Posted by Siamang on: 08.06.2007 /
Here’s an article by Seema Mehta (no relation to Hemant, I think) from the LA Times.
There is broad agreement across the social, political and religious spectrum, and most important the Supreme Court, that the Bible can be taught in public schools and that knowledge of the Bible is vital to students’ understanding of literature and art, including “Moby-Dick,” Michelangelo and “The Matrix.”
Actually, I’m more disturbed that they’re covering “The Matrix” in public schools!
But anyway, there’s a good survey of the two main competing Bible curriculum. It seems its very hard to teach “The Bible as Literature” in the public schools without slipping into “The Bible as Holy Text”.
If it is taught as literature, I’m certainly all for it. Our local public schools have gutted study in the arts and humanities, teaching to the standardized tests and promoting the three ‘R’s to the exclusion of far too much else.
A 2005 report by the Bible Literacy Project, which created a well-regarded Bible study course, found that although virtually all the teachers it surveyed said biblical knowledge was important to students’ education, most thought few students had a command of the subject.
Yes, I agree as well. In my day this was exactly the type of course one took at a university. A university is much better prepared to deal with politically thorny issues like this, far from the jockying of parents and the political pressure on School Boards. The students are older too, and hopefully better prepared for a deeper analysis of the Bible.
I think there are two crowds here… the folks who want it for proselytizing purposes, and those who want it for academic purposes.
What I have yet to hear from the academic crowd is this: Why does this need to be taught in high school and not college?
-Siamang
Comment by: Stephan
1The only justification I could see for covering this earlier than college is that, as noted, understanding so much other art and literature (not to mention history) is dependent on understanding Biblical references. I think it would be better if that foundation was laid early rather than wait until college to put that framework in place.
That said, I’m not going to go to my local school board and fight for it, but I think the argument could be made.
Comment by: Doreen A Mannion
2I agree Stephan. Take the Moby Dick example. We read that in high school, so not understanding the Biblical references until college would be too late.
Comment by: Siamang
3But I’m wondering…
Is there really a popular clamoring in society that says that “our children really need to understand the symbolism of Moby Dick before they turn 18″?
Or is it just an excuse?
It seems to me that if you had two petition-gatherers at a random place in America. One with a sign saying “Teach the Bible in School” the other with “Teach Moby Dick so the Kids can Understand the Symbolism”… I think I can guess which one gets the most signatures.
I certainly can understand the cultural benefit to knowing the Bible. But then again, I can see the cultural benefit to learning Latin.
Why is it more important to teach the Bible in primary school than Latin, let’s say?
Comment by: Eliza
4Seems to me that the main argument in favor of teaching it early would be that the Bible is such a pervasive influence in our society.
But then, so is marketing (which I think should be taught early on to kids, too, so they can recognize when they’re the targets).
My guess is that most of the effort to introduce it early comes from the former group. Major problem: who decides what’s taught, and how? At least at a university (the public ones, anyway) the students can decide whether or not to take a Bible-related course, and whether or not to stay in the course once the “agenda” (syllabus) is presented. Also, older students are more likely feel able to question what’s being presented, if applicable. BICBW.
Comment by: Eliza
5This is a very good question, Siamang. Is it more important to teach the Bible? I think there’s alot to be gained from a course in Latin (or, a course focusing specifically on Latin, Greek, & Anglo-Saxon word roots). It’s like studying the history of our own language (and others). Could be very useful in helping people with spelling, word meaning & etymology, and word choice, for the rest of their lives, and a good basis for learning another language.
Oh, yeah, and the kids would love it (not!!).
Comment by: Siamang
6Plus a basis in Latin is vital to students understanding of literature and art, including Moby-Dick, Michaelangelo and “The Matrix.”
Comment by: Doreen A Mannion
7that’s it - the bible in latin!
:)
Comment by: Kathleen
8Don’t be so sure! If my HS had offered a class on either, I’d have jumped all over it. I may have been the only one, but I’d have been there! (Fast forward 5 years: I’m majoring in Medieval History and Italian (read: pseudo-Latin) with what would have been a Linguistics minor if I’d had enough time).
I don’t think one is more important than the other - I think it depends on what you want to do with them. I would have gotten great use out of either, because of my interests. A finance major probably would have slept through both classes and not picked up on much of anything. I don’t see that you can make much of a case against the Bible as Literature in public schools, as long as it is, in fact, taught as Literature. To ask “why not college?” is to ask “why not prevent kids from familiarizing themselves with one of the most important texts in the Western tradition until as late as possible?” Because, as far as literature, history, and art go, you’re only doing them a disservice. (And the same is to be said for a Latin or etymology class!) - just because you can do it later is no reason not to do it now. The Procrastinator’s Theory of Education isn’t going to get any student very far!
Comment by: Siamang
9Except if the class would be horribly flawed in High School because of parent interference, prosletyzing, etc.
Comment by: Keith
10Important point, Eliza. Even at seminaries or Bible colleges, conflicts will emerge over the perspective from which a professor approaches the Scripture. And that’s with only believers involved. Teaching the Scriptures is not easy, but a class that encourages interaction with the Bible could be beneficial. Wouldn’t want to be that teacher, though, and deal with parents of all sides.
Comment by: Julie
11College is more appropriate for the Bible, mostly because it’s a pretty violent and dirty book!