Separation between Religion and Schools

[Freddie53]

Josh,

In your documentation don't put anything except factual information. Don't editorialize as you go. For instance, Simply say, "Today, Mr. Holt told the class and then be as precise as your memory will allow as to what he said. Don't add things like today the stupid Mr Holt said.

And if you can't remember for sure. Leave it out. You want a document that is beyond any meausre of reproach.

I believe your parents can request that every class session be tape recorded. If so, transcribe from that and keep the original tapes.

Note: I am a practicing Christian. But this teacher is clearly violating the US Consitution. And in most states, he is not following the curriculum guide for the class. In Josh's state there may not be a curriculum guide. But using a hymanl even in a private Christian school would be inappropriate in a class on the Survey of Music. Clearly this teacher's curriculum is not covering the intent of this subject.

Mr. Holt is teaching hymnology. I studied hymnology. I enjoyed the class. But Josh didn't register for a hymnology class. Hymnology is normally taught to people who are studying to be professional Ministers of Music in churches.

The objectives of hymnology would not receive the state curriculum approval from any state department of education,

I suspect that if all this was submitted to the state department of education, the high school could get into trouble for not following the guidlelines of a sate approved high school class. Local high schools can't give credits for just any subject. Subjects have to be on the approved state list to receive credit for graduation.

 

[Freddie53]

Josh,

You are in a very awkward situation to say the least. You are being taught by a teacher who clearly is wrong in what he is doing.

There are some things you need to do.

1. Documentation is a must. See previous post.
2. Respect Mr. Holt's position. You don't have to respect Mr. Holt himself. Always be courteous. Always be respectful in your responses. There is a way to be respectful and still be very pointed in stating your position.
3. Watch your voice tone and body language. Certain voice tones and body language get some teachers going if you understand what I mean.
4. Always keep in mind that this conflict is much larger than you and Mr. Holt. Mr. Holt may win for now in his classroom and het you may win in the end by stopping this obviously illegal practice that is going on. See previous posts.

And know that a retired music teacher with 28 years who taught all grade levels and is a practicing Christian understands and is in your corner.

Being a Christian is a personal decision. I don't like for anyone to try to force people to believe what they believe and that includes Christianity.

I doubt Mr. Holt's understanding of Christianity is anywhere close to my understanding of Christianity. I doubt we would agree on much. Keep that in mind that all Christians don't have the same belifs. Don't judge al Christinas by this one man.

If I can help you, pm me.

Good luck.

Freddie

 

[davidjh7]

While he may object to it, as far as I know, there is no law about openly recording his statements in the class. You can tell him simply that you want to make sure you get all the information he is presenting clear, so there is no question in the future. If he balks, ask him why he objects to having his teachings recorded for clarity and understanding, unless he feels he is presenting something that might be used against him later, and if that is the case, why is he stating those things, if he is worried they might be wrong or improper? Do not try and concel the recorder in any way, but don't announce it, either. The wiretapping laws, as I understand them, are not applicable here, as you are a member of the conversation, and it is person to person conversation. You are not a law enforcement officer, but simpy a student, wanting to have a celar record of his teaching. If he objects, bring his objections to your principle, and ask for clarification of why you can not record his teaching. THis is what I would do, anyway. If nothing else, it will force him to either present the position that he doesn;t want to be recorded, because he is afraid of saying something that is actionable, or else watching carefully what he says, because there is a less refutable evidence to what he is teaching. Request that any private talks include a third party--another teacher, principle, etc., so that there is no misunderstanding about what was and was not said. Don't let him put you in a position where he says something, without witnesses. As also said, document EVERYTHING. Your words without other backing evidence may be dismissed as hearsay, or moot because he says the opposite. But backing evdence goes a long way towards supporting your case. Good luck, and fight the good fight! You may not win, but if you don;t try and stand up for your beliefs, then youwill regret it later in life. Remember, assholes will usually fuck themselves over far worse than you ever could, if you just give them enough time and rope to do so. :biggrin1:

 

[DC_DEEP]

Mephi, I can't wade through all the responses at this specific time, but I'm going to guess that it was the music, not the lyrics, that were of importance in a Music Theory class.

Most hymns are very simple, and the principles of harmony can be very easily identified and analyzed.

You must understand that I am a non-religious musician. Ignore the words, absorb the music. A "I - IV - V - I - IV - I" progression is the same, regardless of any text. A plagal cadence is a plagal cadence, whether it has "Jesus" or "Buddha" or "Aurora" underneath it.

 

[JustAsking]

DC,
big_dirigible summed up the first issue and a good summary of most opinions in post #95. Then the bigger issue surfaced which I added in post #96. I think it is the teacher's religious proseletyzing that most people are reacting to now. This might save you from reading over 90 posts.

Everyone,
I referenced a site in that Nuff Said link a few posts back. It shows that this is not an isolated problem.

Josh,
There is a lot of excellent advice in these recent postings. I just wanted to say that Freddie53's recent advice to you best represents what I would be saying right now if I had his experience, level-headedness, and ability to express it so effectively.

 

[Freddie53]

I am a retired certified music teacher for grades k-12. I know the dos and don'ts in teaching music.

First I want to thank David for elaborating on the dos and don'ts of recording in class. As I understand it, you must tell the person you are recording, or have the tape recorder where they can see you are recording. In a way, I hope Mr. Holt objects. If he does object and prevents the taping, Josh should at least get that part of the conversation on tape before the tape recorder is turned off. And Josh should refuse to give Mr. Holt the tape. Should Mr. Holt try to physically take the tape, then he loses his job for sure. And the evidence that he won't allow taping should seal his fate.

