school, or educated in a public school. Clearly, the children whose family environments place a high value upon education and which provide guidance, nurture, and encouragement in that education will perform better than those that do not. This is no doubt a significant contributing factor to the disproportionate percentage of successful homeschool students compared to public school students, since homeschool families are usually invested in their children's education in this way.

That said, the spiritual aspect of this question must not be discounted. I still maintain that an educational environment in which Christ is not central in every subject area is insufficient for the children of Christian families. That is my primary concern. Having been educated in a public school myself, I spent years (and am still doing so to some extent) undoing the conflicted worldviews that I gained through the unfortunate combination of daily secular education with church on Sundays and Wednesday nights (and I am very grateful that the Lord has saved and preserved me in spite of this). As a public university professor I continually find myself in a state of conflict, trying to "covertly" teach my subject matter in a God-exalting way without running afoul of state laws or regulations. (By the way, if anyone knows of a Christian college or university that would like to hire a music professor with specialties in trombone and low brass performance and pedagogy, with secondary areas in introductory music theory and aural skills, music history, and music appreciation, I will gladly consider it! ) 

Whether the child's explicitly Christian education takes place in a homeschool situation, in a Christian private school, or some combination of the two is immaterial to me. There are certainly strengths and weaknesses to both situations, and I have only taken up the homeschool banner in this thread because that is the subject of the question at hand. My point is that our children need to be educated as Christians. That education needs to be both rigorous and thorough, but it must at all costs be Christian.


----------



## Bethel (Feb 8, 2011)

Our Christian Classical homeschool is not perfect, but it’s bathed in prayer; and I'm teaching my boys what God has led me to teach. If I don't know it, I learn along with them (or at least a day ahead). In all honesty, I do a lot of preparation now that my boys are in high school.

It's really not what I teach them, but it's what I've instilled in them: a love of learning. My oldest son wanted to learn how to program a computer. Neither my husband nor I know how to program a computer, so we found a free programming course from the MIT opencourseware. My son watched the lectures (& thought that the professor was trying to be funny even though he wasn't) and learned some simple programming for a science fair project. My middle son has a passion for Black Holes. I found a course from the Teaching Company, and he has watched them many times over (of course, we talk about the evolutionary worldview presented by the professor).

There are many ways to educate a child in the internet-age we live in. At this point, we've opted not to use co-ops or fee based on-line courses. A certified person in any field does not guarantee a successful outcome of people or products. It's the daily example of Christian love and character of a homeschool mom and dad that produces the child who treasures Christ and goes out into the world to spread His gospel. I don't need a certification to make that happen.

Just so you know, I have a BBA in Accouning with high honors from UT Austin and CPA from the state of Texas, but that hasn't helped one bit in our homeschooling journey. In fact, I relinquished my certification recently to free up those funds (certification is generally a fund raiser for most states) for better use.


----------



## Grimmson (Feb 8, 2011)

There was a reason why I posed these series of questions. The reason was because of what I see as a lack of accountability from anyone regarding education by some and the raise of the self, whereby the self isolates him or herself away from the expectations and standards of a given intuition or community to do whatever he or she wants based from more of a can-do Americanized philosophy of privatized self-doing. Even the puritans did not take a “each man for his self” ideology in life, including in the area of education whereby that had standards civilly for parents as a community which also overlapped in the arena of the church (ex. being the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1642 and 1647). An interesting piece of information to point out is that the 1647 educational law, which was called the Old Deluder Satan Act, was formed due to parents’ neglect towards their children’s education. This law also established the requirement to hire a formal educator with the establishment of grammar schools( with any town of 50 or more families). Now this law and established accountability was within a civil context, along with a spiritual influence. Now I admit that I do not know the ins and outs of the history of the law, who voted for it and how much clerical influence was or was not at play. But with this being called the Puritan Board I think we should consider the laws that they established and why, instead of just leaving educational up to the parents alone for as one can observe they did not. I am extremely interested why some in here would either not appreciate or desire for accountability from the church in teaching your children, especially in the area of doctrine; particularly if one sees your children as covenant children or Christians within the covenant of faith. The church should serve as a check against the parents for the sake of the child so that clear orthodox teaching is taught and understood by the child. 

Now I will address a few comments and afterwards would love to see people address more regarding the church and home education like Tim was pointing out in relation to this OP. 



Scottish Lass said:


> Wayne said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Are professional teachers required to take an annual test?
> ...



Anna is absolutely right here. The point of the OP was not to ask for a test each year, but once for all regarding a particular subject.


Micah Everett said:


> I am still at a loss, Mr. Jolley, to understand why you are so opposed to homeschooling.


I have never said I was against homeschooling, just the lack of accountability. If one reads what I have said in other links you would find that I am all for homeschooling for a variety of reasons. To say that I am against homeschooling would be either a misrepresentation of my position or a lie. If one was to dive in deep to where I think standards for education should come and comes from then you would find that their should be a parallel of standards from the church, where the sacred standards of the faith are taught, and between the state, where common (nonsacred) standards are expected to be taught, issued by masters in the subject within the expectation of purpose being for the well being of the community and needed skills desired by employers. Secular education through grammar schools has not always been through the church as one looks back at history. Chrysostom and Augustine both received a secular education while both having a Christian mother. Chrysostom’s mother being well known being a Christian and for her godliness. In fact Chrysostom was so devote in his faith, he damaged his digestion system while isolating himself from Antioch for a while trying to memorize and ponder as much scripture as he could. Ambrose of Milan himself, I think received a secular education. By the time you get to the Medieval period, if you received a formal education it would either be for service to the church or to typically the state in some capacity. If you were a poor family and could not afford a formal education then one would not get one. You would then work the fields with your father and mother. If you were lucky then by the age of 12 then you would receive an apprenticeship that would last until you were 25 or 26. Formal schools were typically only for the middle class and rich. And they had their own set of standards for their own time and not set from the parents, but instead based on the discipline and the master teacher. The standard practice of apprenticeship continued beyond the time of the medieval period, and also the established practice of the Puritans as well. Therefore based on history, I also think that a given society has a role to establish standards for a child’s education. 

I think today we have elevated in the church the family nuclear structure, a father, a mother, and children. When there is something to be said regarding the interaction of the family with the context of a given community. Where the desires of the one family today outweigh and are divorced from the needs of the local community and extended family. The biblical view of family within the church is not really in play within the context of American Christian family as observed by the lack of care of grandparents of children being shipped away to be cared for in a nursing home. Now what does this have to do with this OP? There are several things. The first of all biblical children education is not done by the parents alone. The one example of this is with Lois and Eunice with Timothy within 2 Timothy 1:5, where we see both Lois and Eunice educating Timothy, thus not Eunice alone in things regarding the faith. The second is the care for children is actively being taught to younger wives within the church by older women, a fact that I see lacking within today’s church as a whole. Third, parents in accordance to scripture that the church abides by are to care actively for their parents based on 1 Timothy 5:4 and Matthew 15:4-6. This is not a suggestion to the church, but a command in accordance to scripture. Therefore we can see church actively taking part in the activity of care within the family structure and these grandparents may assist with the activity of teaching children and currently the parents actively themselves. I am just pointing out that American families do not have the same sense of family as we see within scripture, let alone in the history of the world. 

Also another issue to point out in regards to standards is passages like Ephesians 6:4, and Proverbs 22:6, which are typically used as a defense that God commands that children be homeschooled compared to going to a public school. These passages are not talking about teaching children math or science, but instead the faith. A faith that is guarded by the leaders of the church in ages past, present, and coming future until the return of our Lord Christ Jesus. There is a sacred and common separation that can occur in education, for the faith does not teach you how to be a plumber or how to be an engineer, for those things I will call common compared to showing love to your neighbor or beliefs in major doctrines like the Trinity being sacred. If I was to learn how to become a plumber would it not be better to learn the standards of the trade from a master plumber compared to someone who is not? I would say so. If a employer requires you have a certain certificate, degree, or it’s equivalent for a given job should not one abide by that standards placed on him? It is for these reasons I have no problem with the establishment of standards with the church or even by the state. Therefore the reason why I think parents must have accountability to standards, particularly by the church is due to the training of the faith that occurs though the confines of the church. Not to teach a child the faith actively, like many parents do by the lack of family devotions and prayer that takes place, should be an issue that the church must address and deal with for the protection of the young ones present. Standards laid out by the church can also assist with any misunderstanding that a young parent in the faith may have, which would be a befit to the parent as well as the child. I would not understand why a parent would not want the accountable for themselves regarding the teaching of the faith to their children by the church. 

Hopefully that answers Micah’s question. 

By the way I did listen to Dan’s posted sermon.



bill said:


> I don't know if this is a fair statement. I went to a Bible college and many times my professors would require us to do essays and research papers. Requiring the research papers to be 10-15 page minimums and many of the home schoolers in my class were frustrated about having to do such work that was so demanding and many times they (not all) scored very poorly on the assignments. But from that I would not say that public schoolers were better or smarter, but according to your example maybe I should conclude this?



In my experience as a teacher and a tutor, I have known some homeschoolers who did not succeed academically; whereby I had to correct many things that they were taught poorly on. 





Tim said:


> Let me encourage a slightly different direction here. I think most of us agree that the state has no say.
> 
> But what about the church? Our brother has also asked about that in his OP.
> 
> Since the ultimate purpose of home education is the Christian discipleship of children, are there circumstances where the church should intervene with parents? Perhaps not a "competency exam" that we usually consider, but what about situations where instruction is less than Christian or less sound than it might be? What is the church's jurisdiction?



I was curious about the answers some of you have regarding Tim’s question, because they also fall under questions packed in as well. 

Until I am back on see you all later.


----------



## Micah Everett (Feb 9, 2011)

One more post for me and then I'm done. I rather prefer my usual "lurker" status on the PB, partly because I rarely have sufficient time to write anything substantive or useful, and partly because it is rare that a topic comes up for which I believe I have something pertinent to add to the discussion. I will make a few comments and then (hopefully) just enjoy watching the rest of this discussion develop.



Grimmson said:


> I have never said I was against homeschooling, just the lack of accountability. If one reads what I have said in other links you would find that I am all for homeschooling for a variety of reasons. To say that I am against homeschooling would be either a misrepresentation of my position or a lie.



To the extent that I have misrepresented your view, I apologize. It was unintentional.



Grimmson said:


> There is a sacred and common separation that can occur in education, for the faith does not teach you how to be a plumber or how to be an engineer, for those things I will call common compared to showing love to your neighbor or beliefs in major doctrines like the Trinity being sacred.



I think this is where the primary disagreement between your position and that of myself and most of those posting to this thread lies. Many (most?) of us posting here reject the concept of such a sacred/secular dichotomy. While "2+2=4" is true whether one teaches his children that this is so because God created an orderly universe in which certain mathematical constants are in place, or if he teaches that this is because of an accident of the evolutionary development of the world and/or of our cognition, we believe that it is of paramount importance that our children be taught mathematics (and history, and science, and language, and music, etc., etc.) from the first point of view. The "raw information" being taught is often (though not always) the same, but the underlying philosophical bases are quite different. True, the Bible nowhere teaches the skills necessary to be a plumber or engineer, but it most certainly teaches that, if we are to be plumbers or engineers, we are to do that to the glory of God. Our children need to hear this throughout the week--not just at church on Sunday or Wednesday--as well are receive some guidance as to how this Christian worldview will work itself out in the work of a plumber or engineer.

Let me provide an example with which I am much more familiar--music. Scripture tells us that we are to do all things for God's glory (1 Corinthians 10:31), but what does it mean to glorify God through music? Should I write, teach, and/or perform whatever type of music suits my fancy and then presume to dedicate this to God, or are there stricter Scriptural standards that might apply? Philippians 4:8 tells us that we are to think on things that are true, honest, just, pure, lovely, etc. This means that I'm going to pursue music that is "true," or, as I have applied this in my thinking, music which is well-ordered, reflecting the orderliness of our Creator and the world that He has made. I'm going to pursue music that is "lovely." Granted, the perception of beauty is somewhat subjective (from our point of view), and I think there is room within the interpretation of this verse for various ideas of what is "lovely." But, at the very least, I am not going to pursue that music which is crafted in such a way as to be intentionally ugly, perhaps in an attempt to create "shock value." Ephesians 4:29 says that Christians are to edify others in their communication. Thus, the music I perform, teach, and write should build others up emotionally, cognitively, and spiritually.

That is a VERY short summary of some of the worldview issues with which I have wrestled in my own mind regarding my field, but how different is this perspective from that which prevails in the music profession, in which music is seen primarily as a vehicle for the composer and/or performer's personal emotional and/or intellectual expression, sometimes with little or no thought given to the listener at all, much less to God and His glory. If I were to assume that my field is "common" as opposed to the teaching in the "sacred" realm that goes on in the church, and then on that basis sent my child to study music in public school, he would hear from his family and the church on Sundays and Wednesday nights that he is to glorify God through music, and then hear from his teachers the rest of the week that his goal is self-expression, or maybe "shock value," or perhaps even to "make it big," but the consideration of God or what is glorifying to Him is nowhere on the radar. He is learning the same basic skills as he would in a Christian context, but is building them upon the wrong philosophical underpinnings. A conflict between the purpose of his work as taught by the church and as taught by the school is created, and too often the secular/school perspective "wins out." (You know all of those scary Barna statistics about young adults leaving the faith after high school? I watch it happen all the time where I work.)

In short, I think we all want our children to emerge from their education with the requisite skills to succeed in whatever profession they choose, including the ability to earn whatever certifications are necessary for them to practice those professions. It appears to me at present (and, again, I hope I am not misrepresenting you) that one of our primary differences lies in your acceptance of a dichotomy between a sacred realm and a secular/common realm. While certain subjects are more expressly sacred than others, my understanding is that the philosophical perspective from which we view every area of life and thought must be thoroughly Christian, and for that reason the educational standards put forth by our secular (and as a result God-rejecting) state are faulty. In many cases those standards require the right skills, but the schools governed by those standards operate from a radically different worldview perspective from the one I hope and pray my son will adopt. This was not necessarily a problem for the Puritan system that you cited, since it was expressly Christian. I will leave the question of a more libertarian view of state involvement in education alone for now, since while I have usually taken that position, I would have a hard time opposing a system of public education that operated from such a worldview perspective.



Grimmson said:


> Originally Posted by Tim
> Let me encourage a slightly different direction here. I think most of us agree that the state has no say.
> 
> But what about the church? Our brother has also asked about that in his OP.
> ...



Since I have not really thought through this aspect of your question, I will leave it for others to address. 

With that, I hope to "fade back into the shadows." It has been a busy week already, and all of this extra writing doesn't help!


----------



## JBaldwin (Feb 9, 2011)

A simple comment about accountability. In my state, SC, parents can't homeschool without being accountable. Parents have a choice, but we must either homeschool through the state (in which the parent is directly accountable to the state), through an organization that does the record keeping and standardized testing or through an accountability to group to which we are required to report annually. We are bound by law to keep record books and samples of our student's work. I think this is already more accountability than should be required by law, but to then make the parents take subject matter tests is draconian.


----------



## Bethel (Feb 9, 2011)

Mr. Jolley wrote: In my experience as a teacher and a tutor, I have known some homeschoolers who did not succeed academically; whereby I had to correct many things that they were taught poorly on. {the quote didn't work}

Does your public school system with all of its required certifications and excessive use of State funds produce academic success for ALL of its students? How do you define academic success? Most schools use some sort of secular standardized test. As a Christian, this is not a sufficient definition for my family.

Just because the Biblical model of a family and church may be lacking in your view, it does not logically follow that the secular State should come in and govern. Government control is not the answer because personal accountability cannot be legislated. There are many "accountability" measures for both the successful and unsuccessful ISDs in our area. Our State is wrought with schools misrepresenting their drop out numbers to meet State standards. Recent audits have uncovered this problem. And what is their solution? To put more requirements on homeschools. Whenever the schools run into problems, deflecting the issue is their answer. Their accountability standards do not guarantee competent teachers or knowledgeable students.

