When the state takes YOU to court, what will the verdict be? But you say, “It will never happen to me!” This is what the hundreds have said that have already gone to the courtroom for their religious freedom. It did happen to them!

If someone had said to you twenty years ago that in 1995 there would be hundreds of cases pending against churches and pastors in the United States; what would you have said? You would have probably said, “You’re crazy!” You would have thought that even if the state did take a church to court, the Christians would rise up in a massive revolt. But hundreds of churches have now already been sued and most Christians have not even found it objectionable. Most of us have simply been content with living our lives in another direction. We have been content to let the state’s grip tighten on our faith and religious freedom little by little.

The purpose of this article is to show you the real issues that face the Christian at this moment. We want you to be able to give the Biblical explanations for the stand that you take. We want you to have a strong Godly “conviction: about your actions in the ministry of the Gospel. In Hosea 4:6, it says, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” When the test comes to your home, will you stand or will you fall to the control of the state?

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

The first principle that we as Christians must know and understand is that the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights say that there is to be a separation of church and state. This is found primarily in the First Amendment.

The First Amendment. The First Amendment has two religious clauses: (1) the non-establishment clause and (2) the free-exercise clause. The first clause has little to do with most of the law suits right now. It says that government will not become involved in the “establishment” of a religion. They are not to do anything that will help religion. They are not to finance it, foster it, or further it. The one danger with this clause that has turned up is that if you do take the government’s money, you have no right to object to the government’s controls. But since we don’t believe that Caesar (the state) has any business financing the Church anyway, we do not accept the State’s money. (Do you?)

The second clause, the free exercise clause, is the issue in almost every case across America. It says simply: “There shall be no law abridging (depriving) the free exercise of religion.” This was worded exactly right by the framers of our Constitution. The word “exercise” is the outgoing, or the putting into implementation of our faith. In communist lands, they say they have religious freedom, but that is only to “think” whatever you want. In America, however, we have (by the First Amendment) true freedom of religion. The test for religious freedom is in action and not just in thought.

The Biblical Base. We cannot “believe” in the Constitution. The Supreme Court changes it nearly every week. But there is a document that we can believe and you will be asked this in great detail in the courtroom. They will turn to you and ask, “Is there a book which contains every single one of your beliefs without exception?” “Yes. The Bible.” “Are there any other documents; or are there any other persons living, about to be born, or past lived who can give you a further amplification of those beliefs or curtail any of those beliefs?” “No. There is even a curse on the one who adds or subtracts from the perfect revelation as we have it.” In a court of law our beliefs must be contained in full in the Word of God.

In Romans 13:1, Paul said that there is no authority but that which is given from God. And Jesus, in Matthew 22:21, voiced the fact that God reserves certain matters to Himself. Matters of faith and worship have not been given to government. The Church and Her actions in the gospel ministry are governed by God, and the government dare not meddle with these areas. These are the foundations on which the framers of the Constitution founded the philosophy of church-state separation. They believed the Bible to be the only document containing perfect truth. They knew that the Constitution must agree with the Word of God.

DEFINITION OF THE CHURCH

Now, if our Constitution guarantees us separation of church and state, we have to define these two entities. The state had trouble defining itself. If the state is all the people, how can all the people sue a few of the people? So the Supreme Court chose to define the church. The surprising thing is that they agreed perfectly with the Word of God.

First, they explained what a church was NOT> It is not a church because of its title or name. Just to put the word “Church” with a group of words does not make a church. A church is not a church just because of its organization. It is not a church because of its building. Really, a church does not need any of these three things. The Supreme Court said simply that a Church is “the BELIEFS and the BELIEVERS.”

But now the Supreme Court went one step further. They not only defined what the Church was, but they also defined which beliefs are legitimate. They developed a test that each of us must go through and pass in a court of law. Following is that test; a test impossible to cram for; a test that we must be able to pass before we go to court.

EXPLANATION OF THE TEST

The Supreme Court said that a belief must be something that you as a believer can make oral. You don’t have to be eloquent, but it must be more than an “it seems to me” hunch. Also, you as a believer must have a knowledge of that belief. This is to prevent people from hiding behind a title. To say “I’m a Fundamental Baptist” doesn’t give you beliefs.

In 1972, in a case involving education, the court came up with the ultimate test to determine which of these beliefs were legitimate and which were not. They classified beliefs in one of two categories; “convictions” or “preferences”. Convictions are protected by the First Amendment, and preferences are not. Below is this test in brief.

Preferences. A preference is a very very strong belief held with great intensity and strength. You might give your entire life and go into full time service in the name of a preference. You might give all your wealth to this belief. You could be energetic in spreading and propagating this preference (hand out tracts, go on soul-winning, visitation, etc.). You could even want to teach this to your children. But the one thing that makes a preference different from a conviction is that under the right circumstances, you will change a preference.

The court has noticed five areas where you would be most likely to change. These five areas are (1) peer pressure, (2) family pressure, (3) the threat or the carrying through of litigation (law suits), (4), jail for your and your wife (your children being taken by the state), and (5) death. If any of these things would make you change or even bend just a little, then your belief was a preference, and will not be protected by the First Amendment. Think seriously about these five areas. Before too long, many of you will be called on to give your beliefs.

Convictions. A conviction is different in primarily one way: it is a belief that you will NOT change; a belief that you can not change. There are four things that make up a conviction. The three Hebrew children are excellent Biblical examples of these four qualities.

First, a conviction is caused by a man who thinks that his belief is a commandment from God. It must be God-ordered. The Hebrew children had been commanded of God in Exodus 20:3 that they should have no other gods before them. We, too, have been commanded in the Scriptures that certain things are wrong. Just as the Hebrew children in Daniel, chapter three, refused to bow to the golden image made by Nebuchadnezzar, we must refuse the state in matters not pertaining to it. A God-ordered belief will give us the strength we need to withstand the test for conviction.

Second, a conviction must be a personal belief. It must be a belief that you as an individual holds and will hold even though no one else stands with you. The three boys in Daniel stood when everybody else bowed to the image. Where were all the other Hebrews? They were complying with the state. But these boys had purposed in their heart not to defile themselves long before the test came. Would you stand alone against the state on a God-ordered commend? Remember, God plus one is a majority.

Third, a conviction must be non-negotiable. In Daniel, the king gave these boys a second chance, but they said, “We are not careful to answer thee in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us…but if not, be it known unto thee, O King, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” (Dan. 3:16-18). No amount of talk was going to change their minds. Are your beliefs non-negotiable?

Fourth, convictions must be unconditional. By this is meant that no matter what the outcome is, you will not change. If you must be guaranteed a victory before you take a stand, your belief is a preference. The Hebrew boys were willing to die before they would bend to the wishes of the state.

These are the four qualities that make up a conviction. It must be a belief that is God-ordered, personal, non-negotiable, and unconditional. Only this type of belief is protected by our Constitution.

Lifestyle Consistency. There is one more part to the Supreme Court;s test between conviction and preference. It is based on the philosophy that a man’s conviction will show up in his life. This test is also Biblical. James said it best: “Faith without works is dead” (James 2:20). The way we live our life must be consistent with our beliefs.

When the court tests you, they will delve into literally every area of your life. There is no one part of your life that is secular and another that is sacred. Every part of you belongs to God and must be lived in accordance with His Word. They will search the use of your finances; the use of your time; your recreational activities and your reading materials; every area!

One example of how the court might question you is in regard to the television. Cases have been lost by the following line of question. “Is it true that one reason for your child going to a Christian School is so he will matters of pornography, obscenity, and nudity? (Yes) “Is it true that it is so he will not see unrighteous upheld nor righteous themes debased?” (Yes) “Sir, do you own a television?” (Yes) “How much did it cost?” ($200-$500) “Where do you keep it?” (The living room) “And why is that?” (It is most traveled) “Sir, isn’t it true that a TV can not affect you unless you turn it on?” (Yes) “now, do you ever hear obscenity, see nudity, and view righteous themes debased as well as unrighteousness upheld?” (Yes, sir) Your conviction has just been destroyed.

This area of lifestyle consistency is a little deeper than most would think at first. You are challenged to think seriously about the ramifications this could have in your life.

One other matter concerned with your lifestyle is on the other side of the coin. If convictions are God-ordered and come from the Bible, what is it to disobey them? It is sin! You must not only believe; you must say that the opposite of a conviction is a sin. Pastor, do you preach that public education is sin? If not, you have only a preference. Parent, do you teach and train your child in the steps of Christ? Do you have a daily family altar? If not, your conviction that your child is lent to you by God to train in the paths of righteousness is simply a preference.

When the test comes down to you, what will the verdict be? Will the court find you protected by our Constitution, or will it find you unprotected? Will you have a conviction or a preference? Will you be consistent in your walk, or will you be found with a contradiction in your lifestyle?

Before you continue, check your understanding of these ideas by answering the questions below.

1. What is the issue protected by our First Amendment?

2. What document holds all of your beliefs and is unalterable?

3. What is the Biblical base for the philosophy of church-state separation?

4. What is the Church?

5. What is a preference?

6. What is a conviction?

7. What is a lifestyle consistency?

____________________________________________________________________________________

Answers: (1) The free-exercise of our religious beliefs. (2) The Bible. (3) Romans 13:1 and Matthew 22:21. (4) The beliefs and the believers. (5) A very strong belief that can and will change under certain circumstances. (6) A belief that is God-ordered and therefore cannot change. (7) When you live what you believe and believe the opposite of a conviction, it is sin.

“Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help…” Isaiah 31: 1. A pastor made this warning to his people: If I had my life as a father to live over again, I would make whatever financial sacrifices would be necessary in order to teach each of my childrenfrom kindergarten to the end of college. If I had my life as a pastor to live over again, I would warn my people constantly about the dangers of the American public school system. Over a period of thirty years, I have watched with a heavy heart the devastating effects of the public schools, both on my own children and on those of many of my congregation.

Virtually all theistic religion of any kind has been removed from our schools, along with the original concept of the American philosophy of life. It has been replaced with a humanistic religion that says that “traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species. NO deity will save us, we must save ourselves. Second: Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present concerns, from self-actualization, and from rectifying social injustices. Modern science discredits such historic concepts as the ‘ghost in the machine’ and the ‘separable soul’.” (Human Manifests II, p.2, signed by John Dewey, A.J. Ayer in Philosophy, Erich Fromm, A.H. Marlow, Carl Rogers, and B.F. Skinner in Psychology among others.)]

The backlash of the humanistic (Mr. Webster, 1959, defines Humanitarian as “The distinctive tenant denying the divinity of Christ; also the system of doctrine based on this view of Christ”.) approach to education has resulted in a society of young people many of whom seem to feel that religion, patriotism, discipline, and orality are nasty words. It restricts their “freedom”, “individuality”, and “creativity”; they can’t do “their thing”.

Today less than 50 percent of American attend church and 65 percent of our teenagers drop out of Sunday school and church before the age of twenty. But WHY? Two thousand years ago one man, whom I have given my life to, called Himself the Son of God. His claims were spread around the world. Today millions of people all over the world have given all to Him for His glory and satisfaction. Yet, we are facing the worst crisis since the Roman Empire.

Godly men stand from two to eight hours each week and proclaim the truth based on the person of Jesus Christ. From the training and dedication of these men, you would expect the world to be converted in the next twelve months. Instead, we are standing on the brink of a major crisis. A few churches here and there are growing and rejoicing with songs of victory, but that is not the general condition of the church. In recent years, satanic writings and occult writings, including the writings of Lenin, have surpassed those of our Lord Jesus Christ.

If we really want to know the truth, let us learn from the Roman Empire, and we will have the secret to the problem we are facing in Christendom. Rome had almost conquered every man on earth. She had servants sent in from all parts of the world to meet her every need. She became so involved in ways to pass the time of boredom that it took hundreds of servants to please the whims and fancies of some of her large families. But they stood firm for a number of years because of her military might.

What caused her to fail? Was it immorality? — NO! Was it paganism? — NO! Was it laxity? NO! Was it evil government? — NO! Was it poverty?– NO! Was it wealth? — NO! Was it hunger? — NO! Was it a false religion? — NO! Was it inflation? — NO! Was it forced on her? — NO! No other country set out to conquer Rome. No group small or large planned her downfall.

WHY??? At that time, the fathers and mothers of Rome had Greek tutors and philosophers sent over to teach and train her children; and in a few years, Rome had a nation filled with Roman youth and young adults who were Roman citizens but were filled with ideas and ways of Greece. Their ways were immoral, pagan, lax, evil, false, and before the second generation of half-Roman, half-Greek young people were grown…down came Rome. The Greek teachers didn’t plan to crush their masters. They just taught what they believed and lived what they thought, and the little Romans became like their tutors.

The Roman parents were too involved with everything but the training of their children, which they turned over to the Greek teachers and philosophers, and history recorded Rome as the city-nation that fell; and its fall was great.

For six generations, Christendom has turned her children over to the world to train. We stand on the brink of a greater fall than that of Rome, and we are too blind to see the condition. The thing that breaks my heart is that Christian people are completely irrational about the problem. For example: We claim to be Bible believers; but when we are faced with Scripture, outside of a few verses that deal with salvation, we revert to worldly reasoning. The same Bible that teaches John 3:3 and John 3:16 also teaches Proverbs 22:6 which instructs us to teach our own children. Isaiah 31:1 says, “Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help…” In college, I was taught that Egypt is the type for the world.

Israel was instructed ALWAYS to instruct her own. No disrespect for preaching, but the word teach (and train) is found many more times in the Bible than preach. No disrespect to the Sunday school, but you cannot undo in 45 minutes on Sunday what is done in 30 hours each week. The average parent would be horrified if he really knew what is going on. I don’t believe that the public school teachers have set out to crush Christendom. They just teach what they believe and live what they think. The little children from Christian homes copy their tutors, and we have a generation (almost two) of youth that are growing up to be just like their teachers.

The parable of the sower in Matthew 13 clearly states that only the seed that falls into GOOD ground will come up and produce. If I want to grow a prize rose, I don’t go into a weed bed and plant the seed there hoping it might take hold and come up. It will be choked to death before it even has a chance. I will put it in a protected area, water it carefully, guard how much sun it gets, spray it, and care for it.

If my son wants to prepare for the ministry, I will recommend to him the most fundamental Bible school and seminary I know. I won’t recommend to him the most liberal seminary I know, so he can witness to his teachers and his classmates. He goes to school to learn and study under a man (men) and their philosophies and not to witness. Now, if this is logical on the college level, by what rationale is it wrong on the elementary and secondary levels where children are the most impressionable and defenseless? If Christian education is valid at one level of education, it is valid at all levels.

“Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help…” (Isaiah 31:1). John 15:5 says “…For without me ye can do NOTHING.” Colossians 3:17 says “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do ALL in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Can we send our children to public schools IN THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS? Rome fell when she let the Greeks teach her children. Christendom is ready to fall, because we are sending out children to the world for training.

Dr. Paul Cates

WHICH HOME SCHOOLING PROGRAM IS BEST FOR MY CHILD?

The truth is, your child is unique. God has created your child with an individual learning technique and ability. Not every available curriculum is suited to the learning style. Whether it’s your first or fifth year in home schooling, choosing the best Curriculum for your child remains one of your biggest challenges. How do you make sense of all the available programs? Certainly each has its merits, but which one is best for your child?

Faith Christian Ministries offers a comprehensive testing service to help you tailor-make a school program to best develop your child’s talents and potential and to best meet your individual needs as well as your child’s individual needs.

The FCM staff tours to major cities in the United States to conduct one-on-one consultations with home schooling students and teachers. Your child’s abilities and learning techniques will be evaluated individually using key diagnostic tests. Many of these tests are taken orally or involve using manipulatives.

What does the testing involve? Your child will be evaluated in six areas of the left brain, six areas of the right brain, 15 areas in reading including 5 areas to determine what they can do independently, 5 areas with you teaching, and 5 areas of frustration. They are also evaluated in math, depending on age in up to 209 different areas. The testing takes approximately two to three hours.

What kind of follow-up does FCM offer? After the testing, a conference is held to help you understand your child better and know how best to deal with your child’s talents and weaknesses. You will also be assisted in selecting a curriculum and forming your schedule.

Then, approximately two weeks after the testing, a report with specific materials and levels checked will be mailed to you. Also, a schedule for daily assignments will be included. FCM will also help you in purchasing any/all of your individual specific curriculum needs. FCM sells all curriculum at current catalog prices. This will save you from having to contact 10-12 different publishers.

Who is eligible for evaluation? FCM evaluates all children –gifted, average, L.D., A.D.D. (Attention Deficit Disorder), Normal, Retarded, and handicapped. The testing is not to label your child or help your child be eligible for special public school programs. It is only to help you discover your child’s talents and gifts and to help them be what God intended them to be. FCM does not believe in labeling.

DO YOU KNOW…

…whether your child functions primarily with the left or right brain?

…how your child learns?

…whether your child is primarily an auditory, visual or kinesthetic learner?

…at what level your child reads and computes?

The answers to these questions are critical in choosing the correct home schooling program for your child’s individual needs. If these questions have you confused, bewildered, overwhelmed and frustrated, we can help.

FAITH CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES has a satellite school, Faith Christian Academy, for grades K-12. If you desire to enroll, please contact us. Enrollment is open year round.

FAITH CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES offers “free” seminars. There are two, one week seminars offered -one in June, one in November in Gatlinburg, Tennessee, on the “nuts and bolts” of home schooling. If you desire to come, please notify us early. Space is limited. An important aspect of these meetings is “Walk in The Spirit”, a Biblical approach to child training and discipline.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN HOW FCM CAN BENEFIT YOUR CHILD…

PLEASE VISIT CALL AND SEND US A MESSAGE ON CONTACT PAGE.

What Can Children Learn, and When!!!

Before the ages of three, the answer is simply, when the chid can do it. Entering the school zone is the following guidelines to help you know if your child is on target or possible has some delays.

Check List for Eye-Hand and Motor Coordination for 4-5 years:

Can the child trace, as example, letters and numbers?

Can the child circle an answer or complete a line?

Can the child make a line between two parallel lines?

Can the child find direction in a maze?

Can the child follow dot and line patterns?

Can the child cut with a scissors?

Can the child complete dot-to-dot pictures by connecting numbered dots?

Can the child color within heavy outlines?

Can the child walk, run, skip and jump?

Can the child build block towers (requires steadiness)?

Can the child manipulate puzzle pieces, pegs and blocks?

Can the child use a vertical chalkboard?

Can the child dance or march to rhythms?

Does the child have an awareness of self in space?

Does the child have an awareness of self in relation to other objects within the environment?

CHECKLIST FOR VISUAL PERCEPTION- 4-5 YEARS:

Can the child complete Shape and A-B-C puzzles?

Can the child discriminate in likenesses and differences?

Can the child note missing parts?

Can the child identify the whole, when only a part is seen?

Can the child see the goal in a maze?

Can the child identify shapes within the environment?

Can the child discriminate shapes?

Can the chid match shapes to the outlines of the shape?

Does the child understand variations in size, color and position?

Can the child discriminate in size activities?

Can the child do peg board designs?

Can the child reproduce patterns from a given copy?

Can the child reproduce patterns from memory?

Can the child reproduce designs from memory?

Can the child identify body parts?

CHECKLIST FOR MENTAL SKILLS: 4-5 YEARS:

Does the child know the difference between upper and lower case A-B-Cs? Both manuscript and cursive?

Does the child know numerals to 10?

Can the child count objects to 25?

Can the child follow verbal directions?

Can the child discriminate shapes?

Does the child know directional concepts such as in-out, over-under?

Does the child know relational concepts such as first-last, mine-yours?

Can the child group or classify objects into families? (Fruit, toys, vehicles)

Can the child discriminate in terms of size such as big-little?

Does the child know colors?

Can the child differentiate shades of color?

Can the child write his name ?

Does the child know his address and telephone number?

CHECKLIST FOR AUDITORY PERCEPTION: 4-5 YEARS:

Can the child identify the sound to its symbol; the alphabet or number?

Can the child form and identify words that rhyme?

Can the child repeat sounds, words, sentences, and rhymes that you dictate?

Can the child identify initial sounds for the names of objects, such as fruit?

Can the child identify and repeat characteristic sounds (sirens, whoooo; windshield wipes, swish-swish; and animal sounds)

Can the child reauditorize (think) the initial sound for objects?

Can the child signify when one sound or tone changes to another in pitch? (high-low, soft-loud)?

Can the child write initial and final sounds of words that begin and end with consonants?

Can the child repeat what was said without visual clues?

Can the child follow directions without visual clues?

Can the child identify specific things from musical recordings such as bells? Also horns and traffic sounds?

Can the child identify pictures of objects with names that rhyme with no audible clues?

Can the child sequence dictated words or events in a story?

Can the child sequence dictated numbers of number patterns?

“HE ALONE , WHO OWNS THE YOUTH, GAINS THE FUTURE!” ADOLF HITLER

Who are the real “movers and shakers” of the educational establishment? Who initiates and funds our educational studies? Who has all the solutions to our educational woes? Who stands at the schoolhouse door with check in hand waiting to lure us onto the educational-reform bandwagon? The answers to these questions may surprise you.

While the little taxpayer is scrimping and struggling to support his family and pay his taxes, the real power behind the reform movement is raking in the cash, tax free, and using that tax-free income to finance the destruction of our educational system. An elitist coterie of America’s tax-exempt foundations has designed and initiated every wave of educational reform since John Dewey and his progressive education. The goal of each and every reform movement has been the same–to eliminate knowledge in the classroom and to pilot the United States toward a one-world, socialist government.

You may find these accusations preposterous. After all, we have laws in this country; we have a Constitution that protects our rights. While this is true, we also have the Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations. These tax-exempt institutions are above the laws of common man, they are the real power behind our government, and they answer to no one. Presidents, be they Democratic or Republican, may come and go, but the foundations never leave office!

Let us, then, turn our attention to the foundations and examine the effect they have had on education for almost a century. This monopoly on public education began with the creation of the Rockefeller General Education Board in 1903 (terminated in 1953); The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1905; The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in 1910; The Carnegie Corporation of New York in 1911; and The Rockefeller Foundation in 1918. The impact of these foundations will become evident as we look at what has transpired since their inception.

As we begin our journey back in time, the first item worth noting is that the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations were staunch supporters of Dewey’s educational philosophy. Dewey in fact, taught four of the five Rockefeller brothers, including David and Nelson.

The Walsh Committee was created on August 23, 1912, to review industrial relations. During the tenure of this committee, tax-exempt foundations were also examined. The following was revealed: “A number of witnesses testified that colleges had surrendered their religious identifications in order to comply with foundation requirements to receive grants…” (William M. Bowen, Jr, Globalism America’s Demise, Huntington House Inc., 1984, p.40)

The foundations’ activities came under scrutiny again in the late 1940s and early 1950s due to several Congressional investigations. The first case involved Alger Hiss, President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Hiss had worked for the State Department in 1936 and was an advisor to President Franklin Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference in 1945. Hiss was elected president of this Carnegie Foundation in 1946.

In 1948 during the hearings of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Hiss was accused of being a member of the Communist party and of passing State Department documents to a Soviet Agent, Whittaker Chambers, editor of Time magazine. These charges resulted in two trials, the first of which ended in a hung jury. Hiss was convicted on two counts of perjury in the second trial on January 21, 1950.

By the early ’50s, it had become obvious that someone was interfering with the educational system in the United States. Schools were no longer teaching the concepts associated with the economic and political structures inherent of our form of government.

A preliminary inquiry into the educational dilemma pointed to several tax-exempt foundations which had been funding the promotion of textbooks and methodologies that were socialistic and globalistic in nature. The three major foundations implicated in this inquiry were the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Ford Foundation. (Michael Loyd Chadwick, The Freeman Digest, “Tax-Exempt Foundations Their Impact on the World,” Published by the Freemen Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, June 1978 issue, p.1)

These preliminary findings resulted in House Resolution 561, approved by the 82^nd Congress, demanding an investigation into the tax-exempt foundations to determine if any foundations had been “using their resources for un-American and subversive activities or for purposes not in the interest of the tradition of the United States.” (Ibid, p.2)

This committee became known as the Cox Committee. The Cox Committee was short lived due to time constraints and the death of the committee chairman; however, “In its final report, the Cox Committee reported that a Moscow-directed, Communist plot existed to infiltrate American foundations and to use their funds for Communist purposes. (See No. 2514, 82^nd Congress, 2^nd Session)

Congressman B. Carroll Reece introduced House Resolution 217 to continue the investigation into the tax-exempt foundations. This resolution passed on July 27, 1953. The actual hearings by the Reece Committee lasted only nineteen days before being canceled as a result of questionable political maneuvers. While the evidence uncovered as a result of this committee was substantial, the foundations have continued to “do business as usual”.

The Freemen Institute devoted its entire June, 1978 issue of The Freemen Digest to the finds of the Reece Committee. This publication contained an interview with Norman Dodd (Research Director for the Reece Committee), a summary of the investigation, and quoted excerpts of some of the testimonies given during the hearings. Some of the evidence disclosed by the Reece Committee included:

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was organized specifically to get the United States into the United Nations. With this task accomplished, the Endowment moved on to tackle education. The following information was revealed in the minute books of this foundation:

After the First World War, the foundation Trustees came to the conclusion that to continue moving the nation toward Carnegie’s objective, they must control education. Carnegie solicited the help of the Rockefeller Foundation for this task. Rockefeller was given the task of changing education as it pertained to domestic subjects, while Carnegie worked on subjects dealing with international relationships. The major changes focused on the teaching of American history, by discrediting the founders of the U.S. and demeaning the nation’s Constitutional structure of government. The Guggenheim Foundation facilitated the work of these two foundations by awarding fellowships to several “likely” students studying history and sending them to London where they were briefed in “what was expected of them.” These students returned to the U.S. where they became the most influential members of the American Historical Society.

Toward the end of the 1920s, Carnegie funded the American Historical Society to prepare a report detailing what the future of the U.S. should be. The seventh volume of this report specifies that “the future belongs to collectivism” (William M. Bowen, Jr., pp 35-36)

In the Reece Committee Staff Report on Relations Between Foundations and Education, Assistant Research Director, Thomas M. McNiece wrote:

What this investigation does seem to indicate is that many small grants have found their way into questionable hands and many large ones…have been devoted to purposes that are promoting a departure from the fundamental concepts of education and government under our Constitution… This is indicated by the frequent references in their own literature to the ‘age of transition’ through which we are passing, and the responsibility that must be assumed by educators in leading the way. (Thomas M. McNiece, “The Reece Committee Staff on Relations Between Foundations and Education”, The Freemen Digest, p.12.)

According to our compilations, the Carnegie Corp. has contributed to all educational purposes from 1911 to 1950, approximately $25,300,000. (Ibid, p.13)

…most of the information submitted (from various foundations’ annual reportsprofessional publications whose circulation is ) is available only in largely confined to those engaged in these professions (education and the behavioral sciences). This results naturally in two things: One, the coordinated effectiveness within the professional groups is increased; two, relatively few of the citizenry outside these professional circles have any means of knowing what is developing and therefore of organizing any protest against itbe obscure to . In fact much of the meaning of some articles would the average citizen because of the subtle approach and high technical vocabulary(Ibid. P. 15.).

Miss Kathryn Casey, legal analyst of the Reece Committee, filed a detailed report on the foundations’ activities in regard to education. This information was included in the Reece Committee’s Final Report on Relations Between Foundations and Education. Excerpts from the Final Report include:

The Carnegie Corporation of New York had contributed a total of $41,237,711 to the National Education Association, the Progressive Education Association, the American Council of Education, perhaps the major part of their sustenance in the early years…She (MS. Casey) concluded that these organizations have operated to the end of producing uniformity in teaching, teacher-training and administrative practices in education and that the Carnegie Corporation must have approved this work. (The Reece Committee Final Report on Relations Between Foundations and Education,” The Freeman Digest, p. 17.)

The Carnegie Foundation gave considerable attention to the place, relationship and function of the secondary and primary schools as well. This was done largely through the National Education Association and the Progressive Education Association, to which other foundations have also contributed heavily. Some of the strange things which have happened in the secondary and primary educational fields can be traced directly to the influence of these two organizations. (Ibid. P.18.)

From 1928 to 1933 the Carnegie Corporation of New York provided heavy aggregate financing ($340,000) to the American Historical Society…for the production of a study by its Commission on Social Studies whose final report- “Conclusions and Recommendations” includes the following:

As to the specific form which this ‘collectivism,’…is taking and will take in the future…it is by no means clear or unequivocal. It may involve the limiting…of private property by public property, extended and distributed among the masses…Almost certainly it will involve…compulsory as well as voluntary cooperation of citizens in the conduct of the complex national economy, an..enlargement of the functions of government, and an increasing state intervention in fundamental branches of economy previously left to the individual discretion and initiative–a state intervention that in some instances may be direct and mandatory and in others indirect and facilitative.

If historical knowledge is any guide, these tensions, accompanied by…popular opinion, public policy, and the fortunes of the struggle for power, will continue until some approximate adjustment is made between social thought, social practice, and economic realities, or until society, exhausted by the conflict and at the end of its spiritual and inventive resources, sinks back into a more primitive order of economy and life…” (Ibid. P.20)

Under the heading of “The Redistribution of Power” it continues:

…the teaching profession as a whole will have to organize, develop a theory of its social function and create certain instrumentalities indispensable to the realization of its aims.” (Ibid. P. 21.)

If the board of education is to support a school program conceived in terms of the general welfare and adjusted to the needs of an epoch marked by transition to some form of socialized economy, it should include in its membership adequate representation of points of view other than those of private business.” (Ibid.)

Under the heading “appendix A–Next Steps” the Report continues:

…The first step is to awaken and consolidate leadership around the philosophy and purpose of education herein expounded–leadership among administrators, teachers, boards of trustees, colleges and normal school presidents–thinkers and workers in every field of education and the social sciences. Signs of such an awakening..are already abundantly evident; in the resolutions on instruction in the social sciences adopted in 1933 by the department of superintendence of the National Education Association at Minneapolis and of the United States Commissioner of Education.. And in almost every local or national meeting of representatives of the teaching profession. (Ibid.)

The American Historical Society announces further that it has taken over a publication called The Historical Outlook, a journal for social science teachers, (it was then re-named The Social Sciences). Among the new purposes of the publication was to be ‘to furnish as rapidly as possible various programs of instruction organized within the frame of reference outlined by the Commission…’ Writers of textbooks, said the report, was ‘expected to revamp and rewrite their old works in accordance with this frame of reference and new writers in the field of social sciences will undoubtedly attack the central problem here conceived…’ (Ibid. P. 22.)

The President and Treasurer of the Carnegie Corporation of New York not only endorsed but lauded the call to socialism in the report described above. This was evidenced in their annual report for 1933-4.

Professor Harold J. Laski, philosopher of British socialism, made the following comment in his testimony about the Commission’s report: ‘At bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report is an educational program for a socialist America’. (William M. Bowen, Jr., p. 38)

The Reece Committee had this to say about the report produced by the Commission on Social Studies: “This committee finds the document from which we have quoted an astounding piece of work. We cannot understand how a foundation, Carnegie in this instance, administering funds dedicated to a public trust and made free of taxation by the grace of the people, could justify..having supported such a program. Is this what foundation executives refer to when they assert the right of foundations to ‘experiment’ and to use ‘risk capital’ to reach ‘new horizons’? (The Freeman Digest, p.22.)

Carnegie has continued to endorse the American Historical Society’s “Conclusions and Recommendations” through the years. This will be evidenced in the next part of this report.

The commission on Higher Education appointed by the President produced a report…in 1947…The Report…contained this statement: ‘In speed of transportation and communication in economic interdependence, the nations of the globe are already one world; the task is to secure recognition and acceptance of this oneness in the thinking of the people..There is an urgent need for a program for world citizenship that can be made a part of every person’s general education.’ (Ibid. P.24)

Aaron M. Sargent, a lawyer specializing in anti-subversive work and investigations affecting American education, testified that a movement began in the U.S. shortly before the turn of the century, closely related to Fabian socialism. According to Mr. Sargent, a group of American radical intellectuals organized an attack upon patriotism, “challenging basic American Philosophy founded on the doctrine of natural law.” Sargent attributed the new revolutionary philosophy to the teachings of John Dewey. In fact, Sargent referred to Dewey as “a gift from the gods to the radicals”.

Mr. Sargent pointed out that the period under discussion was one of growing intellectual radicalism, citing the statement of Professor Von Mises that socialism does not spring from the people but is a program instigated by special types of intellectuals ‘that form themselves into a clique and bore from within and operate that way..It is not a people’s movement at all. It is a capitalizing on the people’s emotions and sympathies and skillfully directing those sympathies toward a point these people wish to reach’. (Ibid. 31)

Sargent’s testimony went on to include:

Educator Dr. George S. Counts, served a chairman on a committee sponsored by The Progressive Education Association which was funded by Carnegie. This committee produced the pamphlet, “A Call to the Teachers of the Nation.” The following quote appeared in this pamphlet: “The progressive minded teachers of the country must unite in a powerful organization militantly devoted to the building of a better social order, in the defense of its members against the ignorance of the masses and the malevolence of the privileged. Such an organization would have to be equipped with the material resources, the talent, the legal talent, and the trained intelligence to wage successful war in the press, the courts, and the legislative chambers of the nation.” (Ibid. P.33)

Dr. Counts also served as a member of the American Advisory Organization whose purpose was to “introduce American Teachers and students to the new education methods used in Soviet Russia”. Dr. Counts’ interest in Russia was apparent in his publications, one of which was entitled, “The Soviet Challenge to America”. Counts’ work was known and well received by the Russians, as is evidenced in a letter he received from a member of the State Scientific Council and Commissariat of Education of the Soviet Union: “May I be so bold as to hope that your profound and consistent attack on the social order in your country will eventually lead you to a complete emancipation from American exclusiveness and intellectual messiahship so aptly exposed in your pamphlet thus enabling you to consider all social progress from a universal proletarian point of view.” (Ibid. 34)

Dr. Counts was signatory of the “conclusions and Recommendations” report by the Commission on Social Studies described before. Counts was also a favorite student and disciple of John Dewey and claimed Columbia Teacher’s College as his headquarters. (W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, 1970)

Another interesting aside is that Dr. counts’ pamphlet, mentioned above, is listed in the Communist Leaders’ Handbook for recommended reading. Carnegie’s interest in things Russian will be discussed again later.

The Ford Foundation for the Advancement of Education and the Old Dominion Foundation jointly supported a project of the Institute for Philosophical Research. Mortimer J. Adler was the Director of this Institute. The project, implemented in 1952, is described as “undertaking a dialectical examination of Western humanistic thought with a view to providing assistance in the clarification of basic philosophical and educational issued in the modern world.” (The Freeman Digest, p.29)

That this project deserves attention is witnessed by the well-known radical opinions of Mr. Adler, its director. In the January, 1949 issue of Common Cause, Mr. Adler had an article entitled ‘The quiet Revolution,’ in which he said:

The basic trend toward socialism, which began with Wilson’s New Freedom, and which was greatly accelerated by Roosevelt’s New Deal, has been confirmed by Truman’s return to the presidency on a platform which does not yield an inch to the right and in many respects goes further to the left. That fact suggests the possibility that some form of socialism–may prove to be the middle ground between the free enterprise capitalism and the oligarchical politics of the “economic royalists” on the one hand, and the dictatorship of the proletariat and the despotism of the party on the other…It all adds up to a clear picture. It looks like a quiet but none the less effective revolution. If we still wish to be cautious we need say no more than that we have reached a turning point in American politics at which it has become evident that the general social process of the last 20 years is irreversible-except by force. By choice the American people are never going to fall back to the right again. That deserves to be called a revolution accomplished…

But it is also a revolution which will continue. Either the Democratic Party will move further to the left or a new political party will form to the left of the Democrats.” (Ibid.)

Mr. Adler is still around and very active in the field of education.

A portion of the concluding remarks of the Reece Committee stated:

Putting the evidence together, we conclude that the National Education Association has been an important element in the tax-exempt..world used to indoctrinate American youth with ‘internationalism’…referred to as ‘globalism.’ This point of view is closely related to the ‘new era’ which so many social scientists have envisioned as the ultimate goal of our society when they have gotten through ‘engineering’ us into it. (Ibid. P.66)

The evidence uncovered as a result of the Reece Committee was incontrovertible. What action was taken against the foundations? NONE!!! The committee was canceled due to the disruptive behavior of Congressman Wayne Hayes of Ohio, a member of the Committee, and the matter was more or less dropped.

The findings of the Reece Committee merely became a matter of public record, and as such, is stored in the archives in Washington, DC. The information was never picked up by the media. However, at least two books have been published in the years that followed exposing the influence and power that the major foundations have had on our government and educational institutions.

Rene Wormser, General Counsel for the Reece Committee, published Foundations: Their Power and Influence in 1958. Dr. Carroll Quigley, a professed “insider” among the foundations and money people, published the “tell all” book, Tragedy and Hope – a History of the World in Our Time in 1966. On page 955 of his book, Quigley explains why the press never jumped to cover the Senate investigation: “It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the ‘most respected’ newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any revelations to make the publicity worth while, in terms of votes or campaign contributions.” (W. Cleon Skousen, p. 58)

In an interview with Michael Loyd Chadwick, editor of The Freemen Digest, Norman Dodd, Chief Investigator and Director of Research for the Reece Committee, was quoted as saying that the foundations had succeeded in providing the United States with a “national system of education.” According to Dodd, through the efforts of “organizations and persons little known to the American public. The principles upon which this country was founded are now scorned as a result of the changes fostered by the foundations’ control of education. The foundations have been able to take the philosophy upon which American civilization was based and turn it into its opposite…” (The Freeman Digest, p.75)

To recap the evidence gathered by the Reece Committee, it appears that the elitist coterie of tax-exempt foundations used the tax dollars of American citizens to gain control of our colleges, elementary and secondary schools, the media, the legislatures and courts, the textbook industry, and any person or organization even remotely connected with the educational establishment. Thus establishing this control, the foundations then went to work to mold and indoctrinate the voters and leaders of the future. The goal of this indoctrination being to engineer society into a collectivist, socialist state as outlined in the “conclusions and Recommendations” report.

You see, the “new world order” can be achieved in a more timely and tidy manner when the equalized masses willingly follow the “pied piper of Planethood” than if they surrender through force. To paraphrase Ludwig von Mises, Austrian economist and international educator, collectivism is not something that springs naturally from a people, rather it is something that is contemplated by special types of intellectuals or power-mongers.

The key to collectivism, then, is to play to the emotions and sympathies of the individual in order to “skillfully” direct him toward the predetermined Global objective. Perhaps this explains the trend toward hypnosis and New Age techniques in the classroom today. If you will recall the new thinking skills techniques were designed primarily to play to the emotional and sensitive side of the brain!!!???

In his book, The Naked Capitalist, Cleon Skousen had this to say regarding the foundations’ role in education: “If these people had their way we would develop a prospective nightmare in our schools–schools without grades, without discipline, without prayers, without pledges of alliance, without Christmas, without Easter, without patriotism, without morals, without standards of speech or standards of dress.” (W. Cleon Skousen, p. 72) – HAS NOT ALL THIS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED???

Isn’t it amazing that everything Skousen forewarned in 1970 has come to pass in the ’90s???

Has the locus of control in education changed today….NO! Today, Carnegie controls not only the teachers’s unions (NEA and AFT), but also the educational studies, educational research, educational committees (including the Education Commission of the States, the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and the National Association of State Boards of Education), individual state reform efforts (including state assessment testing and reform task forces), national testing instruments (NAEP, SAT, ETS, and the National Teachers’ Examination), high school graduation requirements (Carnegie units), and most importantly, the development and dissemination of curriculum through the National Diffusion Network.

The list can go on and on. Carnegie’s stronghold on education doesn’t stop with organizations and testing, however. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching co-controls the national educational database (ESIDS along with federal and state governments. They also spearheaded and designed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act perhaps the most important piece of educational legislation of the century.

Some of Carnegie’s projects include The Task Force on Teaching as a Profession and The Task Force on Education of Young Adolescents. And, let’s not forget Carnegie’s American-Soviet educational agreement. This will be discussed in a future issue.

Don’t you find it odd that the people screaming the loudest about our public school nightmare are the very ones who delivered it to us in the first place????

Next issue: HOW THEY CREATED THE PROBLEM!!! AND WHY???

by John Taylor Gatto, New York State Teacher of the Year, 1991

Call me Mr. Gatto, please. Twenty-six years ago, having nothing better to do, I tried my hand at schoolteaching. My license certifies me as an instructor of English language and literature, but that isn’t what I do at all. What I teach is school, and I win awards doing it.

Teaching means many different things, but six lessons are common to schoolteaching from Harlem to Hollywood. You pay for these lessons in more ways than you can imagine, so you might as well know what they are: The first lesson I teach is: “Stay in the class where you belong.” I don’t know who decides that my kids belong there but that’s not my business. The children are numbered so that if any get away they can be returned to the right class. Over the years the variety of ways children are numbered has increased dramatically, until it is hard to see the human being under the burden of the numbers each carries. Numbering children is a big and very profitable business, though what the business is designed to accomplish is elusive.

In any case, again, that’s not my business. My job is to make the kids like it being locked in together, I mean or at the minimum, endure it. If things go well, the kids can’t imagine themselves anywhere else; they envy and fear the better classes and have contempt for the dumber classes. So the class mostly keeps itself in good marching order. That’s the real lesson of any rigged competition like school. You come to know your place.

Nevertheless, in spite of the overall blueprint, I make an effort to urge children to higher levels of test success, promising eventual transfer from the lower-level class as a reward. I insinuate that the day will come when an employer will hire them on the basis of test scores, even though my own experience is that employers are (rightly) indifferent to such things. I never lie outright, but I’ve come to see that truth and [school]teaching are incompatible.

The lesson of numbered classes is that there is no way out of your class except by magic. Until that happens you must stay where you are put.

The second lesson I teach kids is to turn on and off like a light switch. I demand that they become totally involved in my lessons, jumping up and down in their seats with anticipation, competing vigorously with each other for my favor. But when the bell rings I insist that they drop tne work at once and proceed quickly to the next work station. Nothing important is ever finished in my class, nor in any other class I know of.

The lesson of bells is that no work is worth finishing, so why care too deeply about anything? Bells are the secret logic of schooltime; their argument is inexorable; bells destroy past and future, converting every interval into a sameness, as an abstract map makes every living mountain and river the same even though they are not. Bells inoculate each undertaking with indifference.

The third lesson I teach you is to surrender your will to a predestined chain of command. Rights may be granted or withheld, by authority, without appeal. As a schoolteacher I intervene in many personal decisions, issuing a Pass for those I deem legitimate, or initiating a disciplinary confrontation for behavior that threatens my control. My judgments come thick and fast, because individuality is trying constantly to assert itself in my classroom. Individuality is a curse to all systems of classification, a contradiction of class theory.

Here are some common ways it shows up: children sneak away for a private moment in the toilet on the pretext of moving their bowels; they trick me out of a private instant in the hallway on the grounds that they need water. Sometimes free will appears right in front of me in children angry, depressed or exhilarated by things outside my ken. Rights in such things cannot exist for schoolteachers; only privileges, which can be withdrawn, exist.

The fourth lesson I teach is that only I determine what. curriculum you will study (rather, I enforce decisions transmitted by the people who pay me). This power lets me separate good Kids from bad kids instantly. Good kids do the tasks I appoint with a minimum of conflict and decent show of enthusiasm. Of the millions of things of value to learn, I decide what few we have time for. The choices are mine. Curiosity has no important place in my work, only conformity.

Bad kids fight against this, of course, trying openly or covertly to make decisions for themselves about what they will learn. How can we allow that and survive as schoolteachers? Fortunately there are procedures to break the will of those who resist.

This is another way I teach the lesson of dependency. Good people wait for a teacher to tell them what to do. This is the most important lesson of all, that we must wait for other people, better trained than ourselves, to make the meanings of our lives. It is no exaggeration to say that our entire economy depends upon this lesson being learned. Think of what would fall apart if kids weren’t trained in the dependency lesson: The social-service businesses could hardly survive, including the fast-growing counseling industry; commercial entertainment of all sorts, along with television, would wither if people remembered how to make their own fun; the food services, restaurants and prepared-food warehouses would shrink if people returned to making their own meals rather than depending on strangers to cook for them. Much of modern law, medicine, and engineering would go too — the clothing business as well — unless a guaranteed supply of helpless people poured out of our schools each year. We’ve built a way of life that depends on people doing what they are told because they don’t know any other way. For God’s sake, let’s not rock that boat!

In lesson five I teach that your self-respect should depend on an observer’s measure of your worth. My kids are constantly evaluated and judged. A monthly report, impressive in its precision, is sent into students’ homes to spread approval or to mark exactly — down to a single percentage point — how dissatisfied with their children parents should be. Although some people might be surprised how little time or reflection goes into making up these records, the cumulative weight of the objective- seeming documents establishes a profile of defect which compels a child to arrive at a certain decisions about himself and his future based on the casual judgment of strangers.

Self-evaluation — the staple of every major philosophical system that ever appeared on the planet — is never a factor in these things. The lesson of report cards, grades, and tests is that children should not trust themselves or their parents, but must rely on the evaluation of certified officials. People need to be told what they are worth.

In lesson six I teach children that they are being watched. I keep each student under constant surveillance and so do my colleagues. There are no private spaces for children; there is no private time. Class change lasts 300 seconds to keep promiscuous fraternization at low levels. Students are encouraged to tattle on each other, even to tattle on their parents. Of course I encourage parents to file their own child’s waywardness, too.

I assign “homework” so that this surveillance extends into the Household, where students might otherwise use the time to learn something unauthorized, perhaps from a father or mother, or by apprenticing to some wiser person in the neighborhood.

The lesson of constant surveillance is that no one can be trusted, that privacy is not legitimate. Surveillance is an ancient urgency among certain influential thinkers; it was a central prescription set down by Calvin in the Institutes, by Plato in the Republic, by Hobbes, by Comte, by Francis Bacon. All these childless men discovered the same thing: Children must be closely watched if you want to keep a society under central control.

It is the great triumph of schooling that among even the best of my fellow teachers, and among even the best parents, there is only a small number who can imagine a different way to do things. Yet only a very few lifetimes ago things were different in the United States: originality and variety were common currency; our freedom from regimentation made us the miracle of the world; social class boundaries were relatively easy to cross; our citizenry was marvelously confident, inventive, and able to do many things independently, to think for themselves. We were something, all by ourselves, as individuals. It only takes about 50 contact hours to transmit basic literacy and math skills well enough that kids can be self-teachers from then on. The cry for “basic skills” practice is a smokescreen behind which schools pre-empt the time of children for twelve years and teach them the six lessons I’ve just taught you.

We’ve had a society increasingly under central control in the United States since just before the Civil War: the lives we lead, the clothes we wear, the food we eat, and the green highway signs we drive by from coast to coast are the products of this central control. So, too, I think, are the epidemics of drugs, suicide, divorce, violence, cruelty, and the hardening of class into caste in the U.S., products of the dehumanization of our lives, the lessening of individual and family importance that central control imposes.

Without a fully active role in community life you cannot develop into a complete human being. Aristotle taught that. Surely he was right; look around you or look in the mirror: that is the demonstration.

“School” is an essential support system for a vision of social engineering that condemns most people to be subordinate stones in a pyramid that narrows to a control point as it ascends. “School” is an artifice which makes such a pyramidal social order seem inevitable (although such a premise is a fundamental betrayal of the American Revolution). In colonial days and through the period of the early Republic we had no schools to speak of. And yet the promise of democracy was beginning to be realized. We turned our backs on this promise by bringing to life the ancient dream of Egypt: compulsory training in subordination for everybody. Compulsory schooling was the secret Plato reluctantly transmitted in the Republic when he laid down the plans for total state control of human life.

The current debate about whether we should have a national curriculum is phony; we already have one, locked up in the six lessons I’ve told you about and a few more Fve spared you. This curriculum produces moral and intellectual paralysis, and no curriculum of content will be sufficient to reverse its bad effects. What is under discussion is a great irrelevancy.

None of this is inevitable, you know. None of it is impregnable to change. We do have a choice in how we bring up young people; there is no right way. There is no international competition” that compels our existence, difficult as it is to even think about in the face of a constant media barrage of myth to the contrary. In every important material respect our nation is self-sufficient. If we gained a non-material philosophy that found meaning where it is genuinely located in families, friends, the passage of seasons, in nature, in simple ceremonies and rituals, in curiosity, generosity, compassion, and service to others, in a decent independence and privacy then we would be truly self-sufficient.

How did these awful places, these “schools”, come about? As we know them, they are a product of the two “Red Scares” of 1848 and 1919, when powerful interests feared a revolution among our industrial poor, and partly they are the result of the revulsion with which old-line families regarded the waves of Celtic, Slavic, and Latin immigration and the Catholic religion after 1845. And certainly a third contributing cause can be found in the revulsion with which these same families regarded the free movement of Africans through the society after the Civil War.

Look again at the six lessons of school. This is training for permanent under-classes, people who are to be deprived forever of finding the center of their own special genius. And it is training shaken loose from its original logic: to regulate the poor. Since the 1920s the growth of the well- articulated school bureaucracy, and the less visible growth of a horde of industries that profit from schooling exactly as it is, have enlarged schooling’s original grasp to seize the sons and daughters of the middle class. Is it any wonder Socrates was outraged at the accusation that he took money to teach? Even then philosophers saw clearly the inevitable direction the professionalization of teaching would take, pre-empting the teaching function that belongs to all in a healthy community belongs, indeed, most clearly to yourself, since nobody else care as much about your destiny.

Professional teaching tends to another serious error. It make things that are inherently easy to learn, like reading, writing and arithmetic, difficult -by insisting they be taught by pedagogical procedures.

With lessons like the ones teach day after day, is it any wonder we have the nations crisis we face today? Young people indifferent to the adult world and to the future indifferent to almost everything except the diversions of toys and violence? Rich or poor, schoolchildren cannot concentrate on anything for very long. They have a poor sense of time past and to come; they are mistrustful of intimacy (like the children of divorce they really are); they hate solitude, are cruel, materialistic, dependent, passive, violent, timid in the face of the unexpected, addicted to distraction.

All the peripheral tendencies of childhood are magnified to a grotesque extent by schooling, whose hidden curriculum prevents effective personality development. Indeed, without exploiting the fearfulness, selfishness, and inexperience of children our schools could not survive at all, nor could I as a certified schoolteacher.

“Critical thinking” is a term we hear frequently these days as a form of training which will herald a new day in mass schooling. It certainly will, if it ever happens. No common school that actually dared teach the use of dialectic, heuristic, and other tools of free minds could last a year without being torn to pieces.

Institutional schoolteachers are destructive to children’s development. Nobody survives the Six-Lesson Curriculum unscathed, not even the instructors. The method is deeply and profoundly anti-educational. No tinkering will fix it. In one of the great ironies of human affairs, the massive rethinking that schools require would cost so much less than we are spending now that it is not likely to happen. First and foremost, the business I am in is a jobs project and a contract-letting agency. We cannot afford to save money, not even to help children.

At the pass we’ve come to historically, and after 26 years of teaching, I must conclude that one of the only alternatives on the horizon for most families is to teach their own children at home. Small, de- institutionalized schools are another. Some form of free-market system for public schooling is the likeliest place to look for answers. But the near impossibility of these things for the shattered families of the poor, and for too many on the fringes of the economic middle class, foretell that the disaster of Six-Lesson Schools is likely to continue.

After an adult lifetime spent in teaching school I believe the method of schooling is the only real content it has. Don’t be fooled into thinking that good curricula or good equipment or good teachers are the critical determinants of your son and daughter’s school-time. All the pathologies we’ve considered come about in large measure because the lessons of school prevent children from keeping important appointments with themselves and their families, to learn lesson in self-motivation, perseverance, self-reliance courage, dignity and love and, of course lessons in service to others, which are among the key lessons of home life.

Thirty years ago these things could still be learned in the time left after school. But television has eaten most of that time, and a combination of television and the stresses peculiar to two-income or single-parent families have swallowed up most of what used to be family time. Our kids have no time left to grow up fully human, and only thin-soil wastelands to do it in. A future is rushing down upon our culture which will insist that all of us learn the wisdom of non-material experience; this future will demand, as the price of survival, that we follow a pace of natural life economical in material cost. These lessons cannot be learned in schools as they are. School is like starting life with a 12-year jail sentence in which bad habits are the only curriculum truly learned. I teach school and win awards doing it. I should know.

TALENT DEVELOPMENT

God gives every child undeveloped gifts and talents to be used to serve Him. (Matt. 24: 14-29)

Square Pegs deserve square holes. Not every child learns in the “normal” instructional method. God has created each child to be an individual with a specific learning style. It is the job of home schooling and Christian school parents to discover each child’s learning technique, what his/her gifts are, where their talents lie, and how to best choose curriculum to meet their needs. FCM offers diagnostic educational testing, documentation, remediation and enrichment curriculum recommendations. Let us help you to understand your child and their specific needs. Then let us provide you with an Individualized Educational Plan and schedule to allow your child to develop their talents to the fullest potential.

Scope & Sequence: General Overview
Language Arts: K-3

Reading/Literature

Word Analysis

PHONICS/VOCABULARY

learn consonant sounds
know letter/sound vowels, blends, digraphs, diphthongs, phonograms
recognize sight words
learn compound words
recognize synonyms, antonyms, homonyms
write contractions
decode words
use root words: prefixes, suffixes
use words with multiple meanings
use of descriptive words
integrate use of words of all subject areas
demonstrate variety and growth in word knowledge

LITERARY ELEMENTS

COMPREHENSION
expose to variety of literary forms
answer literal fact questions
recall main ideas from characters in story
read simple stories
understand sequence
follow simple directions
find main idea in story
understand cause/effect
make inferences
draw conclusions
identify reading for a specific purpose
compare and contrast
identify character traits and motives
learn setting
introduce topic
use word referents
look for author’s purpose

CRITICAL THINKING

predict outcomes
expose to inferential questions
distinguish between real/fantasy
distinguish between fact/opinion
answer why/how questions

LISTENING

skills in listening to others
becoming aware of purposes of listening
listen for clear speech patterns
apply skills for listening in a group discussion
learn how to adjust volume control in various situations
listen for directions
listen with respect
learn to understand audience response
teach purposes of listening: to gather and recall factual and
implied information
listen critically
listen for sequence of ideas
recognize main idea and details in listening response
experience listening to various media
write and respond from teacher dictation

SPEAKING

enjoy expressing self
encourage impromptu speaking
establish eye contact
learn to express ideas clearly
learn and apply different purposes for speaking:

giving information
persuading
entertaining
expressing feelings
group discussions
conversations
choral readings
use of complete sentences
enunciation/pronunciation
phrasing; pace; pitch; tone; expression
recite poetry
oral reports/speeches

The children who will benefit from a Talent Development ministry are usually easy to recognize. After two weeks of school, most teachers know which students are going to have difficulty, or need additional materials to be challenged. There is a need for teacher and parent observation in the screening process and valuable information can be obtained in this manner. The observations tell what the child is or is not doing, but does not give reasons for the performance level.

It is, therefore, necessary that complete evaluative and diagnostic testing be provided for each child entering the Talent Development program. This battery of tests should provide a reasonable estimate of the child’s I.Q. an achievement level in the basic subject areas, and diagnostic tests to pinpoint specific areas for remediation. These tests also will serve as a reference point when testing is done later in the school year to help determine progress.

The first test given is usually a standard group achievement test. If the child being tested is new to the school and achieves stanines of four or lower, further testing should be recommended. If any of the following information is supplied to your Christian school about the child, this will indicate a SPECIAL NEED ON THE PART OF THE STUDENT:

• Two years or more below academic grade level in any academic area;
• I.Q. below 90
• Variance on WISC (Individual Intelligence Test) between verbal and performance scores of over 15 points; and/or
• Scatter on the WISC of over three points in the subtests.

Additional testing should always be done by trained, competent, dedicated, born-again Christians. Never go to the world for the educational planning of your children’s future. The world’s ways are not God’s ways.

A service available to help you in student screening and testing is:

Visit/Message us on Contact Page.

The services of Faith Christian Ministries include:

1. The child will be brought to a pre-determined location where he/she is to be tested. At this time, the boy or girl will be administered a very thorough battery of examinations which will supply the parents and school with a very detailed account of the child’s competence in all educational areas.

2. Once work on the evaluation is completed it is time for the parent conference. Whenever the circumstances permit, the school administrator and the child’s teacher should be present during the parent conference. At this time the findings of the testing are shared. Also, all are informed of what materials can aid the child to make the greatest gains in achievement. The recommendations and guidelines provided in the educational plan are devised to promote success and maximum academic progress. At the close of the conference, the school administrator is given the completed folder which is to be placed in the student’s confidential file so that the child’s teacher can refer to it whenever necessary.

If this is the first indication the parents have had that their child has a problem, they may not accept the test results as being valid. It is their right to seek further opinions; it is after all, their child’s future which is involved. Always try to leave the lines of communication open so that if after further testing the results are the same, the parents will feel comfortable returning their child to your school.

Proper and thorough screening will save many instructional hours. A complete academic picture is a valuable tool and benefits both teacher and child. Children in need of a Talent Development program have already wasted much valuable time. They cannot afford to fall further behind due to insufficient or inaccurate diagnosis. This could negatively affect a child’s achievement level by as much as one to two years overall.

Once a child is in the program, he/she should be tested regularly using an achievement test, and once a year using a partial diagnostic testing. Yearly evaluation to update curriculum according to the child’s needs is essential.

As your program develops, a test at the beginning of the year serves as a comparison of the child’s progress during the school year. Much information is lost during the summer and comparison between test levels is not accurate when trying to ascertain progress made over the school year. Summer school is extremely important for the learning disabled child, slow learner, and retarded, for up to a year’s loss can occur over the summer due to some children’s severe auditory or visual memory problems.

In the case of our hypothetical “Mikey”, a complete evaluation would have helped not only Mikey, but also his parents and teacher. It is much easier to deal with a problem once it has been clearly defined. Many of the behavior problems that Mikey was experiencing were a direct result of the impossible school situation he had to face every day. With complete information concerning Mikey’s abilities and performance levels, his teacher would have been able to adjust some of the demands made upon Mikey and remove some of the pressure within the classroom. A complete physical examination could have revealed any root causes for both the bed-wetting and the academic difficulties. These efforts on Mikey’s behalf would also have helped improve his self-image as he saw the adults in his life concerned for him as a person.

Let’s Teach It — “Rite”???
contributed by Susan Foster

What approach to teaching should we use as we undertake the education of our children? Many parents and teachers want to know, “Just how do I present these new and wonderful materials which I have purchased for my child?”

A year ago, I was given a coffee mug by a dear friend who knew my heart for teaching. On it there is a German Proverb which I believe is pertinent to this question. It says. “A teacher is better than two books.” No matter how wonderful the books are, children need teachers. It is essential that we who are charged with the education of children, either our own or for others, do the teaching. We cannot sit our children in front of a workbook and expect the book to do our job.

With that firmly in mind, how do we teach the various subjects our children need? If we look to the Bible for our guidance, as we should in all matters, we will find that God gives us wonderful examples to follow in our teaching methods.

God has given us the answers to all the “tests” in life, if we will but read and study the Bible. As God gives us teachers in our Pastors and Bible teachers, and as we read and study the text book, our Bible, we find the answers are all there, ready for us to learn ahead of time for the test.

When you begin to think about your childs studies, ask yourself what is important on this page, in this chapter, or in this unit. Jot these ideas down. These are the concepts you must teach. Frequently, you will find these concepts at the beginning of new lessons. Write these concepts out in the form of questions and present them to your child as a study guide when you begin the lesson. Never test over anything that has not been put on that study sheet. You may add to this sheet as you work through your lessons and find important new concepts.

Next be sure that all the concepts are in the correct format. This is especially important for language arts. Unfortunately many books present concepts by showing the child the incorrect form. If one of your books presents concepts in the incorrect format, please DO NOT give this book to the child when teaching the concept.

Rewrite the exercise in the corrected format, and highlight, circle, or underline the specific things you are teaching. Teach this to the child, explaining why each item is the way it is, and then use the workbook or text questions only as a quiz or check point to check for mastery of the concept.

Before you begin to test, ask the child to tell you why something is correct. Show him correct items many times, asking him for explanations as daily review.

Be aware that the child remembers the last thing he sees when learning a new concept. This is why it is so essential that the child see only the correct format during the instructional period. Experts who teach bankers how to identify counterfeit money use this concept. A student is never exposed to the counterfeit bills while he is learning. He handles and studies only the real (correct) thing. By the time the student is finished with the program, he knows the real bills so well, he can spot a counterfeit immediately. It should be the same with our childs education. He should know the correct concept so well, that there is no question in his mind when he sees it in incorrect format.

Our children need to see the correct format over and over. They need to see it, handle it, speak it, and hear it. Be sure the exposure has been adequate to compensate for any memory weakness they may experience. Then you may need to reteach, again. Oral questioning will help you to know when the chid has mastered the new concept.

Once you feel confident the child understands the concepts, then and only then present the text book exercises, which need to be corrected, as a quiz, test or check point. When grading the tests, erase any wrong answers (do not let him see the incorrect format again) and then go back and reteach, showing him the same question in the correct form. Give him the quiz again and accept the final effort as his grade. After all, he did finally master the concept! When you baked your first cakes, or mowed your first lawn, did you want credit for the burnt sacrifice or for the crooked lines? You probably preferred that people remember the one that was perfect. Your child deserves the same encouragement.

When you have applied these strategies, you can say that you have taught it the right way! Congratulations on a job well done.

Note: Susan Foster is the Director of the Faith Christian Academy Satellite School, a service available to all Home Schoolers working with Dr. Paul Cates and Faith Christian Ministries.