Thanks to David Goodwin and the Ambrose Group for allowing us to post from their booklet, “Discover Classical Christian Education, A Parent’s Essential Guide“. Visit the Ambrose Group website, A non-profit group dedicated to expanding the reach and influence of classical Christian education
———–

Modern Education

Democratic: Every student should attain the same level of achievement.

Multi-cultural: Critical of our Western cultural roots, strongly emphasizing imperialism, slavery and historic Christianity as “what is wrong with America”.

Naturalistic: Emphasizes math and science at the expense of art, literature, and history.

Secular: Holds the “spiritual” as personal and separate from education. Avoids deeper philosophical values.

Values-Neutral: All moral positions are relative and hence all positions must be equally treated.

Broken into many subjects: By breaking knowledge into pieces, it can be more carefully studied and thus understood.

Teaches facts and functional skills: Students primarily learn about subjects particularly ones that help them “get good jobs.”

Progressive: Always experimenting with new techniques and methods.

Entertainment learning: Entertain students to engage them in the learning process.

Classical Christian Education

Excellence: Take each student to their highest possible potential.

Western: Recognize the great contribution of Western culture to America and the world, including its triumphs and failures while also recognizing the beauty in other cultures.

Universal: Emphasize the humanities, arts and sciences to bring a full perspective

Integrated: Education is necessarily tied to philosophy and religion in order to train thoughtful students.

Idealism: Standards of right and wrong exist in all subject areas. Students are taught to make judgment accordingly.

Integrated Subjects: Subjects should be taught in an integrated way so that students understand the whole as well as the parts.

Teaches Critical Thinking: Students learn to think beyond the subject-matter. Content is not the goal – wisdom is.

Traditional: Hold to educational standards that have a clear record of success.

Engage and Challenge: Students will meet a high standard and enjoy a sense of achievement.

Tom Garfield discusses a Biblical approach to modern “disabilities”, and and their treatment, in this “Dear Parents” article.

Who’s Got The Right Diagnosis? ADD, ADHD, ODD, LIES

“They interrupt…they don’t follow directions. In short, they do what seizes them at the moment without thinking through the consequences.”

“Accept the fact that it is a handicap…don’t expect your child to behave like others.”
(Sandra Doran, on children with “ADHD”; Focus On the Family)

“Even a child is known by his deeds, whether they are pure and right.”

“Children, be obedient to your parents in all things, for this is well-pleasing to the Lord.”
(God, on children with sin natures; the Bible, Prov. 20:11, Col. 3:20)

I. History of “Disabilities”:
A.Personal experience:
When I was doing my student teaching at Moscow High School a “few” years ago, as part of my experience I was assigned to regularly teach art to a group of handicapped students. I grew very fond of these students and we had an all too short time together. We were able to complete the painting of a pretty nifty wall-mural, though. Among these students were kids in wheelchairs, kids with Down’s Syndrome, and others with a variety of mental and physical problems. However, they had at least a couple of things in common; one was they all had medically provable disabilities, the second was that they all had a generally cheerful and compliant spirit. I had few discipline problems with them, after the class rules were made clear.

B. General history – handicaps were medically identifiable, treated as such, then mainstreaming, growing demand for “equal education” coupled with increasingly poor education = Learning Disabilities growth of special ed, follow the money!
In the years since the days of real handicaps there has been a flood of previously undetected “disabilities” diagnosed. It reminds one of FDR’s “alphabet soup” of programs to fix the economy during the Depression. Considering his legacy, the comparison is not a bad fit.

C. Definitions: LD, ADD, ADHD, and my favorite, a relatively new release, ODD, Oppositional Defiant Disorder. Quotes from advertizement for workshop: “Symptons – Lose their temper? Argue with adults? Deliberately do things that annoy others? Blame others for their own mistakes? Are touchy or easily annoyed by others? But ODD students are not merely misbehaving, difficult young people. They are often sensitive, intelligent, capable students who need someone to help unlock their potentials.” Workshops? Diagnosis and medical management of ODD students. The underlying and sometimes unseen causes of ODD. Attitudinal Therapy techniques.”

The symptoms for these afflictions read as specifically as your daily horoscope: “Your fellow workers need your timely input today.” “Today holds many challenges for you, do your best in decision making and your future will be bright.” “To avoid explosive situations, don’t smoke around gas pumps.” What kind of diagnoses are these? Just about every kid and virtually every adult male I know could be labeled ADD, if not ADHD, but most certainly ODD at some time or other. The next one I trust we’ll see is the unabashed – LIES – Learning Isn’t Essential Syndrome, which already afflicts millions of students as well as teachers.

READ MORE

-Tom Garfield
———

RING! “Good afternoon, Logos School…”

“Hello. I’m wondering who I could talk to about getting our son enrolled in your high school. You see, he’s really a good boy, but due to being strongly influenced by a bad group of friends, well, he has done some things that, well…, he has been expelled from his school. What do I need to do to get him into Logos? There doesn’t seem to be any other option for us at this time. Can you help us out?”

That introduction, virtually verbatim, we have heard far too many times over the years. I say too many times for a couple of reasons. One is that sadly far too many students “hit the wall”, i.e. finally really do something bad enough for even the government schools to notice and find themselves in that position. Another reason is that many people in our community think of a Christian school as a reform school for students who can’t “make it” in the public schools.

I think the reasoning for that last assumption goes something along the lines of the following:

See, historically churches have accepted anyone, especially the downtrodden and the outcasts and we are a “Christian” institution, so we should also accept these troubled students. Also, the reasoning continues, not only should we accept them, but being a “religious” school and since we have tougher discipline and academic standards, somehow just being here will straighten these students out. However, very often, as with a reform school, the time here has been practically considered a “sentence” to be filled before the student returns to take his rightful place in society (i.e. back to the public school).

Early in our history as a Christian school, we were faced with this dilemma: Do we accept these problem students and count on our love and program to turn them around, or do we coldheartedly reject them and be labeled as a school for only the “best and the brightest?” In our educational infancy and naivete, we chose the former, since it was “obvious” that these students needed the kind of education and atmosphere we could offer.

Imagine our naive shock when time and time again we saw that not only were we not seeing these students repent and achieve; they were actually having the effect of dragging other students down with them! We did not, at least in practice, believe the scriptures that teach “bad company corrupts good morals.” The reason it took us literally years to realize this ageless truth is due, I believe, to our thinking that when scripture says that good should and will triumph over evil, we acted as though Logos School was the agent for that “good”, instead of the Lord and the students’ parents. As much as we love and pray for students, only God alone, through Jesus Christ can truly make men new. So… what then is our role?

READ MORE

- Tom Garfield

——-

Slowly and weightily, Pa said, “Miss Wilder, we want you to know that the school board stands with you to keep order in this school.” He looked sternly over the whole room. “All you scholars must obey Miss Wilder, behave yourselves, and learn your lessons. We want a good school, and we are going to have it.” When Pa spoke like that, he meant what he said, and it would happen. (Little Town On the Prairie, by Laura Ingalls Wilder)

“And, fathers, do not provoke your children to anger; but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Ephesians 6:4

The above verse is often used by Christian educators, and rightly so, to demonstrate God’s view of the kind of instruction children are supposed to receive, that is, a completely God-centered one. What isn’t pointed out often enough from this verse is to whom the imperative is given, that is, the father.

I know it isn’t pointed out enough because so many fathers, even in our church-saturated culture, have ignored the application of this clear teaching. To be fair, many fathers do consider this verse, but believe they are doing this adequately by regularly taking their families to church. The application is far more encompassing. Not long ago I had a conference with a mom who was agonizing over whether or not to have her child repeat a grade. She was asking my advice on what factors she should consider in making this tough decision. Instead of spending much time on answering her immediate questions, I told her as diplomatically as possible that this decision which was weighing on her so heavily was not hers to make; it was her husband’s. At first I was concerned that I may have offended her, but instead I had the joy of almost visibly seeing a burden fall from her shoulders. She was still understandably concerned for her child, but obviously had more peace knowing that indeed it was her husband’s decision, and, being the good father he is, he would gladly assume that decision.

Unfortunately, that type of father is all too rare in the Christian community, not to mention our general American culture. It hasn’t always been so, as evidenced by the brief excerpt above from the Little House series. I don’t know if Mrs. Laura Wilder (eventual sister-in-law to the teacher in the book) was a Christian, but her father was certainly recognized as the authority for his children’s education. American history shows us that he was not unique or unusual in his assuming of that role.

God designed mothers to be the nurturers to their children, and as such, they naturally take a very active part in their children’s education. Moms feel the ‘nest-leaving’ far more deeply than do the dads. When that first little one starts kindergarten, it’s often mom who sheds the tears and diligently scrutinizes every aspect of the school’s instruction over those first critical years. As I’ve mentioned to many people, I would rather meet with a concerned dad vs. a concerned mom any day; I call it the “Mother Bear Syndrome.” Nevertheless, having designed mothers that way, God still insists that dads take the lead in the education of their children.

How is this to be done? First, it means recognizing that it is the God-ordained role of a father to take the responsibility for his children’s welfare and education. This will likely mean some type of delegation of tasks, but the responsibility cannot be averted. The father is the Pastor, the Superintendent, and the Chief Justice in the home, all the while being a true gentleman. Dad should be at every formal parent-teacher conference. He needs to know what his kids are studying and how well they’re doing. (With four kids in school, I know how hard it is just to look at all their papers each night, but Julie lays them out for me, and it happens.) All problems in school, academic and disciplinary, should receive top priority by Dad. And a “Well done!” from Dad should be frequent and meaningful. All our current school-board members are fathers of children in Logos School. This is not a requirement, nor are women excluded by policy; this is just the way it is, and I am very grateful!

READ MORE

- Tom Garfield
———

“You blind guides, you who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.” Jesus Christ (Matthew 23:24)

Since I am going to apply a principle from the above verse in a way some may find objectionable, I desire to convince you from the start that I really did read and understand the context. Jesus uses this jibe smack dab in the middle of soundly and emphatically denouncing some of the Pharisees’ and Jewish teachers’ practices and beliefs. Put simply, our Lord was not in favor of “majoring on the minors”, when it comes to seeking a right standing before the Almighty God. Tithing from every food item was fine and even appropriate, but not at the expense of neglecting true, spiritual worship. These “blind guides” had missed the big picture!

In using the proverb of gnats and camels, Jesus was vividly illustrating the foolishness of convoluted priorities. We all recognize extreme forms of priorities out of whack: a bumper sticker I recently saw stated, “My wife, maybe my dog, but never my gun!”. ( I wondered if he still had his wife.) Even allowing a hard-core interpretation of the second amendment, most Christians would agree that the marriage covenant pulls rank even on the United States Constitution. The guy in the pickup (of course!) obviously had his priorities thoroughly confused.

Unfortunately, confused priorities also make themselves apparent in Christian education. For example, too many Christian schools take great pains to ensure their dress codes are keeping every bizarre fashion trend at bay by the application of nitpicking policies, and yet they frequently allow “Christian” teachers to gossip, teach from a humanistic worldview, and discipline in an unbiblical manner. I will never forget a so-called Christian school I visited that was a disaster almost from top to bottom. This was brought home to me in spades when the administrator told me that when she heard I was coming to look at their school, she was tempted to “put more God-words in the hallways.” Mercy! Talk about missing the big picture.

Parents also do their share of gnat-straining and camel-gulping. From my experience, it has been a consistent pattern that Christian parents will hold Christian schools and staffs to a very severe accountability in every aspect of the school’s program. This is right and good, though sometimes a bit uncomfortable. It’s not always enjoyable to be under a microscope. Nevertheless, parents have that authority and their scrutiny keeps us on our toes. Yet, parents I would have considered hard-nosed about their children’s education, based on their concerns while at Logos, suddenly become docile if their children transfer to the public sector. Even when faced with what I would consider flagrant undermining of their rights as parents, these same people seem to quietly acquiesce to the powers-that-be and too often their children suffer for it.

Christian schools, yes even Logos, have real “gnats”: problems that may frustrate parents in their desires for their children. These problems may even have camel-like proportions at times. So, if these cannot be eliminated in a constructive manner, whatever their size, the parents are totally justified in removing their children from that Christian school. Nowhere does the Bible endorse or encourage us to pretend gnats don’t bother us. However, it doesn’t follow that these parents should then take up camel-chugging by transferring their children to a totally unbiblical, God-hating school environment. Homeschooling would be at least a biblically consistent step, even if it would be difficult practically.

I pray I haven’t offended you with my application of our Lord’s principle. I also pray that more and more parents will not compromise the biblical standards God has placed before them for the education of their children. (And feel free to point out our gnats!)

VIEW PDF

– Tom Garfield
———

I considered entitling this column “State Accreditation – The Golden Cow of Education”, but upon reflection felt that that would be inappropriate and unkind. Cows get enough bad press as it is.

It is rare, when I interview new families, that one of the parents does not ask about our accreditation status with the state. It is also very common that they inquire about the certification requirements we place upon our teaching applicants. Understandable questions, given the conditioning to which we, as a culture, have been subject. We have been told, both directly and subliminally, that state accreditation is to education what the FDA stamp of approval is to food quality, i.e. the guarantee of rigorous scrutiny by knowledgeable experts. The only problem is that if the FDA’s stamp indicated the same “quality” in food that state accreditation does for schools, salmonella and hepatitis would be as common as the cold and we’d all resort to raising our own food. Not too surprisingly, many people have done just that in education; they’ve started their own schools!

The idea of holding educational institutions and their instructors accountable and ensuring they maintain high standards is very appropriate. However, at least two things need to be carefully considered:

1. WHO or WHAT is the superior and responsible agency to which the institution is accountable?

2. WHAT STANDARDS are used as the yardstick against which the institution is being measured?

It’s very disappointing to me to see so many Christians become schizophrenic (Latin – “split mind”) on this issue. On most other issues involving children and their training, most Christians resort immediately to the scriptures. To cut to the chase, the Bible clearly and without apology says parents are the primary educators (Deut. 6, Ephesians 6:1-4). They are the “WHO” to which any institution educating children must be accountable. The State has been given no biblical authority in education. Doesn’t it then follow that the “STANDARDS” are also up to the parents, within certain, specified biblical principles? For example, it is just as wrong for parents to disregard God’s command to thoroughly educate their children, as it is for the state to use force to ensure that parents do so.

If all this isn’t convincing enough, consider two other points – is state accreditation (a relatively new idea on the block, historically) consistently bequeathing us better and better educated citizens, or just the opposite? In other words, is state accreditation any type of guarantee of quality? Further, the actual accreditation process gives barely a nod to the academic performance of a school’s students. Instead, the process and tool itself majors on the physical plant and faculty numbers.

At Logos we not only believe we operate directly under the collective authority of our families (as prescribed and enforced by our school board), a large percentage of our staff is comprised of parents. The standards we hold all our staff members to, and the school at large, come from the Bible. Therefore, loving the children and modeling the Christian life to them are enforced standards. On a more administrative, but still significant level, as a school we sought and received accreditation from A.C.S.I. (the Association of Christian Schools, Intl.), of which we are also a member. Their standards, both for staff and the school, incorporate both biblical and strong academic standards for education.

In the end, the excellence of any education is discerned by the quality evidenced in the lives of the students, not by state-approved, meaningless certificates.

VIEW PDF

- Tom Garfield, Superintendent of Logos School

There are virtually countless joys associated with this job. But one of my greatest heartaches has come from witnessing, from time to time, a teenager flounder in search of direction. This hapless young person is usually a young lady, but I’ve seen young men in similar quandaries. Frequently, from my experience, two major areas of decision-making are often laid on these young peoples’ shoulders by their well-meaning parents. No doubt from the best of intentions, parents seem to often leave the following decisions to their high school-aged children:

1. Whether or not to continue in and graduate from Logos.

2. Issues related to getting to know (and care about) the opposite sex.

Regarding the first issue, going the distance at Logos, we have learned the hard way that retaining a student here who doesn’t want to be here is a real drag for everyone concerned. So, as part of our application process for new secondary students, we ask the student to write a statement addressing why the student wants to come to Logos. These statements are often very revealing. If the student basically says, “I’m coming because my parents say I have to!”, this trips off our mental warning lights, and chances are pretty good that student will not be part of the entering class in the fall.

However, it is not among our newer secondary students that I usually see the anguished indecision mentioned above. It is more prevalent among the students we get to know the best, those that began with us in their kindergarten or first grade years. These students, for a number of reasons, often get to a point in their lives where they feel the “call of the wild”, and begin considering a transfer to the public schools. This restlessness, and it really manifests itself as such in the kids, typically hits at around the ninth grade year. Like the man who has seen the “greener grass” in his neighbor’s yard, these students no longer find satisfaction in their current conditions: Logos classes, teachers, even friends seem pretty lackluster compared to whatever lies beyond the rainbow. Enticements to these “richer” fields can come from the students’ own ideas of what will bring them satisfaction, or can also come from church friends already in the government schools. The draw to be with “everybody else” can be a powerful impulse at this age.

There is little, if anything, we at the school can do to help these teens decide whether to exit or not. In most cases, we would dearly love to see them stay and finish the course here. Yet, while they are on the horns of this dilemma they are almost different people. Relationships can become strained, and even academic performance can fall off. It can get to the point where, even though no formal decision has been made on their part, we know that parting is just a matter of time.

READ MORE

-Tom Garfield
———

Over the years I’ve been involved in Christian education, I’ve had the opportunity to talk with many individuals and groups. It’s always surprising to me when otherwise intelligent, informed people have solemnly repeated common misconceptions about Christian education that have no basis in fact. Yet, because it is easier to adopt someone else’s views than research the truth ourselves, the myths continue.

Let me repeat a few I regularly hear:

1. Christian schools have good discipline because good children go there. Following this logic, people are restored to health in hospitals because hospitals only admit patients who are already recovering. This myth assumes that the treatment, i.e. applied biblical discipline, in the Christian school has little to do with the resulting good behavior. As every parent knows that is absurd. Children are sinners; only through God’s grace and years of consistent, biblical training will children’s hearts and actions be changed for the better.

2. Christian schools have good academic results/scores because they only admit very intelligent students. Sounds like a variation on the theme above, doesn’t it? It is. Like the applied discipline above, it assumes that the time-tested (and in our case, the classical) teaching methods play no part in how well the students do academically, regardless of where they come from. Nevertheless, I hear this very often, especially from public school teachers and administrators. There is an a ironic twist to this myth. When Christian schools or Christian home schools do have academic problems, the same people accuse the involved teachers or a parents of incompetence. Any stick is good enough, it seems.

3. Christian education keeps Christian students from being “salt and light” in the public schools. I hear this most often from Christian parents of elementary-age students. Unfortunately, at the junior and senior high level, I hear Christian parents saying something different. At that point, the parents will often settle for their kids “surviving”. That means graduating without becoming a drug addict or pregnant or otherwise being seriously damaged by the system. Nowhere in all of Scripture are we, as parents, commanded or even encouraged to send our little ones out to be “missionaries” in an overwhelmingly evil environment. In fact, just the opposite is true; from Genesis to Ephesians we are commanded to train our children up in the Lord and His word . I’ve seen children at Logos who are real missionaries for Christ to their unsaved fellow students. The difference is that here those young missionaries are supported and taught by adults who share the same Lord. We may even train and nurture future, mature adult missionaries.

4. Christian education shields children from the raw, ugly facts of our society. Whoops. That isn’t a myth; it’s true. That is, we do shield, but we don’t lie. The children do learn the truth, both the ugly and the beautiful facts, as seen from God’s viewpoint and with His solution.

Thank you for examining these myths with me. I encourage and welcome your comments at any time, especially if you think I mythed the point.

VIEW PDF

-Tom Garfield
———

One of this century’s movie superheroes, Clint Eastwood, made the following memorable remark in one of his films:”A man’s got to know his limitations.” Please bear with me. I know it’s a little strange to quote Clint Eastwood in a Christian school, but it seemed appropriate to what I’d like to share with you.

You hear regularly about the many positive, biblical aspects of our program. All those things are true, and we are grateful for the grace granted to us to accomplish them. However to be accurate, we should tell you some of the things we, as a school, cannot do, i.e. our limitations.

No matter how we may try, Logos School is unable to do the following things:

1. We cannot replace parents in their God-ordained role as the most important people in the lives of the students. We can’t give them the same kind and amount of love and loads of time that parents should.
2. We cannot totally makeup for the parents’ failure in fulfilling the role mentioned above. Many times I’ve told tearful mothers that we cannot accept their rowdy junior high students. We’ve learned the hard way that it is more likely that a rebellious teenager will have a negative effect on students at Logos, than Logos will have a positive effect on the student.
3. We cannot be the first place children hear about the gospel, discipline, sex, drugs, hard work, safety, or even basic hygiene and nutrition. The nation’s public schools have received an agenda, willingly or unwillingly, of tasks that have historically and biblically been a part of a parent’s job description. Logos is unwilling to accept that agenda.
4. We cannot keep sin at bay by closing the school doors. There are sinners here, unrepentant ones too. Through God’s truly amazing grace these sinners are under the tutelage of former unregenerate sinners. By the application to that same grace and through sometimes years of diligent prayers, the sinners here often become new creatures too!
5. We cannot operate independent of financial gifts, above tuition payments. Just like all soldiers in God’s spiritual army, the staff members at Logos are real people who must eat and pay bills. Our school facility houses eternal beings, yet relies on very earthly items like electricity, gas, regular cleaning, and repairs. God has chosen to communicate His marvelous, universal gospel through decaying, physical individuals and materials.
6. We cannot keep its vision pure and dynamic in years to come without continuous prayer support for the board, staff, and families. We see daily the effect of your prayers! If the prayer support ceases, our limitations will far exceed those I’ve listed here.

Thank you for keeping our limits in bounds!

READ MORE

Scene 1: Interior shot of average home on any weekday morning:

“Mom! I can’t find my purple pants!”

“They’re in the dirty clothes, honey. Find something else to wear.”

“But I CAN’T wear anything else! Nothing else matches, and I really wanted Sandy to see my purple pants with my new blouse!”

“Sandy won’t care what you wear…!”

“Oh Mom! She ALWAYS notices and tells me if I wear something weird!”

(Huge sigh.) “Ok, ok….dig them out of the hamper. But you’ll have to at least iron them before you wear them!”

“But I’ll be LATE if I iron them!”

And the scene degenerates from there. From personal experience, I know this is not a hypothetical, nor a rare scenario in many households. Even in godly, loving homes, sometimes the pace of preparing for a school day can produce severe temptations to frustration in the most solid saint-of-a-parent. There are just a lot of things to think about, from lunches to homework, to needed books for that day, to after-school plans to double check on. Knowing precisely what clothes will be worn the next day might just lift one major burden from the backs of the students and the parents alike.

Scene 2: Interior shot of much-beloved Christian school on an average weekday:

The students, albeit with many smiles and friendly attitudes, move from class to class dressed as though they had dropped in on their way home from a four-day hike through uncharted wilderness. Rumpled sweatshirts, t-shirts, and semi-clean blue jeans, supported by well-worn sneakers or scuffed boots abound. An untucked sports shirt flaps over a dull-colored t-shirt, the attire of the student slumped in the desk at the front of the room. She is a bright, friendly student, as are most in this school, so no one comments on her combat-weary demeanor. Meanwhile, the teacher in front of the room wears his tie and jacket everyday, and hoping, somewhere in the recesses of his mind, that his “modeling” of maturity in dress will somehow affect the students’ understanding of the adult life.

Scene 3: Exterior shot featuring the selfsame female student from scene 2:

Dressed in matching mauve top and pants, and sporting a quaint cap with a monogrammed yellow letter, the young lady dashes a hot food order to a waiting car in the parking lot. She doesn’t see any disparity of thought between her unique attire for the few hours she weekly puts into this fast-food restaurant, and the daily grungy appearance she flaunts in school most of her waking hours.

When Logos School first began in the early eighties, the idea of student uniforms was as remote from our considerations as the idea of e-mail. In fact, a number of very serious discussions were held at board-level to decide whether we would require the students to wear shoes in class, or if they could be “free” to go barefoot. Sanitation won out over individuality. Had uniforms even been mentioned, I am confident that all present, self included, would have had a hearty laugh, and then gone on with more practical school business.

READ MORE