|
reading the laws rightly
by
William Michael E-mail:
wmichael@classicalliberalarts.com
Note:
This article was originally published in the April 2009 edition of the
CLAA Newsletter.
Nearly 2,400
years ago, Aristotle explained why a society ruled by laws is better
than one ruled by judges. Read his explanation carefully:
"First, to find one man, or a few men, who are sensible persons and
capable of legislating and administering justice is easier than to find
a large number. Next, laws are made after long consideration, whereas
decisions in the courts are given at short notice, which makes it hard
for those who try the case to satisfy the claims of justice and
expediency. The weightiest reason of all is that the decision of the
lawgiver is not particular but prospective and general, whereas members
of the assembly and the jury find it their duty to decide on definite
cases brought before them. They will often have allowed themselves to be
so much influenced by feelings of friendship or hatred or self-interest
that they lose any clear vision of the truth and have their judgment
obscured by considerations of personal pleasure or pain. In general,
then, the judge should, we say, be allowed to decide as few things as
possible."
We live in a society that has well-drawn education laws and they
protect parents from the tyranny of individual judges or officials who
offer advice and warnings based on their own private opinion rather than
education law. Unfortunately, many Americans don't know the laws and
accept the opinion of the individual with the same authority as the law
itself. Many Americans are also afraid to disagree with someone because
they feel unprepared to argue. Many (most?) home school families have
allowed themselves to be advised, warned and even bullied into bad
curriculum decisions by individuals who they believed were speaking on
behalf of the law. The result is seen in the popular chaos and
busy-ness of home school families: the public school brought home.
Understanding the requirements of national and local education
regulations is essential to making prudent choices in education. If we
allow ourselves to be misled by someone's faulty notion of the law, or
personal disapproval of our objectives, we will struggle in home
schooling. Essential studies will be crowded out by "state
requirements" and sound Christian priorities will be compromised.
Many of the
families who contact the CLAA with fears about the simplicity of our
curriculum are hindered by this common problem. This article is
intended to provide clarity on three important issues in education law
and its application to Catholic home schooling.
ISSUE #1: THE PURPOSE OF THE
LAW
As stated above, Americans enjoy a well-drawn system of laws and this is
no more evident than in the realm of education. There are many
irresponsible and reckless parents who, if left to themselves, would all
but abandon their children to the streets. In fact, earlier in American
history, this is exactly what took place and the government made it
illegal. Public schools were established and attendance was made
mandatory for all children whose education was not already provided for.
The compulsory attendance laws made it illegal for children not to be
educated in America and the early public schools literally emptied the
streets of neglected children, providing them with a basic education
that provided many of them with opportunities they would not have had
access to otherwise.
These laws, however, were not written for children belonging to families
that already provided them with a quality education, whether it was from
a church or privately maintained schoolhouse. The government schools
were a measure of protection for the poor and neglected who needed
them--for the boy "Ignorance" and the girl "Want", as
Dickens portrayed them in the Christmas
Carol.
Since the 1930s, however, this original purpose of government education
has been hijacked by modernists who view the public schools as a means
of social change rather than a means of protection for the neglected.
While the law speaks only of the mandatory provisions for those in need,
the modernists twist the law to become a set of standards for all
children. Despite the popularity of this interpretation, it is not the
law as a simple reading will prove.
Therefore, our first duty is to be conscious of the danger of applying
the government school provisions as requirements for children who do not
need the government's educational programs. For an illustrative
example, let us consider what would happen to the five year old Wolfgang
Amadeus Mozart if he moved to America and was subjected to our
government curriculum standards.
At five years old, Mozart was performing in royal courts on the keyboard
and violin. At that age, he would have already fulfilled the entire
goal of the National Standards for Arts Education, which is:
"that a comprehensive understanding of one or more of the arts be
accomplished by each student throughout the K-12 program."
Nevertheless, we might find a local school official concerned that the
boy had not experienced an "age-appropriate" kindergarten music class in
which he played freely among his peers with musical "instruments" like
wood blocks, rhythm sticks and egg-shakers. We might then find his
mother searching through home school catalogs and local home
school bulletin boards to find a good "Rhythm Sticks for
Catholics" class to add. Why?
First, the school official offered his own misguided opinion as though
it were the law and in doing so misapplied the law. Second, because
Mrs. Mozart was foolishly submissive to the private opinion of an
official rather than the law of her state to which the official is
accountable. In the end, poor little Wolfgang would be humiliated and
bored by his new class and the Mozart family would be out $100. Worst
of all, the family's status before the law would not have changed after
all of this wasted energy, time and money.
Most home school families are struggling because of this error, even to
a greater extent than Mozart's poor mother. A child raised in an
intelligent, loving and active Christian family exceeds most government
standards through their ordinary activities. The regulations of formal
education do not apply and documentation of their satisfaction outside
of school is all that is needed.
ISSUE #2: THE CURRICULUM
AREAS
The government's educational regulations, once again, are excellent. To
step back and realize that hundreds of thousands of American children,
whose parents cared nothing for their education or future, were provided
with a tax-funded education that saved many of them from their parents'
and community's harmful influences is remarkable. When we look at the
content of the government's requirements we find that it not only
provides for job-training, but for cultural and civic life as well.
This again, is commendable for the group the laws are intended to serve,
but they need not form part of our children's formal schooling.
The normal state curriculum focuses on some combination of the following
curriculum areas:
1. Arts
Education
2. Computer / Technology Skills
3. English Language Arts
4. Guidance
5. Healthful Living
6. Information Skills
7. Mathematics
8. Second Languages
9. Science
10. Social Studies
11. Career Technical Education
Thinking of all of the "stuff" offered at the local public school may
wrongly intimidate us as we consider our children's home education.
We err in thinking that because we do not provide formal instruction in
a specific area we are failing to meet the requirements. Remember,
the government education requirements are intended to protect the
neglected, not limit or control the life and learning of those privately
educated. Let's consider an example once again.
Let us say that Thomas Smith is a ten year old boy in a faithful
Catholic family. He enjoys regular access to the sacraments, serves at
the altar and participates in youth group activities throughout the
Church year. The family enjoys a stable home life with Dad modeling a
good work ethic and unselfish disposition, Mom lovingly caring for the
children and managing the children's daily studies. The family enjoys
the benefits of Christian culture: good music, good literature, good
films, etc.. Thomas takes piano lessons and is always reading books on
nature and history as well as the "canon" of children's literature.
Thomas has to bear his own burdens around the home, helping with chores
and caring for his own things. He enjoys time for bike-riding,
swimming, and maybe even a rec. league sport.
Thomas'
Catholic life fulfills well over half of the goals of the government
curriculum objectives. Of course, hardly any of these activities,
lessons, experiences and habits are documented or considered a part of
his formal education by most families. Thus, by ignoring all of the
advantages Thomas enjoys and comparing his formal studies to
those of the public schools, they feel pressure to match the school
textbook-for-textbook and course-for-course. This is absurd.
Remember, the fundamental assumption is that the children for whom the
government education regulations are intended are not receiving
these lessons at home in the ordinary course of family and community
life. These disadvantaged students are offered a replication of them in
an artificial community known as "school". Those students who enjoy the
reality do not need to study them in pictures and books.
Once Thomas's everyday experiences are documented, and maybe organized a
bit better, we will find that all he needs by way of formal instruction
is the classical liberal arts. This is the reason for the CLAA's simple
study program: it's all that a child in a responsible Catholic family
needs.
Certain
specialized or college-preparatory courses, like laboratory sciences,
are best studied in a college laboratory, not at home, so they should be
arranged accordingly at the appropriate time. There is no need,
however, for children in cultured families to add formal studies that
are superfluous for them or to admit lower intellectual goals than those
which match their quality of life.
ISSUE #3: THE DEFINITION OF
A 'UNIT'
One of the
most misleading of all issues faced by home school families has to do
with the definitions of terms in school legal documents. When we look
at the state curriculum requirements we see lists that include the
number of "units" of English and Math and Social Studies, etc.. For
example, the New York state curriculum lists the following:
1. English (4 units)
2. Social Studies (4 units)
a. American history (1 unit)
b. Government (1/2 unit)
c. Economics (1/2 unit)
3. Mathematics (2 units)
4. Science (2 units)
5. Art and/or music (1 unit)
6. Health Education (1/2 unit)
7. Physical Education (2 units)
Home school families tend to look at these lists and see: four
years of English, four years of Social Studies, two years
of Math, etc., and judge this to be an impressive amount of work!
However, we are not comparing apples with apples. What we have failed
to do is ascertain the definition of a "unit" (the foundation of all
mathematics!), which is the basis for this entire system.
The "unit" referred to in the NY state curriculum is defined as "6,480
minutes of instruction per school year". Now, let's do the math:
6,480 min./year divided by 60 min./hour = 108 hrs./year
108 hrs./yr, divided by 36 wks in a school year = 3 hrs/wk
3 hrs/wk, divided by 5 school days per wk = 36 minutes per day
When we read the law rightly, we find that by a "unit" is
meant only 36 minutes of class per day and that for only 36 weeks of the
year! Furthermore, when we consider the fact that a typical high
school class meets for about 40 minutes per day for 180 days, we learn
further that this "unit" of instruction also includes all of the
administrative tasks of normal school life: taking attendance,
collecting papers, reviewing old materials, taking quizzes and tests,
handling disciplinary issues, etc.. Thus, the "unit" becomes even less
impressive and is by no means equivalent to a year of intense home
study.
So, let's re-phrase the state requirement in terms of class time:
1. English (36 min./day for 4 school calendar years)
2. Social Studies (36 min./day for 4 school calendar years)
a. American history (36 min./day for 1 school calendar year)
b. Government (36 min./day for 1/2 school calendar year)
c. Economics (36 min./day for 1/2 school calendar year)
3. Mathematics (36 min./day for 2 school calendar years)
4. Science (36 min./day for 2 school calendar years)
5. Art and/or music (36 min./day for 1 school calendar year)
6. Health Education (36 min./day for 1/2 school calendar year)
7. Physical Education (36 min./day for 2 school calendar years)
Let us now consider how little this is.
If a child takes piano lessons and practices for a total of 2 hours per
throughout the entire year (52 weeks), he would fulfill the state's high
school Music requirement with 1 year of his normal weekly piano
lessons and he would probably continue these for another few years!
Again, a student who plays in a local youth soccer league may play 10
games per year that last 2 hours each. Add to this 10 hours of team
practice and we have 30 hours of Physical Education per year. In
addition to this, the student spends an average of 20 minutes per day
playing actively (riding bikes, swimming, playing on playground, etc.).
This student has thus completed one "unit" of Physical Education.
The situation is even more striking for CLAA students. The CLAA
Grammar program requires 1-2 hours of study per day and covers English
Language Arts along with Foreign Language (Latin/Greek). Over three
years, a CLAA student completes approximately 600-1200 hours of language
arts study. That is equivalent to 5.5 - 11 units of "Language Arts" in
the state curriculum, and we haven't studied Dialectic, Humanities,
Rhetoric or Literature yet!
When we maintain a consistent value for the "unit" of education
the government requires, we will find that a normal CLAA student exceeds
the state regulations many times over--often without any formal school
study!
CONCLUSION
By keeping these three simple issues in mind whenever we discuss
curriculum planning, we will be freed from the absurd notion that we may
somehow be falling short of state requirements. By simply documenting
our family's normal activities, we will demonstrate our children's
satisfaction of a large percentage of the state's required studies and
will be free to focus our formal schooling on those subjects appropriate
for our children: the classical liberal arts.
* * *
Note:
The CLAA is beginning the process of analyzing the state educational
requirements for each state and demonstrating how they are fulfilled not
only through the CLAA program, but in the students' everyday lives.
In coming months, we will add these analyses to the CLAA Library.
If you have questions you would
like
answered in these articles, please mail them to us at:
mail@classicalliberalarts.com. |
