Flatlander Faith

Apologetics from an Anabaptist perspective

Tag Archives: parents

Misfits

School tends to be a one size fits all proposition, and some children are misfits.

Despite the best efforts of schools and teachers, some children just do not do well in a large classroom. Home schooling parents have more freedom to find ways to adapt the curriculum and environment to make learning work for their child.

Children are hard-wired to learn from their parents, and parents know their children better than anyone else. Parents do not need special skills or training to teach their children, they just need to be parents.

Standard achievement tests show that home-schooled children score well above their peers in public schools. Even children with cognitive  limitations do better when home-schooled.

Now this is just a personal observation, but the home-schooled children that I know have much better social skills than their peers in school. Think about it: at home a child has to get along with her siblings and her parents. She learns how to communicate clearly with them all and this prepares her to communicate freely with anyone else, of any age.

Learning to learn

It looks like parents will be teaching their children at home for awhile. Here is something to keep in mind:

Education is not about teaching, it is about learning.

And the great advantage that home-schooled children have is that they learn how to learn.

Pray for all God’s children

children-513693_640

Image by Ben Kerckx from Pixabay

There is an epidemic sweeping the world that no one dares mention. Jacques Ellul, French sociologist, philosopher and theologian, wrote The Technological Society in 1964. In the book he describes how technology has supplanted the church and the Bible as the ultimate source of truth. Efficiency has become the sole moral absolute. There is no room for other moral considerations regarding the use of technology.

Jacques Ellul died in 1994 and did not live to see how horribly prescient he was. The technology now exists to change a person’s gender. If it is possible, then it is wrong to deny it to anyone. Children are being exposed to propaganda in the public schools and on TV telling them they may have a person of another gender inside them. If they decide this is true, then no one can prevent them from allowing that person of the other gender to manifest itself, first through hormone therapy and later through surgery. Parents have no right to interfere. There is no God, therefore man is perfectly free to play at being God.

This is child abuse, pure and simple. But in the view of the technological society it is altogether right and good. Even when it is now generally known that the human brain does not reach full maturity until the age of 25, and the last part that matures is the area governing impulse control.

Our children, all children, need to be told clearly and often that we love them, and God loves them, just the way they are. Let’s pray for the children too, not just our own children and grandchildren, but all children.

When the schools fail, what are parents to do?

family-eating-at-the-table-619142_640

Image by skeeze from Pixabay

The leaders of the public school system claim that only they have the tools and the understanding to prepare children for life in the modern world. It should be clear by now, to anyone who is not sleep-walking through life, that the schools have done a proper botch-up job of all things wherein they claim to be the experts.

Is it time for parents to rethink their own place and responsibility? The responsibilities of parents are the same as they always have been. We have allowed the public school system to usurp some of those responsibilities and thought we were doing what was best for our children.

A child’s first heroes are Mom and Dad. Young minds are hardwired to learn from their parents. That affords a precious opportunity for parents to establish a foundation for their child’s life. The opportunity slips away if we are intimidated by the confusing jumble of psychological opinions about how best to raise a child. If we squander that opportunity, our children will suffer the consequences throughout life, unless they can grasp hold of that foundation from some other source.

The public school movement has for years spread the propaganda that children can only learn how to get along with others by being together with their peers, children of their own age. How has that worked out? Honestly, does anyone see evidence of children learning consideration for others from children their own age?

Gordon Neufeld, a child psychologist in Vancouver, B. C., believes children must learn social skills from their parents. “The belief is that socializing–children spending time with one another–begets socialization: the capacity for skilful and mature relating to other human beings. There is no evidence to support such an assumption, despite its popularity. . . If socializing were the key to socialization, gang members and street kids would be model citizens.”

That brings us back to parents as the best placed people to teach their children respect and consideration for others. To parents who fear they are not qualified for such responsibility, Neufeld says: “We miss the essential point that what matters is not the skill of the parents, but the relationship of the child to the adult who is assuming responsibility.”

Bruno Bettelheim, a child psychologist who died thirty years ago, considered the ecological concerns that were being increasingly talked about and applied them to the family. He wrote that we should be concerned about raising children in the ecological setting that was most natural and helpful to their growth and development. That was a home with a mother and father. I believe we can safely ignore those psychologists who say anything different.

-Gordon Neufeld quotes are from Hold on to Your Kids – Why Parents Should Matter More Than Peers, © 2004 by Gordon Neufeld and Gabor Maté.

Matthew Effects in Learning

“For unto everyone that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance; but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath” (Matthew 25:29).

In 1986, Keith Stanovich published a study entitled Matthew Effects in Reading: Some Consequences of Individual Differences in the Acquisition of Literacy. The “Matthew Effects” in the title came from Jesus’ parable of the talents in Matthew 25.

The study showed that students who, at an early stage, gained a good understanding of how words are composed of sounds represented by the letters of the alphabet progressed rapidly in learning. Those who do not rapidly develop an awareness of the spelling to sound correlation will fall farther and farther behind in subsequent years.

This concept of how words are composed of sounds (phonemic awareness) is easily taught to young children, but our public school systems are not doing it. Instead, for at least 70 years now they have been experimenting with other methods of teaching reading. The result is that about 1/3 of children quickly make the letter-sound connection on their own, another 1/3 will struggle at first but eventually get it and the other 1/3 will be labelled learning disabled. I believe a large percentage of learning disabilities are created by inadequate teaching.

Since reading skills are the essential tool for learning everything else that a child will encounter in school, those with poor reading skills fall farther and farther behind as they progress through the school system.

This is a perfect example of the quote in my last post: “You know that the bureaucratic state has been reached in an organisation when the procedure is more important than the result.”

What we need is a more flexible system that is focussed on results. In both learning to read and in learning basic math skills, a child needs to master one set of skills before being pushed on to the next level. This concept of teaching for mastery in the basic skills has long been absent from the public school system

If this sounds like an argument for home schooling, or the old-fashioned one-room school, well, yes, I believe that they are more successful models for results-oriented learning. In any case, parents need to overcome their sense of intimidation by the big school machine and be much more involved in their child’s learning, especially in the beginning stages.

Am I a soldier of the cross?

 

Now these are the nations which the LORD left, to prove Israel by them, even as many of Israel as had not known all the wars of Canaan; only that the generations of the children of Israel might know, to teach them war, at the least such as before knew nothing thereof” (Judges 3:1-2).

After crossing the Jordan river into the Promised Land, Joshua led the Israelites in a few quick battles that left them in control of the whole land. The land was then divided among the tribes and it was up to each tribe to deal with any lingering opposition from the former occupants of the land. The above verses show that God knew that the Israelites would need to face opposition in order to remain vigilant.

Like the Israelites, we are prone to complacency. When things go well for a time, with no evident threats to our faith or our Christian way of life, we begin to believe that it is God’s plan for us to live at our ease.

This has been the case for Christians in North America over the past several generations. We have blessed the Lord for our freedom and prosperity, never dreaming that the Enemy was at work right under our noses. Today we are aware that there has been a major shift in public attitudes towards morality, the family and Christian faith. We didn’t see this coming, don’t understand what has happened, but surely it must be the fault of the politicians. If we could just get right-thinking people elected all would return to be as it should be.

Politicians did not create the situation we find ourselves in today – and they cannot fix it. They are being swept along just like the rest of us. The roots are much deeper and go much further back.

The humanist intellectuals who inspired the founding of our public school systems saw the schools as a means of removing children from the influence of their parents and forming their minds in the way that suited the purpose of the humanists. Their intention was to create a utopian society, a society where families and faith ceased to exist.

The first step was to convince parents that they were incompetent to train their own children. “Children need to be with other children their own age in order to learn how to get along with others.” The idea is ridiculous and should have been laughed to scorn, but it has been repeated so often, for so long a time, that most parents today accept it without question.