In elementary music, I tied the music to what the children were studying in social studies. So if they were studying Japan I found Japanese music. If it was a religious text i told them it was a religious text sung by people who believe in this religion. I always told the students they were welcome to sing it if they wished, but they didn't have to. I usually played each song twice on differnt days so those who were absent had a chance to hear it.

I did the same with songs fromt the Civil War. I played Dixie, but told the students they didnt' have to sing it, I was just letting them know what the batttle song was for the Confederate Army. I chose not to sing it myself. And I only told them what page it was on and I didn't require them to find that page of that song. We also learned Battle Hymn which was the fight song for the Union Army. We learned "We Shall Overcome" during black history month. And I played some black Gospel msuic as well along with jazz and blues.

On the Spirituals I told them that the spirituals were from the Bible and showed them how the slaves used them to send messages. For instance in the spiritual "Nobody Knows the Trouble I've Seen." The slaves told the masters that that was what they were singing. What they were really singing was 'Nobody knows the Trouble I See" This was the cue song that the master or boss man was coming around the corner and everybody needs to be really working hard.

The spiritulals talked about the promised land and I compared that to the slaves thinking of the promised land was freedom from being slaves. God was a secondary figure in the lesson. The Hebrews were slaves as well and the black slaves idenitfied with them and hoped for the same delivery. And God wasn't mentioned much at all by me.

I give this example of how I taught music appreciation. I treated all cultures and religions the same. The songs I kept repeating were the songs the classes asked me to repeat.

At their request I did sing "Silent Night" several times. I only chose four Christian Christmas carols to introduce them to. I told the older kids the legend of Santa Claus. And it helped many of hem understand what a legend really is.

As for teaching music theory. There are curriculum books to teach that. They are far superior to using any hymnal or song book. They teach the singing by notes in a sequential order using either the "do ra mi" or many people including me use numbers for the scales 1 -7 instead of "do ra me fa so la ti". The students should be singing those sylables, not words to learn the various chords, cadances and such.

There is no problem with Mr. Holt using the Baptist Hymnal to indroduce Christian hymns if he also introduces Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu and all others covered by the social studies curriculum of the high school. And no one should be made to sing songs from the religion. Listening to them as an educational tool is all that is needed. No one should be barred from singing them either I don't think. But it that is necessary to prevent the appearance that one religion is being favored over another, than just listen to all religious texts.

It is OK in choir to sing the great oratorios such as Handel's Messiah as it is considered to be the best choral work done in Englsih. Students should know that this is the reason for singing it, not that they are singing a religious song. And this is done in choir which is an optional course which students can check out what is going to be sung before they sign up for the course. If a person had a religious reason for not singing on that or other"great" oratorios that are Christian based, they should be excused from singing on those particular songs. And the choir director needs to make sure that religous base texts do not dominate the repertore. They need to be most definitely in the minority of oratorios and octavos sung.

Most of my career was in elementary school where the music was not performance based, but based on learning music of the cultures being studied. And of course we sang the popular songs of our era as well. The cultures included historic eras ini Americas past. Big Band, Rock and Roll, Stephen Foster, etc.

The oldest patriotic song we sing today is Yankee Doodle. It was the song of the American Revolution. I taught the other patriotic songs and when they were written and by whom and what circumstances caused them to write the song. The students learned that "My Country Tis of Thee is based on a tune that is the tune of several of Europe's nations.

I am posting all of this because somewhere someone needed to write down what is supposed to be taught and how in Music Appreciation Class. It isn't just a matter of don't teach religion. It is a also amatter of teaching the stated curriculum

Mr. Holt is faililng miserably at teaching the stated curriculum for Music Appreciation in High School. So he is guilty of more than just trying to convert students to Christiantiy. He is failing to teach the subject curriculum that he was hired to teach. That is grounds for dismisal in my book. We must have a principal asleep at the wheel.

 

[NCbear]

Outside of forbidding the government from doing so, which is mandated by the Constitution, where have you seen the public discussion of religious issues suppressed?

In overwhelmingly secular environments, and by smugly superior "liberals" like I was in an earlier life.

People talked about the depth of their faith and it was like a dog had shat on the floor. Everyone else looked at each other, rolled their eyes, and pretended not to have heard it. As though the expression of faith was naive, or unconsidered, or obviously so wrong it didn't need someone to say aloud how wrong it was.

It wasn't de jure, it was de facto -- which can be even stronger as a method of social control than de jure.

NCbear

 

[JustAsking]

In overwhelmingly secular environments, and by smugly superior "liberals" like I was in an earlier life.

People talked about the depth of their faith and it was like a dog had shat on the floor. Everyone else looked at each other, rolled their eyes, and pretended not to have heard it. As though the expression of faith was naive, or unconsidered, or obviously so wrong it didn't need someone to say aloud how wrong it was.

It wasn't de jure, it was de facto -- which can be even stronger as a method of social control than de jure.

NCbear

Yes, I forgot about this. I don't think what you are describing is a trend, though. I think it is regional. To Wit, the latest poll by Baylor U pegs religiousity at over 90% of the American population. I used to live in New England though, so I know what you mean. I still haven't decided what is worse, though. You trade what you described for The Handmaiden's Tale out here in Ohio. Maybe there is a sweet spot somewhere around Syracuse.