tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post3099337615606431153..comments2024-03-07T00:03:12.584-07:00Comments on John's Corner of the World: CHEC, Part IIIJohn Holzmannhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14849211055450293089noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-61084102546349558792009-02-10T08:45:00.000-07:002009-02-10T08:45:00.000-07:00Just to clarify... Tapestry of Grace is not displa...Just to clarify... Tapestry of Grace is not displaying products at ANY homeschool conferences this year.Scott W. Somervillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17312154442915574915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-34456283638928883502009-02-04T14:09:00.000-07:002009-02-04T14:09:00.000-07:00What I really don't understand here is why Kevin j...What I really don't understand here is why Kevin just doesn't come out and say exactly what the issue is with Sonlight. It seems that it would save so much time and energy on both your parts. Either you can meet his requirements or you can't, or don't choose to, why drag this out?<BR/>Kevin spends so much time writing blog posts and talking about gossip when there is such an easy way to avoid it...just tell the truth. For some reason this movement of men seems afraid of being completely forthright about their agenda.Leaves us all wondering....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-19468019214396580422009-02-04T09:37:00.000-07:002009-02-04T09:37:00.000-07:00"thatmom":Your comments about RC Sproul, Jr. and t..."thatmom":<BR/><BR/>Your comments about RC Sproul, Jr. and the "movement" homeschoolers really are distressing.<BR/><BR/>Now, that, clearly, <EM>is</EM> a place where Swanson and Sonlight take strongly divergent perspectives. From <EM>very</EM> early in Sonlight's history, we openly declared our belief that, while we are delighted to have the homeschool option, we didn't believe it was "the" only--or necessarily, even, the "best"--option for all families.<BR/><BR/>. . . Again, however (adverting to my immediately preceding comment): I have a hard time imagining this issue is at the root of Sonlight's problems with CHEC . . . for reasons already noted: that they are permitting plenty of other <EM>non-homeschooling</EM>, indeed, <EM>secular</EM> companies onto their convention floor.John Holzmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849211055450293089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-71278161085126108672009-02-04T09:33:00.000-07:002009-02-04T09:33:00.000-07:00"thatmom":I think we have to be careful in our exe..."thatmom":<BR/><BR/>I think we have to be careful in our exegesis of motive.<BR/><BR/>I am willing to hear further evidence for the perspective you are suggesting. HOWEVER, at least one reason to question what you are saying: the CHEC contingent itself at our December meeting included a woman.<BR/><BR/>Y'know, as I went through the documents that compose my <A HREF="http://johnscorner.blogspot.com/2009/01/change-of-interpretation-on-chec.html" REL="nofollow">A change of interpretation on CHEC</A> post, I sense CHEC actually <EM>has</EM> been (relatively) consistent in its approach on this matter.<BR/><BR/>Please notice that, <BR/><BR/>though Sonlight seems to have been singled out in 2007 to put away its Usborne books [an inconsistency], and <BR/><BR/>despite the fact that, obviously, other companies CHEC has permitted (and is still permitting) into its convention hall carry [I can't say anything about whether or not they <EM>display</EM> those books; but . . . !] . . . --despite the fact that, obviously, CHEC is permitting other companies that carry those same books to attend their convention [I would claim that, too, is somewhat of an inconsistency--especially considering the expressed concern of the vendor committee chairman during our meeting in December], the truth is, <BR/><BR/>* Both Bill and Kevin seemed/seem pretty consistent in expressing their <EM>primary</EM> concern about "metaphysic" with respect to <EM>curricula</EM>. One or the other or both of them said, during our meeting, that it is the fact that these books are, in some way, central to our "complete <EM>curriculum</EM>" that bothers them.<BR/><BR/>Therefore,<BR/><BR/>* Please notice that, of all the <EM>curriculum</EM> suppliers whose names I recognize, <EM>this year</EM> CHEC only includes those whose primary curriculum spines are obviously "Christian." Indeed, as far as I can tell (I don't study these companies' offerings!) <A HREF="http://www.chec.org/chec/events/state-conference/vendors_listing.php" REL="nofollow">CHEC's convention this coming year</A> seems to include only companies that feature Christian <EM>textbooks</EM> as their curricular spines.<BR/><BR/>* It is possible this has nothing to do with CHEC's leadership (it could be a strategic business choice on the part of Marsha Sommerville), but notice that Tapestry of Grace <A HREF="http://www.chec.org/chec/events/state-conference/vendors_listing.php" REL="nofollow">is <EM>not</EM> scheduled to be present at the 2009 convention</A>.<BR/><BR/>* They <EM>are</EM> featuring/permitting companies to display that obviously have <EM>no</EM> Christian metaphysic at <EM>any</EM> level. (Someone noted the presence of The Critical Thinking Company as an example. And, of course, there are many others.) --But none of them suggest they are offering "complete curricula" the way Sonlight does.<BR/><BR/>* Interesting, as I looked at the My Father's World website, they make clear that Bible is "integrated" in their curriculum. Not sure exactly what that means. But it is true that a couple of years ago, at the request of many of our Christian customers who are already heavily involved in Bible input for their kids through AWANA and Sunday School, Sonlight made <EM>its</EM> Bible program <EM>optional</EM> in K through 5 to still qualify for the benefits one receives for purchasing a Core Curriculum. (Of course, the Bible reading <EM>schedule</EM> is still included in the Core Instructors Guide. . . . But, perhaps the fact that Sonlight removed the requirement to purchase the additional/external books: maybe that swayed the CHEC committee as well.)<BR/><BR/><STRONG>ON THE OTHER HAND</STRONG> (something to be considered in years to come), <BR/><BR/>* It just struck me that TOG is <EM>also</EM> headed by a woman. So the gender issue may have something to do with what's going on.<BR/><BR/>* With all the things you and others have been saying about the patriarchalist movement: where does this leave Mary Pride and Gena Suarez, Skeet Savage and other strong and, obviously, conservative Christian women in the homeschool movement? Are they, too, being marginalized by the patriarchalists? [Forgive me, but as you have already discovered, this patriarchy issue was completely off my radar until <EM>very</EM> recently. So I have no knowledge of any such marginalization, if it has occurred.]<BR/><BR/>. . . For all these reasons, I really <EM>do</EM> find it hard to believe the fundamental issue has much, if anything, to do with patriarchy.John Holzmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849211055450293089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-27683742166609895442009-02-04T06:44:00.000-07:002009-02-04T06:44:00.000-07:00Hi John, Looks like Kevin may be "indirectly" answ...Hi John, Looks like Kevin may be "indirectly" answering you today on his radio show. You may want to have a look.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-56223384254972684342009-02-04T05:05:00.000-07:002009-02-04T05:05:00.000-07:00"No one from CHEC has ever mentioned anything abou..."No one from CHEC has ever mentioned anything about gender views as having anything to do with anything."<BR/><BR/>John, I can't imagine that they would come right out and ask you about it or even use it as a reason in talking with you. <BR/><BR/>But since gender issues are front and center in so much of the patriocentric movements' teachings, I can't help but wonder if you have crossed that line with them in some way. It could be very subtle, maybe even your wife's presence at a meeting. Believe me, I know how this system works and what it teaches.thatmomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05749567393301385829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-25070592174099165942009-02-04T05:02:00.000-07:002009-02-04T05:02:00.000-07:00I don't know about threatening local support group...I don't know about threatening local support groups but I do know there is pressure to have certain approved speakers.<BR/><BR/>Also, HSLDA hosts various "leaders" from around the country and I have seen them exclude real leadership while at the same time hosting those who have set themselves up as leaders. <BR/><BR/>I also know of people who have been blacklisted from speaking at conventions because they were no longer credible when they (gasp) sent their daughters to college or the mom took a job when her children were grown. I know this sounds hard to believe but it is true and those were absolutely the reasons given.<BR/><BR/>The us vs them mentality is being promoted by R.C Sproul Jr. Last summer he wrote a piece that defined their group as "movement homeschoolers" and listed some of the hallmarks of the appropriate lifestyle. He claimed that the rest of us who don't hold to those conviction homeschool because we want to produce acadecimally superior kids, that we do so out of choice rather than by convenience, that we do it because we moms want to feel good about ourselves. Immediately both James and Stacy McDoanld affirmed this position on their own blogs. <BR/><BR/>As many have observed, their tent of acceptability is getting smaller all the time...can we say pup tent?thatmomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05749567393301385829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-7322746054022144052009-02-04T01:00:00.000-07:002009-02-04T01:00:00.000-07:00Rainbow was at CHEC in 2008...I spent a ton of mon...Rainbow was at CHEC in 2008...I spent a ton of money at their booth LOL!!!razorbackmamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08929966862824457248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-5917936618592449332009-02-03T20:58:00.000-07:002009-02-03T20:58:00.000-07:00For the record, Rainbow was not at last year's CHE...For the record, Rainbow was not at last year's CHEC, either. I don't know what is planned for this year. (My Father's World and Tapestry were both there, though, and they also have many books of the type mentioned here. Tapestry, at least, doesn't have much discussion of those, though they do have ample discussion of other philosophical areas.)<BR/><BR/>I think, if someone wanted to be contentious, they could find things about SL that they didn't like--books in the geography core from a Buddhist perspective, eg; or some of the more secular books in older cores. I have even had a friend tell me they wouldn't use Sonlight because in a high school core, there are a couple of books written by a (gasp!) Catholic. <BR/><BR/>This is probably true of most curricula, though, unless it's directly written to be Christian in every way. Most have secular books included (often without much discussion), and most have reasons one could question, if one wanted to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-55323247378401170952009-02-03T11:17:00.000-07:002009-02-03T11:17:00.000-07:00The implication that CHEC thugs are threatening lo...The implication that CHEC thugs are threatening local support groups if they don't fall into lockstep with them is quite a charge. Wild speculation and rumor mongering diminish the credibility of the valid concerns that are being expressed about CHEC and have no place in this discussion IMHO.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-33183618297369243892009-02-03T10:36:00.000-07:002009-02-03T10:36:00.000-07:00No one from CHEC has ever mentioned anything about...<I>No one from CHEC has ever mentioned anything about gender views as having anything to do with anything.