Evolution was introduced, in the name of science. The real reason was to convince children that there was no basis for any belief in right or wrong and no consequences to fear in choosing to live a life that did not accord with the teaching of their parents.

The old way of teaching reading by phonics was abandoned in favour of sight reading. Parents were told that they should not try to teach their children to read at home, leave it to the experts. The old way actually worked, nowadays we accept the 40% of the population has learning difficulties that leave them functionally illiterate. Much supposed research has taken place, many new methods tried, always with the same dismal results.

The same thing has happened in the teaching of mathematics. Parents are bewildered, so are the children. It seems that this was most likely the intention. The humanists are quite content to leave most of the population without the tools to figure out what is really going on.

So now we have children being trained that gender roles are not fixed, whatever they want to do is the right thing for them to do, and that it will be their responsibility to fix all the things that past generations have done to mess up our world.

Humanism has become the prevailing state religion and the schools are the shrines where it is worshipped. Our enemies are spiritual and must be fought with spiritual weapons. Have we forgotten what Isaac Watts knew almost 300 years ago?

Are there no foes for me to face?
Must I not stem the flood?
Is this vile world a friend to grace,
To draw me on to God?

Sure I must fight, if I would reign;
Increase my courage Lord,
I’ll bear the toil, endure the pain,
Supported by Thy Word.

The devaluation of women

Here in Canada the media has paid considerable attention to a sordid case where a well-known media personality was charged with sexual assault. The charges outlined incidents of kinky and violent sex involving several women. Unfortunately things unravelled at the trial. Emails and other evidence indicated that the women were willing participants and that their initial statements to police were not fully truthful and had omitted many details. The accused could not be found guilty on such untrustworthy evidence, even though most of what was described undoubtedly did happen.

Why would seemingly successful young women willingly subject themselves to such degrading experiences? A story from California helps to explain where this begins. It tells about young teen girls who post nude photos of themselves on Facebook. Many of them admit they find it degrading, but the social pressures are so enormous that they dare not refuse to participate. Such refusal would cause them to be rejected and ostracized by their friends.

It seems to me that this is how the devaluing of women begins in our society. Surely a girl, and a woman, is more than the sum of her body parts. She is a person worthy of respect, she has a brain, and is a soul of such value in the eyes of God that she is worthy of the death of His Son to redeem her.

But who is telling girls and women about this? The schools take no such responsibility. Many churches have veered off on causes that seemed more important, and thus these churches became irrelevant to the real needs of people.

Eventually though, the devaluation of women in our society points to a catastrophic failure of the home. Not all homes, thankfully, but so many that the behaviour I have described seems to many young girls to be the norm. (Boys and men are being devalued too, but I want to focus on the girls in this post.)

The well-being of our society depends on having parents who believe they have the ability, the freedom and the duty to provide a safe haven for their children.  A place where girls are respected as persons of value, where they can talk freely of their fears, their struggles and the pressures they face outside the home. Parents that do not push their children to get out there and compete for attention, but help them think through what is really important in life. Parents who encourage their children to be kind and caring toward others and to develop the abilities and qualities that will make them useful citizens.

I’m afraid that being a Christian does not automatically make us superior parents. It is good and right to teach our children to love God and to understand the way of salvation so that they may respond when the Spirit calls. It is good to teach honesty and sound moral principles. But all that is not enough. We need to be examples of all that we teach and above all we need to listen to our children with patience and sympathy and let them know that we love them no matter what happens to them.

The hoary head

Continuing with the events of the day I was writing about in my last post, after finishing my supper at Tim Horton’s I went over to Dollarama. Two young ladies were just coming out of the store, loaded down with their purchases. I stepped aside to let them through and then one of them held the door open for me. I thanked her and was rewarded with a happy smile. I walked into the store filled with respect for a young lady who wanted to show respect for me as a Mooshum.

My white hair mark me as a Mooshum (grandfather in the Cree language). You see, both this lady and the two I mentioned in my last post were First Nations, or Indians. I respected the two young mothers who stuck to what they knew was right. Their boys are evidently getting different ideas from somewhere else. “Warrior,” “bow to no one,” indeed! Such an attitude, if maintained into adulthood, is a guarantee of a troubled life.

Earlier, on this same day, I had coffee with a friend who is pastor of an evangelical church. He told me that he and his wife are now home schooling their children and spoke of the change that has made. Their children, who would hardly look at them when they spoke to them, now look up and respond appropriately. What kind of stern discipline did it take to achieve such results? None. It was enough to simply remove them from a setting where their peers were the only people who really mattered in their lives.

Over 100 years ago, the founders of the public school system were quite open about their intention to remove children from the influence of the home to shape them on more “progressive” lines. They proceeded to implant in parents the belief that they were incompetent to raise their own children by incessantly repeating that children had to go to school and be with children their own age to learn social skills. We see now what kind of social skills children are learning in that setting.

The apostle Paul described our day well in 2 Timothy 3:1-5: ” This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.”

Perhaps I am starting to sound like the story of the two old Quaker men sitting on the front porch in their rocking chairs on a fine summer evening. One of them says, “All the world has gone mad, except for me and thee.” Then his rocker stops, he peers over at his neighbour and adds, “And sometimes I wonder about thee.”

Is it only the younger generation that has gone mad? What about those of us who are Mooshums and Kookums (grandmothers)? Can we really expect the respect that the Bible says is due to the hoary head if we don’t want to admit that we are old? Are we part of the problem?

No fault parenting versus no excuse parenting

This is a story of two young boys. The first came from a stable, two parent family; the second from a home where the father had left for parts unknown. Boy Number 1 has an advantage, don’t you think? Well, let’s see.

Boy Number 1 takes a jackknife to school one day, the teacher sees him playing with it and confiscates it. The next day, Dad, who happens to be a police officer, comes storming into school and threatens criminal charges if the knife isn’t returned. The teacher meekly returns the knife.

Boy Number 2, who tends to be hyperactive, acts up a little too much on the school bus and the driver makes it known that he cannot ride the bus until he promises to stop being so disruptive. Mom could have cried discrimination because of her son’s ADHD, or she could have simply decided to drive him to school herself. She did neither; she told her son: “I guess this means you’re walking to school from now on.”

The next day she got him ready early enough to walk the two miles and get to school on time. She walked with him and walked home with him at the end of the school day. The next morning they walked to school again. Then she asked, “Do you want to walk home again this afternoon?” “No,” he replied, “I think I’ve learned my lesson.”

Some years have passed. At last report, Boy Number 1 is in prison. Boy Number 2 has learned a trade and is doing just fine..

Why parents still matter

Here is one paragraph from an article that appeared in the Autumn 2014 issue of City Journal. The writer is Kay S. Hymowitz and the subtitle states : Families shape their children’s prospects more profoundly than anything government can do.

Universal preschool is by far the most popular idea for easing poor children’s early disadvantages. The theory behind it is similar to the argument for parenting programs: if we give low-income children a middle-class, school-relevant experience when they’re young and impressionable, they will be as prepared for school as middle-class kids are. Yet since the 1960s, when Head Start got under way, preschool’s effect on children’s academic futures has ranged from nil to modest. A notable paper by Brian Jacob and Jens Ludwig concludes that even when cost-effective, preschool programs don’t significantly reduce the achievement gap. The biggest problem is what researchers call “fade out.” In some of the best programs, children appear to be as “school ready” as middle-class kids. By third grade, however, they revert to the same academic levels as their non-preschooled, low-income peers. Experts have struggled to account for fade out, but one likely explanation is that whatever educational habits these preschools impart are not reinforced in the homes of low-income children and in the elementary schools that they go on to attend.

%d bloggers like this: