Category: From the Catbird Seat

Society’s Values

by Debra Conley

Some kids think it’s OK to trash someone else in a chat room or on a “blog.” They think it’s OK to assume fake identities, to hack into databases or other computers, to cut and paste materials into their papers, to forward sexist or racist jokes, and to download music. Well, none of that is OK. Those are examples of slander, vandalism, plagiarism, theft, and racism, and they are just as real on the Internet as on the street or in school, and in some cases, in court.”

I wish I had said that, but this article from SKY Magazine (November 2003) caught my attention and my applause. It was not directed as much toward the idea of right is always right and wrong is always wrong, but about breaching security through Internet chat. The real issue is the larger picture. What is your child learning from activities like these that are pervasive in our society? Is he participating in these activities at another’s home? You might be surprised at how unsupervised your child is while on the Internet at school. Some schools have blocks on their computers; others rely on student integrity. Have you spelled out these offenses to your child? Or are you just assuming he knows this is wrong? Have you asked him if he has engaged in any of these kinds of misuses? The admonition of II Timothy 2:15 is that study must be of truth. When one knows what is truly wrong, he can abstain from it. Our job as parents is to give our children direction in the absolutes of right and wrong, not the shades of truth or the relativism of the world which teaches that some activities are acceptable when the end justifies the means.

No where is this Machiavellian philosophy more prevalent than in modern literature. Reader, beware of the modern philosophies of the current generation of writers. I am including especially those who write for children. They have an agenda to push (refer to Telling the Truth by Lynne Cheney) and have no one placing the admonition of II Timothy upon them. That’s your job.

Distorting American History

by Debra Conley

One of the most disturbing trends of the last fifty years has been the distortion of historical record surrounding the founding fathers. Their deep devotion to an Almighty God has been stripped away, replaced by avarice, political greed, and power struggles. Modern writers mistake enthusiasm or passion for dominance; they mistake confidence (in one’s purpose) for arrogance, and intellect for aristocratic snobbery. A classic example is the 1966 work by Holmes Alexander entitled, Washington and Lee – A Study in the Will to Win. The author makes no attempt to square Washington’s enthusiasm to win the Revolution with his belief that he was fighting for a just and worthy cause, that a free country was worth fighting for. In this book, it’s all about personal accolades and power glory. “The ruling passion of Washington’s character was for accomplishment. All of his passions were for the purpose of making money–lots of money–and he prosecuted this single purpose with all his energy,” declares Alexander in Chapter One. The book becomes an increasingly insulting tirade belittling any man with unwavering purpose. So where is the truth about this man, our first President?

As I’ve often said, turn to the first-hand accounts, to those who lived with the man. These sources include many personal letters written between Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. The letters between Adams and Washington are on display at Mount Vernon, at Valley Forge, in the Congress Hall of Philadelphia, and are still available through printed sources. What does John Adams, a personal friend and first-hand observer of the man, have to say about Washington? Adams called him “modest and virtuous, the amiable, generous and brave, of whom we stand united with God.” Adams repeatedly proclaims Washington a man of God, modest, and humble. One has only to read the actual accounts of witnesses to get these first-hand reports: “We have seen him kneeling both day and night before an open Bible, which seems to be his daily practice” (Reverend at Christ Church of Valley Forge; read from letters obtained through the Smithsonian); “That must be our last vision of him, kneeling in his library in prayer, his Bible open before him, and his hands clasped in prayer.” (Philadelphia Historical Society/account from nephew).

Disney and History

by Debra Conley

The Disney Corporation recently took it upon themselves to rewrite several historical records, most notably the history of American Indians (The Deerslayer) and their part in the lives of early settlers (Pocahontas). Since much of the content of these movies digressed from what we have learned in school, how can one determine which story is accurate? James Fenimore Cooper(1789-1851) is one of the best on-the-scene writers for this history. He knew the people from whom his characters are modeled, and at the least, was living during some of the same time periods, so he had many first-hand accounts from which to draw. Cooper is the author of The Deerslayer, an historical romance novel about a hunter/trapper in the Delaware Indian territory. This was Cooper’s home, and the situations he described were personal. So which version would you choose to be the more accurate-Disney’s or Cooper’s? The pervading message of the Disney versions is that all American Indians were peace-loving, environmentally friendly people who just wanted to be left alone. Their version paints the settlers as hostile “takeover agents” hacking and antagonizing their way into the Americas. Before you buy into that version, read the original work. Cooper paints a very different story. His works clearly point out that Indians and settlers were both good and bad. In his original writings, he often refers to “hostile Indians raiding the frontiers” and uses other descriptions like “savages” and openly describes the unprovoked Iroquois slaying of many settlers and even of other tribes (The Deerslayer, chapter one/original, unabridged). He gives credit to the Delaware Indians for their more diplomatic approach and their befriending of the Settlers. They were one of the tribes curiously interested in the ways of the settlers. Cooper also shows the hostilities of the settlers (mostly from fear) toward the Indians, particularly from the British and French troops to the north. How insulting it is to have a modern re-writer (Disney) of a first-hand account decide that the original history is not valid because it deviates from their perception of how it ought to be.

Critical Thinking Skills

by Debra Conley

Science teaches that first-hand observation is the only factual basis for conclusions. Why is this solid principle not true in the teaching of literature? If your children are to be astute readers, guide them now in the critical thinking skills of looking at the basis for any writing, especially literature that portrays true events. Is it written by an author who has first-hand knowledge of his subject? If the author is removed a generation or two, how much research and recall from first-hand observations does he use? Is there a clear balance of the subject, or does the author just have an axe to grind? Perhaps the author is just frustrated or angry with himself, as I suggested about F. Scott Fitzgerald in last month’s column.

Carl Sandburg wrote one of the most extensive biographies of Abraham Lincoln ever written, but Sandburg was born 13 years after Lincoln’s death. Nonetheless, the work is considered highly accurate because Sandburg returned to the communities and people who had known Lincoln during his lifetime and delved into the many letters and journals written by Lincoln himself. The conclusions drawn by Sandburg about Lincoln’s character are so named as personal observations in Sandburg’s own words. Many modern authors make sweeping personal observations in their writing that are skewed by their own philosophies and never bother to point out which is fact and which is their personal opinion. The naïve young reader may never know the difference unless he is taught to look for these flaws. There are personal agendas hidden even in works of fiction. Judge the “rules” of the fiction by your absolute Biblical standards. Even Shakespeare creates punishment for wrong; good always triumphs over evil. While the Bard himself was apparently no model citizen, the primary ‘textbook’ of his day was the Bible. That’s why there is so much reference to it in his work and the majority of his themes are taken from Scripture. In the next several Catbird Seat columns, I’ll review famous authors and their personal perspectives in relation to their subject.

Speed Reading

by Debra Conley

The average 9^th grader reads 200 words per minute with a 45% comprehension level (National Scholastic Board Testing). This is about 100 words per minute slower and a 30% lower comprehension level than when this testing began in the 1950’s. Much of the drop is due to lack of educational emphasis in general. Some is the pathetic job schools are doing in the teaching of reading.

If your student of Junior High or older age is a reluctant reader, try some speed reading techniques. The student who successfully completes the average speed reading course will read at a rate of 3000 words per minute. Many times, the uninterested reader finds the various “games” used in speed reading techniques to be of interest and in the process, picks up a better reading habit. The reader who is having difficulty because of hindrances like fixation or regression should not be ruled out as a candidate for speed reading, nor should the student who may have learning problems. Studies show that speed reading has a beneficial effect on some learning problems.  Fixation, a common reading problem, is stopping too long on certain words. Some students do this because of poor vocabulary; teachers admonish students to slow down and sound out words. This is necessary in the elementary level, and isn’t a bad idea as long as it doesn’t become the habit. Regression, the practice of going back over sentences already read, is usually harder to break. But if a student becomes interested in the acceleration of the games which increase reading speed, he quickly breaks the regression habit. Two of my favorite resources for easy skills in speed reading are Rapid Reading with a Purpose by Ben Johnson, and Mastering Speed Reading by Norman Maberly. Both of these are older books but the basic techniques of speed reading are the same now as then: Pacing, grouping of words and paragraphs, questioning as you go (for comprehension), and setting a reading span are the primary objectives. Look for these in the chapter title of any book you may be considering.

Textbook “Facts”

by Debra Conley

As a textbook editor and proofreader, I am sometimes asked to verify statements presented as facts. This involves considerable research, and the national company asking for this proof requires that a statement presented as fact be verified by five other reliable sources (materials generally in use for years and “proofed” by previous researchers) and that those five sources all agree that the statement is a fact. While this sounds quite difficult, it all depends on the subject of the statement.  As Christians, we daily confront disbelief in a Creator. Nowhere is this dismissal of an Almighty Being more evident than in textbooks. Recently, I perused several outside science reading materials for a national school chain. In Science Encyclopedia, written for elementary schools by DK Publishing, Inc., I found this “explanation” of views of the Earth’s origin in the chapter titled, “How Life Began”: “Throughout history, people have wondered how life on Earth began. Some people (italics mine) believe it was created by God. Scientists (italics mine) think that the first simple life forms were the result of chemical reactions…” The remainder of the chapter not only makes no mention of any other support for its view, but presents no other theories (and there are several). The inference that people who believe God created the Earth cannot be scientists is a non-intellectual bias. And guess what? I was able to “verify” that statement as “fact” with the first five sources I went to! So I decided to verify my position that God created life. I had to turn to books by Henry Morris, John C. Whitcomb, or the Institute for Creation Research. These verified my position, but they are not on the list of reliable sources for verification from the textbook company.I present this information to you in hopes that it will spur you to investigate fully the textbooks your children use. For some interesting looks at textbook errors, go to web sites of the Texas Public Policy Foundation or to Mesa/Meoc Textbook Review Project.