Comments on: College for the Home Schooled

By: bryan

bryan — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

What's really sad is that the NY Times thinks this is a new phenomenon. Two words: Bob Jones. BJU has even stricter policies - although the courtship policy is something I haven't heard of. At the BJU library, men and women sit in different areas. Women are required to wear dresses or skirts, and they have chapel five days a week.

And I suspect if the Times actually did any reporting, they'd find a number of similar campuses across the country.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Oh, goody. Indoctrination masquerading as higher education.

As opposed to what we have today? (smirk?)

By: McGehee

McGehee — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

No, James, this is what the NYT wants its readers to think homeschooling is leading to.

By: TM Lutas

TM Lutas — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

This seems to answer every unimportant question about such an institute of higher learning. What's the important question? I thought you'd never ask. Does the place turn out serious scholars who can earn a living and advance the arts and sciences? Are people who get a degree at least as prepared as other young adults to face the world?

Where's your respect for diversity?

B-)

By: Meezer

Meezer — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

I agree with McGehee. The educational establishment is under threat and this is one of the responses: homeschooling threatens us all. They're not under threat enough to actually make some changes, but they are afraid they will be, so they are trying to cut out the legs from homeschooling, charters, etc.

I am in the teacher certification program at Big-10 U and I can tell you a few things about indoctrination and refusal to allow, let alone entertain, "conflicting ideas."

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Homeschooling appears to be one of the hated enemies for NEA (along with school testing). It appears to be the next logical step in the homeschooling network. Is it the college I would want to attend? No but what great institution of learning was pefectly formed? Give it a few years and see how it develops, it is possible that a consevative school that is non-military oriented (unlike VMI) could be a success.

I am still angry about Al Franklins little deception regarding BJU.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Oh, I know there are other schools like this out there. But they're largely on the fringes. If 7 percent of the federal interns are coming from this place--with only 240 students!--then something is definitely wrong. This is clearly an environment that breeds fanaticism.

By: bryan

bryan — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

James, context, context, context.

It's not 7 percent of *federal* interns. It's 7 percent of white house interns *this semester.* No indication of where the other 93 percent come from, and whether that number is a steady 7 percent, or a fluke of having a number of well-qualified candidates (not to mention some well-connected adviser somewhere).

I think the NYT has done its job well. You're spooked.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

I find the trend worrisome. If this were a group of Muslims who'd come up in the similar manner, everyone would think it was a problem.

By: jen

jen — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

I'm glad someone brought up Bob Jones - it's the first thing I thought of when I was reading the post. This is clearly an environment that breeds fanaticism. No, it's an alternative environment for college kids and their parents who don't like what's happening in the secular system. Look, I'm an evangelical Christian who worries about the ability of those kids to adjust to real life when they leave the cocoon of their fundamentalist upbringing, but it's their decision to attend Patrick Henry. How is that tiny little college a "trend" or likely to breed fanatacism? There are a ton of conservative Christian colleges all over the United States and most of us who attend them are normal, productive citizens.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Oh come now James.

The "ruling class" is decidedly ivy league. Go down a list of any on the big names in politics (or the media) and tell me where they went to school. Harvard, Yale, etc etc. It is not that these schools offer an educational environment that is not available elsewhere. It is an incestuous relationship.

I bet 90% of the names that shape the news come from 5 schools. Where is the horror there?

One could argue they have their own culture and this offers much needed diversity.

Paul

BTW as a note of explanation there was not supposed to be a question mark after my smirk above, that makes it look odd. Just a typo.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

This particular one is aimed at people who have never had exposure to American society. They cloisture these poor kids from birth through age 22 and indoctrinate them. Most of the religious colleges out there still let kids live a more-or-less normal life plus they've likey gone to a real school at some point in time. Graduates of this school reach adulthood never operating outside parental supervision. It's essentially brainwashing.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

YEP--- Them kids study the bible and don't have premarital sex, it's fanaticism I tell you, fanaticism.

The 1950's what a radical era.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Ivy League schools aren't an indoctrination system. Students are encouraged to actually challenge ideas presented to them. Sure, the professors are more liberal than the society as a whole--but not all of them are. And the profs are of a variety of religious and political backgrounds.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Who, in the 1950s, spent their entire life to age 18 never leaving the house, "educated" entirely by mommy, and then went off to a college where they couldn't hold hands with their girlfriends unless they were walking?