</I><BR/><BR/>Ah, but if they did they'd be showing their hand. :-S<BR/><BR/>I tend to agree with thatmom. You don't fit in their box of "acceptable," for some reason, and your curriculum is the scapegoat.<BR/><BR/>Tapestry of Grace uses Usborne books, and they are allowed there, and they have a whole curriculum as well.<BR/><BR/>When I get a free moment (HA HA HA - I have a midterm due in a college class I'm taking, my dh is out of town, and I'm homeschooling 5) I plan to write some letters to vendors that I would buy from at CHEC *if* I were to go. I also plan to write letters to some of the speakers I was looking forward to hearing.razorbackmamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08929966862824457248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-23568680030051144442009-02-03T05:51:00.000-07:002009-02-03T05:51:00.000-07:00"thatmom" wrote: John, my guess is that you are no..."thatmom" wrote: <BR/><BR/><EM>John, my guess is that you are not supporting some gender-related view that they hold near and dear, like women and college, and that is at the root of this mess. Or maybe it is related to your perspectives on family integrated church. I don't know you well enough to know where you crossed their line, but since there are other vendors who carry similar materials (I think of Rainbow Resources as one example) and they are given a pass, I think there is something else going on here.</EM><BR/><BR/>If I recall accurately, I more or less raised this question, noting that other vendors carry the same titles. Swanson's response (justifying Rainbow Resources as compared to Sonlight): "But you claim to offer a complete curriculum. They merely sell books." --Something like that.<BR/><BR/>No one from CHEC has <EM>ever</EM> mentioned anything about gender views as having anything to do with anything.John Holzmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849211055450293089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-45861901692431163872009-02-03T05:42:00.000-07:002009-02-03T05:42:00.000-07:00I think razorbackmama is correct. This goes way b...I think razorbackmama is correct. This goes way beyond CHEC, though I believe that CHEC is one of the biggest movers and shakers of this movement and Kevin Swanson has become the mouthpiece of the group. I believe they are using homeschooling and their conferences as vehicles to promote their lifestyles and to convey the message that there is only one true way to raise and educate children. If you are outside of their paradigm, you aren't really a genuine Christian homeschooler. And that paradigm includes militant fecundity, patriocentricity, skewed views of womanhood, the eisegesis of Scripture to support their personal preferences, such women working outside the home or going to college, and the family integrated church movement. <BR/><BR/>There is also an abusive nature to this movement. I know there s pressure put on support groups and convention organizers to fall into lockstep with CHEC and their compatriots. And now it appears that various vendors have their very businesses put at risk if they don't meet a patriocentric standard. <BR/><BR/>John, my guess is that you are not supporting some gender-related view that they hold near and dear, like women and college, and that is at the root of this mess. Or maybe it is related to your perspectives on family integrated church. I don't know you well enough to know where you crossed their line, but since there are other vendors who carry similar materials (I think of Rainbow Resources as one example) and they are given a pass, I think there is something else going on here.thatmomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05749567393301385829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-85663817935029699082009-02-02T18:59:00.000-07:002009-02-02T18:59:00.000-07:00This is PRECISELY my concern with CHEC. I blogged ...This is PRECISELY my concern with CHEC. I blogged about it last year around convention time. I was frustrated at just how many workshops were <B>not</B> related to homeschooling - about 40%! Entrepreneurial topics, "biblical" womanhood and manhood (note the quotes), parenting, etc. The focus on the organization seems not to be the promoting of home education, but the promotion of patriarchy and other Vision Forum-ish ideas. Then they slap the word "Christian" or "biblical" on those ideas and instantly those of us who do not subscribe to those ideas are deemed unchristian or in rebellion.<BR/><BR/>LOL don't take this the wrong way, but my concern with CHEC isn't that they banned Sonlight. ;-) I think it goes way deeper than that, and honestly way deeper than just CHEC itself! I think that your experience with them is just a symptom of a much greater problem. :-(razorbackmamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08929966862824457248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-73902191912407030592009-02-02T15:15:00.000-07:002009-02-02T15:15:00.000-07:00I recently found your blog and find the ongoing di...I recently found your blog and find the ongoing discussion very interesting!<BR/><BR/>I don't like it when people in leadership of a group like CHEC (not a church) see it as their duty to 'protect' their fellow adult believers from situations in which they might have the freedom to make a choice the leaders do not approve. Most of the tragedies and abuses that have come about in the home schooling community have been related to control issues. I think that families who choose Sonlight are not as likely to be motivated by fear in their home schooling choices, and are thus willing to allow their children to see both sides of many issues.<BR/><BR/>I home schooled my kids over 14 years, beginning in 1982, and several of my kids are now home schooling their children. All are independent thinkers who desire to please God.<BR/><BR/> I don't see it as a dying movement, but you would have a closer vantage point.ShackelMomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11533566166709273000noreply@blogger.com