Homeschools are successful in Texas because of the lack of oversight. Yes, there are parents who abuse this. But these parents will abuse whatever system is in place. And I think that they have a right to because they are the parents. When you put homeschool accountability measures in place it does not cause the "abusive" parents to comply, it just puts more work on those parents who are accountable regardless.

With all of the accountability measures in our state school systems, education is still a problem for our country. So much so, that the Federal government has gotten involved. Have things improved? Not that I can see. Certification and government control is NOT the savior for any entity (education, health-care, financial institutions, etc.); they are the idols we put in place of God to make things "better". In our family, Jesus Christ is Savior. When we have that as the center, all other priorities fall into place. I'm thankful for the freedom to make this choice for our family. I'm completely against homeschool accountability measure because, in our nation's history, legislation generally removes freedom and God.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 9, 2011)




----------



## Hebrew Student (Feb 9, 2011)

Hey Everyone!

Interesting topic. I would actually say that I am halfway between Grimmson and the rest of the posters. First of all, I don't agree with this statement:



> If parents screw up their children's minds and values, then they screw up their children's minds and values. There is no way to prevent this and it has never been the state's responsibility to do so. This is why the Bible regards parenting as so important. You really have a lot of power over how your kids turn out.



If that is the case, then I am really frightened after reading the book of Genesis. Sin has infected the family, and, if there is no checks and balances on the authority of the family, then basically what you are saying is that there should be no consequences for sin. In fact, I would argue that scripture says just the opposite:

_*Deuteronomy 13:6-11* "If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods ' (whom neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 of the gods of the peoples who are around you, near you or far from you, from one end of the earth to the other end), 8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. 9 "But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 "So you shall stone him to death because he has sought to seduce you from the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 11 "Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and will never again do such a wicked thing among you._

If a family member teaches things that are contrary to God himself, and tries to entice you, he is to be put to death. As I said, reading the effects of sin on the family in the Bible, it is simply dangerous to have no accountability, and God presents the highest of all penalties for those who would secretly try to teach their children contrary to him. To not have accountability given our sin nature is simply asking for the abuse that you now find being talked about in books such as _Quivering Daughters_.

On the other hand, I also see where everyone else is coming from. The problem is that I don't trust the state to *Biblically* enforce these regulations at all. After hearing the president mock the Bible using the most horrendus eisegesis I have ever heard, and after seeing our government associate with some of the hardest leftests on the face of the planet [communists, socialists, etc.], I do not trust the government to be Biblical in their regulations.

Incedentally, while I would trust the church more, it is still difficult, because so much of the church is based on politics and authoritarianism. I still cannot believe that Ergun Caner is going around completely unrepentant of his lies. I have read many stories about church abuse, and have ran into many men who are leaders in churches who simply do not care to interpret the scriptures accurately.

In an ideal world, I would say that there needs to be a balance of power between the family, the church, and the state; the true Lord in these matters is God and his word. The problem is, the whole point of secularism is to remove God from the throne. Also, when politicians start getting into power in the church, the whole point is to make themselves Lord, rather than the scriptures. Both of these things destroy the Lordship of Christ. That is why, it seems to me that reestablishing the Lordship of Christ in the areas of state and church through the proclaimation of the Gospel and the scriptures needs to be top on our list of solving this problem.

In the meantime, I think it is good to find a church that does faithfully exegete and exposit the scriptures, and to be involved in that fellowship. As you interact with the people in the congregation, and as you learn more about the scriptures, there will be accountability based upon the scriptures. That is why I have found that the two best methods I have found are Church-Based schooling [where the church sets up a school], and homeschooling, where the homeschoolers have close ties to an exegetically sound Church. People who come from those situations are amongst some of the smartest people I know.

God Bless,
Adam


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 9, 2011)

To clarify, Adam, I do believe that crimes should be punished by the state, such as injuring one's children. This is not a way to monitor, regulate, or enforce parenting (as educational checks and balances would be), but a way to punish crime. Stoning idolaters under the OT falls under the same category--punishing crime. It's not a way to enforce good parenting.


----------



## Grimmson (Feb 9, 2011)

Micah Everett said:


> Grimmson said:
> 
> 
> > There is a sacred and common separation that can occur in education, for the faith does not teach you how to be a plumber or how to be an engineer, for those things I will call common compared to showing love to your neighbor or beliefs in major doctrines like the Trinity being sacred.
> ...



The secular and sacred distinction does not eliminate within the common realm to do all things to the glory of God. One can be a garbage collector and do it for the Lord through his hard work, sacrifice, humility, grace towards others, his kindness, and so on because of the Gospel. This however does not make the position of the garbage collector as a sacred or holy profession based on the standard requirements for what is in the job description of a garbage collector in a realm of common grace in the kingdom of man. The issue is of course is if everything in this world for the Christian should be seen as sacred or if there are things set apart from the common which by definition makes it sacred. And I think we can see where I fall there. 



Micah Everett said:


> Our children need to hear this throughout the week--not just at church on Sunday or Wednesday


I completely agree with you there.




Bethel said:


> Does your public school system with all of its required certifications and excessive use of State funds produce academic success for ALL of its students? How do you define academic success? Most schools use some sort of secular standardized test. As a Christian, this is not a sufficient definition for my family.


 The State, and I am referring to the State as the United States, does have laws in place that every student will receive what that child needs for a fair education. The problem with the lack of success is not due to the certification or funds, but due to several factors. The first being the lack of care by parents regarding education, whereby they are not involved with what the child is learning about or to keep the child on task at home regarding any homework. Another issue is the lack of interest in the students regarding particular subjects or topics of required study. The lack of communication and accountability between teachers, the schools administrators, and parents between one another is yet another. And one can just go down the list and come up with more and more reasons, including plain and simply by teachers and approaches in education. Now if a student was not receiving a fair education and all the tools to reach those goals of the state then the parents have the right to sue the teacher; however they do not have the right to sue the teacher, the school, or the school district if the teacher was over the course of the quarters or semesters trying to get the parents involved and was communicating the issues with the parent’s child’s education; which would include a plan (individual if need be) for student success. The point of the certification is in regards to making sure that the teacher has the content knowledge which is needed to be taught and has the necessary experiential and academic knowledge in teaching to teach as a professional.

I have many different definitions that I apply for academic success, varying on the individual. I do not have a problem with secular standardized tests. If a student’s test score does not match equivalently well with my assessment of the student’s ability based on my understanding of the standards then there should be a real issue of concern. How could someone fail a standardized test and yet pass with high marks in my class? The reality is that is not going to take place; for if it was then I would not be doing my job and be giving false information to the school and the parents regarding that child’s ability. Now I am willing to admit that some students stress out regarding standardized tests, which is why I don’t have a problem with varying medium regarding the testing of that student meeting the standards. However a good teacher will prepare the student so that such stress would be minimal and the student well prepared when that standardized test arrives. This can be done and through the support of parents, which overall is lacking in children education; especially on the secondary level. Not everyone is gifted with the ability to teach effectively, and for those who are trying to be teachers and cannot effectively reach their students (even the good students) then that teacher should by the state have their certification removed as a form of accountability. Probably one of the reasons why this does not happen as much as it should is due to educational politics, including with unions, and the lack of educational involvement of parents on all levels of education. So not only is there a need in my opinion of accountability with homeschooling, but also accountability within the state by the parents. Good teachers are more then happy to have parental involvement and participation in education; whether it be through the presence of the parent in the classroom, working with a students on an assigned project, or homework support. 


austinww said:


> To clarify, Adam, I do believe that crimes should be punished by the state, such as injuring one's children. This is not a way to monitor, regulate, or enforce parenting (as educational checks and balances would be), but a way to punish crime. Stoning idolaters under the OT falls under the same category--punishing crime. It's not a way to enforce good parenting.



Austin, so you recognize Israel's right and required accountability by scripture to punish evil, whether the evil comes from a brother, a son, a daughter, or a wife. Now do you think by analogy that the church has the right to have accountability and place under discipline those within the church regarding the religious education of children?


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 9, 2011)

Grimmson said:


> austinww said:
> 
> 
> > To clarify, Adam, I do believe that crimes should be punished by the state, such as injuring one's children. This is not a way to monitor, regulate, or enforce parenting (as educational checks and balances would be), but a way to punish crime. Stoning idolaters under the OT falls under the same category--punishing crime. It's not a way to enforce good parenting.
> ...


 
I would have to say yes. Teaching a child heresy would be cause for church discipline, for instance.


----------



## Scot (Feb 9, 2011)

I've heard Dr. Morecraft say (it may have been in the sermon I posted on a previous thread) that in his opinion sending your child to a public school should be cause for church discipline.


----------



## Grimmson (Feb 9, 2011)

Scot said:


> I've heard Dr. Morecraft say (it may have been in the sermon I posted on a previous thread) that in his opinion sending your child to a public school should be cause for church discipline.


 
He said that near the end of the sermon you wanted me to listen to on Christian Education.

---------- Post added at 09:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 PM ----------




austinww said:


> Grimmson said:
> 
> 
> > austinww said:
> ...


 
So you do recognize then the need for parents to be accountable by the church of what they teach in relation to the doctrines of the church. If the answer is then yes, how should that accountability take place? I ask because in post number 20 here in the thread you said no in relation to the church intervening if parents are teaching something "less than Christian" as our good brother Tim asked in a post 18.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 9, 2011)

Grimmson said:


> So you do recognize then the need for parents to be accountable by the church of what they teach in relation to the doctrines of the church. If the answer is then yes, how should that accountability take place? I ask because in post number 20 here in the thread you said no in relation to the church intervening if parents are teaching something "less than Christian" as our good brother Tim asked in a post 18.


 
I said "no" in relation to the state and "yes" in relation to the Church (see the parenthetical statement).

---------- Post added at 10:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 PM ----------

OH! I see where the miscommunication came from now. My post (#20) begins with "As far as I am concerned the answer would still be 'no'..." and you thought I was answering the same question that Bill answered right before me. I can easily see how that would have made sense. My bad. My "no" actually applies to the question of whether parents should be tested according to state curriculum requirements prior to teaching their children a particular subject in lieu of sending them to a certified teacher. It was not an answer to Tim's question. Sorry about that.


----------



## JBaldwin (Feb 10, 2011)

austinww said:


> Grimmson said:
> 
> 
> > So you do recognize then the need for parents to be accountable by the church of what they teach in relation to the doctrines of the church. If the answer is then yes, how should that accountability take place? I ask because in post number 20 here in the thread you said no in relation to the church intervening if parents are teaching something "less than Christian" as our good brother Tim asked in a post 18.
> ...


 
For those of you who say that parents are accountible to the church for what they teach their children regarding doctrine, how do you suppose that is to be done? Parents can teach their children correct doctrine all day long, but it doesn't mean the child will embrace it. How would the church check that?


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 10, 2011)

For my part, I am only saying that if it became known that a family in the church was teaching their children, say, Arianism, then the parents should be disciplined (starting with just a rebuke, I would assume). I am not talking about regular examinations in the church.


----------



## Hebrew Student (Feb 10, 2011)

austinww,



> To clarify, Adam, I do believe that crimes should be punished by the state, such as injuring one's children. This is not a way to monitor, regulate, or enforce parenting (as educational checks and balances would be), but a way to punish crime. Stoning idolaters under the OT falls under the same category--punishing crime. It's not a way to enforce good parenting.



The point is, as Grimmson pointed out, teaching your children that God and his word is not the ultimate standard *was* a crime. My point is not to say that we should execute those who do these things today; it is only to say that the law of God does recognize that there needs to be some regulation on what parents teach, even if only that they must not teach their kids to follow after other gods. I am glad to see that, upon further discussion, you do agree that the church should step in if the parents are teaching their children Arianism.

JBaldwin,



> For those of you who say that parents are accountible to the church for what they teach their children regarding doctrine, how do you suppose that is to be done? Parents can teach their children correct doctrine all day long, but it doesn't mean the child will embrace it. How would the church check that?



I wouldn't argue that the church should "check" anything in that sense. Even in the civil sphere, you must have an warrant before you can go into someone's house and start an investigation in a civil case. It would be something very similar here. The church cannot start accusing someone without evidence. For example, in Deuteronomy 13, the one place that these things can come from is the family itself, and from those who know the family. Verses 12-14 seem to suggest this, even though they are talking about men of a city.

I think the point would be that, in a society whose first allegance is to God, this would be something that would be pointed out rather quickly, as would things like Arianism, denials of Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura, etc. Then, there should be an investigation to see if it is true, and then the appropriate disciplinary action taken. However, the initial evidence would come from simply being in both the family and the church community.

I do find it interesting that this is a civil law. Practically, in our modern culture, I hate to go that route because of the fact that our government is so anti-God and anti-Christ. That is why I say that there seem to be both civil and religious aspects to this law, and it would seem that all three are involved somehow. Again, though, that is only for a society where the family, church, and state actually care about accurately interpreting and obeying God's word.

God Bless,
Adam


----------



## bill (Feb 10, 2011)

JBaldwin said:


> For those of you who say that parents are accountible to the church for what they teach their children regarding doctrine, how do you suppose that is to be done? Parents can teach their children correct doctrine all day long, but it doesn't mean the child will embrace it. How would the church check that?



Both are accountable. Parents and Child. Just because the child is not recognized as part of the invisible church he (the child) is still accountable to believe the truth. The parents are accountable to teach the truth, and the Church would do well in being accountable to both. I find in many churches today that the teaching of the children is left up to the parent (home school, private school, or public school) all to much. That does not say that the church should step in and tell the parents what method they should use to teach there children, however, the church should be involved in what the parent is teaching. 

For instance. I send my children to the public school. I am constantly as well as my wife asking my children what they are learning and I work with them through there studies. I and my wife constantly talk to the teacher and the administration to find out what is coming up in my childrens curriculum. If they are to be taught evolution I or watch a video about evolution I ask to view it before they are to be taught it. The school allows me to view it and I or my wife are able to teach our children the errors about evolution and direct them through scripture how the world was made and all things came about through God. We also are active in reading through the bible and catechisms and we spend family devotion time with them as well. Yes it takes up a lot of our time, but I have as well as my children been blessed by this. 

However, I have never had a Elder ask me what I am doing to raise my children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Nor do they go to the other parents. They have left it up to the parent. Yet, I am accountable to teach my children the biblical truths and regardless they are accountable to believe what the bible says.

On a side note where is the accountability in the PCA in regards to theistic evolution which is being advocated by some in the New York area? When I look at the church being accountable I mean not just the local church, but the catholic church. Maybe I should have posed this question on a different thread.


----------



## TexanRose (Feb 10, 2011)

austinww said:


> For my part, I am only saying that if it became known that a family in the church was teaching their children, say, Arianism, then the parents should be disciplined (starting with just a rebuke, I would assume). I am not talking about regular examinations in the church.


 
Historically speaking, Reformed churches considered it their duty to regularly examine the doctrinal understanding of all--young and old--via catechism. The Scottish church employed catechists who did this full time; and at least a few Dutch Reformed ministers (incl. Brakel) considered catechizing to be a part of the minister's duties. While catechizing was also itself a means of instruction, it was primarily (at least in regards to the children) a way of checking up on whether the children were being taught as they should at home. 

Personally, I think that it is the church's duty to verify that parents are at least teaching their children to read with a reasonable degree of proficiency, so that they can read the Bible. And if the elders had reason to think that children were not being taught at all due to sloth on the part of the teaching parent, then perhaps discipline would be needed to address the sloth.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 10, 2011)

I hadn't thought about catechism as a means for examination. That's a good point.


----------

