Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature



 Religions > Bible > Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Religions > Bible
User: ""
Date: 01 May 2005 12:30:04 AM
Object: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature
Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature
By Amy Doolittle
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Some of the nation's top English teachers say the Bible should be part
of any high school class covering the finest works of Western
literature, according to a new report issued by the Bible Literacy
Project.
The Bible is "one of the basic pieces of literature that in Western
civilization has influenced laws, morals, politics and other
literature," says Laurance Levy, a teacher at McDonogh School in Owings
Mills, Md., who participated in the national survey.
Researchers spoke with 41 teachers in 10 states, from both
religious and nonreligious backgrounds, who are regarded as outstanding
by colleagues. Teachers at four private schools and 30 public schools
were part of the study.
Nine out of 10 teachers who participated argued that knowledge of
the Bible is crucial for a good education; 40 of the 41 teachers said
Bible literacy is an educational advantage.
The study by the Bible Literacy Project, backed by Wall Street
financier John Templeton, was conducted in tandem with a poll by the
Gallup Organization that quizzed 1,002 teenagers on their knowledge of
the Bible.
The Gallup poll found that fewer than half of the teens surveyed
knew that the Bible says Jesus turned water into wine at a wedding.
Nearly two-thirds couldn't identify a quote from Jesus' Sermon on the
Mount, or the relation of the road to Damascus to the Apostle Paul's
conversion.
The Gallup survey, with a margin of error of 3 percentage points,
also found that 63 percent of private schools in the United States
offer classes on the Bible as literature, but only 26 percent of public
schools do.
McDonogh, a private school, does not have a unit on the Bible as
literature, Mr. Levy says. Scripture, he says, does "not at all top our
list of critical topics to teach."
The Bible Literacy Project, a nonpartisan organization in Fairfax
that promotes academic study of the Bible, plans to release a textbook
in September designed for use in public schools.
Bryan Borah, chairman of the English department at Centreville High
School, says the Bible is important, but adding the book to an already
crowded curriculum would be tough.
"I understand philosophically the importance of biblical works and
that it does affect mind-sets and attitudes," he says. "But
logistically, can I squeeze it in? I can barely get in a
creative-writing class."
Other school officials are making a place for the Bible.
In West Texas, the Ector County school board voted Tuesday to add
an elective Bible class in two high schools in fall 2006. The class
would be taught as a history or literature course.
"The research I've done is that you can't hardly go back and look
at history without the history of the Bible or the literature in the
Bible. It's an integral part of American heritage, and we need it to be
a more integral part of American society today," Ector school board
member L. V. "Butch" Foreman III says. "I see [the Bible] as no
different than any another book that will be used to educate children."
A group of parents asked the school board in March to approve the
class.
The Massachusetts State Department of Education requires selections
from the Bible to be taught as part of high school English classes,
spokeswoman Heidi Perlman says.
"The Bible is in our English language-arts framework to be used as
another type of literature, but by no means do we condone the teaching
of religion in our classrooms," Ms. Perlman says.
Marie Wachlin, author of the Bible Literacy Project report, says
that when it comes to teaching the Bible, teachers are affected by
"political correctness issues."
"Teachers implied they were very cautious, even fearful about
teaching the Bible in class," she says, often out of a
misinterpretation of the First Amendment's ban on government
establishment of religion.
That fear is ungrounded, says Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at
the First Amendment Center.
"Contrary to popular belief, the Supreme Court did not ban the
Bible from public schools," Mr. Haynes says. Rather, he says, the high
court barred public schools from supporting religion.
Incorporating the Bible in a public school curriculum is not
unconstitutional, writes Chuck Stetson, founder of the Bible Literacy
Project and former vice president of the National Bible Association.
"The great authors of literature made an assumption that the
general population understood the basic themes of the Bible," he
writes. "Yet, our study reveals that we are losing this knowledge and
raising a generation that teachers say is 'clueless' about the context
for some of the most basic phrases in our common language."
Christians who regard the Bible as the inspired word of God also
generally are supportive of its being studied as literature, says the
Rev. Joseph Jenson, executive secretary of the Catholic Biblical
Association.
"The Bible is fundamentally a foundation in many ways [throughout]
our culture and the Western world," Father Jenson says. "A lot of the
narratives in the Bible are very fine examples of good literature and
the study of them can only be a help to people."
Teaching the Bible as literature doesn't "take anything away from
it, because they're not discussing it in a spiritual realm," says Kiera
McCaffrey, a spokeswoman for the Catholic League, which promotes
religious and civil liberties. "Anything teachers can do to impart
knowledge of the Bible to their students, we're behind it."
.

User: "ZenIsWhen"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 08:20:19 AM
<stevejdufour@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1114925404.885056.184570@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature


By Amy Doolittle
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Some of the nation's top English teachers say the Bible should be part
of any high school class covering the finest works of Western
literature, according to a new report issued by the Bible Literacy
Project.
The Bible is "one of the basic pieces of literature that in Western
civilization has influenced laws, morals, politics and other
literature," says Laurance Levy, a teacher at McDonogh School in Owings
Mills, Md., who participated in the national survey.
Researchers spoke with 41 teachers in 10 states, from both
religious and nonreligious backgrounds, who are regarded as outstanding
by colleagues. Teachers at four private schools and 30 public schools
were part of the study.
Nine out of 10 teachers who participated argued that knowledge of
the Bible is crucial for a good education; 40 of the 41 teachers said
Bible literacy is an educational advantage.
The study by the Bible Literacy Project, backed by Wall Street
financier John Templeton, was conducted in tandem with a poll by the
Gallup Organization that quizzed 1,002 teenagers on their knowledge of
the Bible.
The Gallup poll found that fewer than half of the teens surveyed
knew that the Bible says Jesus turned water into wine at a wedding.
Nearly two-thirds couldn't identify a quote from Jesus' Sermon on the
Mount, or the relation of the road to Damascus to the Apostle Paul's
conversion.
The Gallup survey, with a margin of error of 3 percentage points,
also found that 63 percent of private schools in the United States
offer classes on the Bible as literature, but only 26 percent of public
schools do.
McDonogh, a private school, does not have a unit on the Bible as
literature, Mr. Levy says. Scripture, he says, does "not at all top our
list of critical topics to teach."
The Bible Literacy Project, a nonpartisan organization in Fairfax
that promotes academic study of the Bible, plans to release a textbook
in September designed for use in public schools.
Bryan Borah, chairman of the English department at Centreville High
School, says the Bible is important, but adding the book to an already
crowded curriculum would be tough.
"I understand philosophically the importance of biblical works and
that it does affect mind-sets and attitudes," he says. "But
logistically, can I squeeze it in? I can barely get in a
creative-writing class."
Other school officials are making a place for the Bible.
In West Texas, the Ector County school board voted Tuesday to add
an elective Bible class in two high schools in fall 2006. The class
would be taught as a history or literature course.
"The research I've done is that you can't hardly go back and look
at history without the history of the Bible or the literature in the
Bible. It's an integral part of American heritage, and we need it to be
a more integral part of American society today," Ector school board
member L. V. "Butch" Foreman III says. "I see [the Bible] as no
different than any another book that will be used to educate children."

A group of parents asked the school board in March to approve the
class.
The Massachusetts State Department of Education requires selections
from the Bible to be taught as part of high school English classes,
spokeswoman Heidi Perlman says.
"The Bible is in our English language-arts framework to be used as
another type of literature, but by no means do we condone the teaching
of religion in our classrooms," Ms. Perlman says.
Marie Wachlin, author of the Bible Literacy Project report, says
that when it comes to teaching the Bible, teachers are affected by
"political correctness issues."
"Teachers implied they were very cautious, even fearful about
teaching the Bible in class," she says, often out of a
misinterpretation of the First Amendment's ban on government
establishment of religion.
That fear is ungrounded, says Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at
the First Amendment Center.
"Contrary to popular belief, the Supreme Court did not ban the
Bible from public schools," Mr. Haynes says. Rather, he says, the high
court barred public schools from supporting religion.
Incorporating the Bible in a public school curriculum is not
unconstitutional, writes Chuck Stetson, founder of the Bible Literacy
Project and former vice president of the National Bible Association.
"The great authors of literature made an assumption that the
general population understood the basic themes of the Bible," he
writes. "Yet, our study reveals that we are losing this knowledge and
raising a generation that teachers say is 'clueless' about the context
for some of the most basic phrases in our common language."
Christians who regard the Bible as the inspired word of God also
generally are supportive of its being studied as literature, says the
Rev. Joseph Jenson, executive secretary of the Catholic Biblical
Association.
"The Bible is fundamentally a foundation in many ways [throughout]
our culture and the Western world," Father Jenson says. "A lot of the
narratives in the Bible are very fine examples of good literature and
the study of them can only be a help to people."
Teaching the Bible as literature doesn't "take anything away from
it, because they're not discussing it in a spiritual realm," says Kiera
McCaffrey, a spokeswoman for the Catholic League, which promotes
religious and civil liberties. "Anything teachers can do to impart
knowledge of the Bible to their students, we're behind it."

Obviously nothing more than a pile of invented or manipulated propaganda.
propaganda.
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 09:48:45 AM

Obviously nothing more than a pile of invented or manipulated

propaganda.
But still it is important as literature.
.
User: "Malcolm"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 02:42:26 PM
<stevejdufour@yahoo.com> wrote


Obviously nothing more than a pile of invented or manipulated

propaganda.

But still it is important as literature.

You cannot teach children anything serious about Western culture without
giving a central place to Christianity.
Unless you are a completely exceptional teacher, it is in practise
impossible to do this without imparting some view about the vlaue of
Christianity.
So any separation of church and state, as far as education goes, is
virtually unworkable. American Christians need to point this out. It's
either the glories of Christian civilisation, if you want real history, art,
literature, music, and so on, or the inanities of "multicultural studies".
.
User: "Bonnie Bitch"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 03:45:57 PM
On Sun, 1 May 2005 19:42:26 +0000 (UTC), "Malcolm"
<regniztar@btinternet.com> wrote:

So any separation of church and state, as far as education goes, is
virtually unworkable.

Teaching that Christianity exists and that it is responsible for X, Y,
and Z is vastly different from the position you advocate -- cramming
it down people's throats.
Happy FOAD --
Bonnie *****
.
User: "Malcolm"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 06:25:00 PM
"Bonnie *****" <123@sesame.str> wrote


Teaching that Christianity exists and that it is responsible for X, Y,
and Z is vastly different from the position you advocate -- cramming
it down people's throats.

Can't you see that you're making a wholly unrealistic demand. Teach _about_
Christianity, but with no consideration, overt or implied, as to its value?
Most university lecturers at top colleges find this very hard, to teach
objectively without merely passing on their own ideological biases to
students. But we are talking schoolchildren and ordinary teachers here. The
children are generally not mature enough to defend their own ideological
positions in a competent way, and the teachers don't generally have the
philosphical background that would allow them to teach at that level.
There is the same problem with evolution. It is not possible to teach "about
evolution" and "about creationism" without implying something about the
value of those beliefs. You can't teach biology without teaching where the
organisms came from, so either you teach evolutionary biology, or
creationist biology, or you don't teach biology at all.
So I think that Americans must say that the concept of "separation of church
and state" as far as education goes, is unworkable and needs to be revised.
To me it seems obvious that Chrisitianity must be taught as valuable and
evolutionary biology as true. Plenty of adults will disagree with me on one
of those positions (though few on both). As adults we have to argue it out
and decide how the children will be taught. Fudging the issue by saying
schools shouldn't teach values is no real option.
.
User: "Bonnie Bitch"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 07:26:49 PM
On Sun, 1 May 2005 23:25:00 +0000 (UTC), "Malcolm"
<regniztar@btinternet.com> wrote:


"Bonnie *****" <123@sesame.str> wrote


Teaching that Christianity exists and that it is responsible for X, Y,
and Z is vastly different from the position you advocate -- cramming
it down people's throats.

Can't you see that you're making a wholly unrealistic demand.

Can't you see that you're unable to think?

Teach _about_
Christianity, but with no consideration, overt or implied, as to its value?

It is possible. See what home-schooling does?

Most university lecturers at top colleges find this very hard, to teach
objectively without merely passing on their own ideological biases to
students.

One need not worry about that at BJU.

But we are talking schoolchildren and ordinary teachers here. The
children are generally not mature enough to defend their own ideological
positions in a competent way, and the teachers don't generally have the
philosphical background that would allow them to teach at that level.

You write as if education is a case of "the stupid leading the
ignorant."

There is the same problem with evolution. It is not possible to teach "about
evolution" and "about creationism" without implying something about the
value of those beliefs. You can't teach biology without teaching where the
organisms came from, so either you teach evolutionary biology, or
creationist biology, or you don't teach biology at all.

First off, there is no such thing as "creationist biology." The sum
total "wisdom" of "creationist biology" is "Goddidit."
It is very possible to teach biology without bias, because (you may
want to take some notes here) biology deals with real world
observations and explanations.
Anyone can go into a lab and watch evolution in action. Take some
bacteria, squirt some penicillin over them. The ones that survive will
produce offspring which are resistant to penicillin. The surviving
organisms have <drum roll> evolved.
The only problem with evolution is the undereducated ignoramuses who
prefer their religion fantasies over real-world occurrences.

So I think that Americans must say that the concept of "separation of church
and state" as far as education goes, is unworkable and needs to be revised.

In Reality, education is about presenting all the information. So,
before you step up in front of history class with your "Christianity
good, praise-a-llujah" rant, I will be presenting the facts, such as:
Christianity is responsible for the genocide of over 5 million
indigenous peoples in the Americas
Christianity is the reason for the Crusades, during which hundreds of
thousands of non-Xians were slaughtered for God Almighty (tm).
Christianity is evil, intolerant, bigoted, hateful, and a fantasy.
"Anyone who engages in the practice of psychotherapy confronts every
day the
devastation wrought by the teachings of religion." --- Nathaniel
Branden, Ph.D.
"If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act
redeemed." --Voltaire
I'm sure you'll have no objections, in your post-modernist zeal for
"equal time" and "all viewpoints are equally valid."

To me it seems obvious that Chrisitianity must be taught as valuable and
evolutionary biology as true. Plenty of adults will disagree with me on one
of those positions (though few on both). As adults we have to argue it out
and decide how the children will be taught. Fudging the issue by saying
schools shouldn't teach values is no real option.

Fine. But.... how happy will you be when this left-leaning, atheist,
loudmouth, opinionated teacher teaches your kids that Christianity is
crap and is the cause of most of the modern world's inherited ills?
Oh, wait -- you won't like that, because you want your religion
crammed down everyone else's throats.
I will be more than happy to support your view -- right after the
Wiccas, Druids, Buddhists, atheists, Shintos, Unitarians, Asatrus,
Zoroastrians, Moonies, $cientologists, and Satanists have their say.
BTW, you'll go right after the Satanists, since that would make a
great seque from Christianity, Part 1, to Christianity, Part 2.
BTW, when I learned about the Reformation in world history class, it
was in a non-religious school. Somehow, the poor,
undereducated/ignorant teacher managed to muddle through, without
imparting her bias. Imagine that.
Happy FOAD --
Bonnie *****
.
User: "Malcolm"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 02 May 2005 07:10:52 AM
"Bonnie *****" <123@sesame.str> wrote


Can't you see that you're unable to think?

Well really. If you can show me where I've gone wrong then I'm happy to
retract. But no-one belives that his thought processes are invalid.


Teach _about_
Christianity, but with no consideration, overt or implied, as to its
value?


It is possible. See what home-schooling does?

You write as if education is a case of "the stupid leading the

ignorant."

I wouldn't put it as crudely as that. But it's nurses and doctors. I don't
disrespect nurses, but the fact is that a heart surgeon could do the nurse's
job if required, whilst nurses can't do heart surgery.
Similarly many university professors would make good schoolteachers, but the
vast majority of schoolteachers wouldn't be candidates for a university
faculty post. The demand for non-directional teaching _about_ Chrisitianity
is the same as a demand for nurses to do heart surgery. If you can employ
Plato to teach in your school, maybe it has a chance, but with Mr Bloggs at
the local state school, there's no way its going to happen.


It is very possible to teach biology without bias, because (you may
want to take some notes here) biology deals with real world
observations and explanations.

You cannot teach biology without making judgement on some theological
claims. In practise if you look at, say, fossils, all you see is some
impressions which are hard to interpret and don't bear any clear
relationship to each other. So you can't just hand the children a bunch of
fossils and say "Ok children, here's the evidence. Now what do you think
happened."


Anyone can go into a lab and watch evolution in action. Take some
bacteria, squirt some penicillin over them. The ones that survive will
produce offspring which are resistant to penicillin. The surviving
organisms have <drum roll> evolved.

Actually that's not what happens. The antibiotic resistnace genes are
carried on plasmids, which the bacteria pass to each other, sometimes even
across species, by sexual conjugation. So the use of antibiotic resistance
as a textbook case of evolution in action is controversial.
So even if we agree on the broad facts of evolution, how we present it in
science class isn't cut-and-dried, but something that has to be debated.


In Reality, education is about presenting all the information. So,
before you step up in front of history class with your "Christianity
good, praise-a-llujah" rant, I will be presenting the facts, such as:

Christianity is responsible for the genocide of over 5 million
indigenous peoples in the Americas

Christianity is the reason for the Crusades, during which hundreds of
thousands of non-Xians were slaughtered for God Almighty (tm).

Christianity is evil, intolerant, bigoted, hateful, and a fantasy.

"Anyone who engages in the practice of psychotherapy confronts every
day the
devastation wrought by the teachings of religion." --- Nathaniel
Branden, Ph.D.

"If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act
redeemed." --Voltaire

I'm sure you'll have no objections, in your post-modernist zeal for
"equal time" and "all viewpoints are equally valid."

Who said "all viewpoints are equally valid"? I'm a Catholic and a biologist.
I want evolution taught it schools, which involves passing judgement on the
theological postion of other Chrisitians. I also want Western culture taught
in school, in which Christianity has the central place, and that necessarily
involves overt or implied theological judgements as well. As your proposed
curriculum has amply demonstrated.


Fine. But.... how happy will you be when this left-leaning, atheist,
loudmouth, opinionated teacher teaches your kids that Christianity is
crap and is the cause of most of the modern world's inherited ills?
Oh, wait -- you won't like that, because you want your religion
crammed down everyone else's throats.

I don't actually have a problem with that. Of course I'd rather have a
Christian teacher presenting Christianity in a positive light, but it is a
lot better to say "I am an atheist and this is why I think Christianity is
crap." rather than "this is the objective, unbiased history of Christianity
which you must accept (because I'm the teacher), and then make up your own
minds".


I will be more than happy to support your view -- right after the
Wiccas, Druids, Buddhists, atheists, Shintos, Unitarians, Asatrus,
Zoroastrians, Moonies, $cientologists, and Satanists have their say.
BTW, you'll go right after the Satanists, since that would make a
great seque from Christianity, Part 1, to Christianity, Part 2.

This is the "Wicca" fallacy, and another reason why separation of church and
state is unworkable, if it is interpreted in such a way that the state is
obliged to treat Wicca and Christianity as equal when, apart from the fact
that both are formally "religions", there is no point of equality.


BTW, when I learned about the Reformation in world history class, it
was in a non-religious school. Somehow, the poor,
undereducated/ignorant teacher managed to muddle through, without
imparting her bias. Imagine that.

If she'd done a really top-notch job you would say. "This teacher taught
about the Reformation. This was her bias. This is where I agree with her,
these are the points on which I would disagree."


Happy FOAD --

Bonnie *****

.
User: "Bonnie Bitch"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 02 May 2005 01:02:53 PM
On Mon, 2 May 2005 12:10:52 +0000 (UTC), "Malcolm"
<regniztar@btinternet.com> wrote:


"Bonnie *****" <123@sesame.str> wrote


Can't you see that you're unable to think?

Well really. If you can show me where I've gone wrong then I'm happy to
retract. But no-one belives that his thought processes are invalid.

Already did.

Teach _about_
Christianity, but with no consideration, overt or implied, as to its
value?


It is possible. See what home-schooling does?

You write as if education is a case of "the stupid leading the

ignorant."

I wouldn't put it as crudely as that.

How PC of you.
<snip 2 end -- nothing new or relevant>
Happy FOAD --
Bonnie *****
.






User: "Bonnie Bitch"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 12:31:04 PM
On 1 May 2005 07:48:45 -0700,
wrote:


Obviously nothing more than a pile of invented or manipulated

propaganda.

But still it is important as literature.

You misspelled "worthless."
Happy FOAD --
Bonnie *****
.



User: "Antagonist for God"

Title: Re: Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature 01 May 2005 10:28:13 AM
On 30 Apr 2005 22:30:04 -0700,

spake thusly:

Top English teachers see value of teaching Bible as literature


By Amy Doolittle
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Some of the nation's top English teachers say the Bible should be part
of any high school class covering the finest works of Western
literature, according to a new report issued by the Bible Literacy
Project.
The Bible is "one of the basic pieces of literature that in Western
civilization has influenced laws, morals, politics and other
literature," says Laurance Levy, a teacher at McDonogh School in Owings
Mills, Md., who participated in the national survey.

It isn't "western literature" though. :)

"The Bible is fundamentally a foundation in many ways [throughout]
our culture and the Western world,"

I agree with that.
--
Antagonist for God
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
Re: Hope is is of value to you.
Atheists Put Less Value On Love Than Believers
So That's How Dr Laura Raises Her Kid (That Vaunted GOP Family Value)
Re: GOP "Core-Value" Flip-Flops
Oops, MA Catholic Priest Senetenced for Kiddie Porn (Christian Family "Value")
Re: Value of Popularity
serious questions to Muslims (Shii or Sumni), who value peace
Guide to God, part 13/41: The Value Of Life
SoT Christian Family Value: Christian Man Sentenced for Molesting OWN DAUGHTER
The Sickness of Republicans: They determine Value as Dollars on the Plate rather than Nearness to God's Loving Spirit
What is the modern value...
Hope it is of some value to you.
Why Athiests value life and the world more than believers
BIBLE VALUE AND ACCURACY
J Young Christian Morality: Matthew Shepard's Mom Speak Out Against Hate (Praise Jesus! Kill Gays! Family Value! Hate the Sinner!)
 

NEWER

pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER