Church home schooling program?

[zil2]

Has anyone heard of the Church developing a home schooling program? (Have a friend who's interested.) 

Thanks! 

[Carborendum]

IRCC, there was someone who came onto the forum several years ago stating they'd heard about it.  No one knew about it.

If this is the same rumor coming around once again, I'd say it's just a rumor.

But there's always a possibility.

[Traveler]

3 hours ago, zil2 said:

Has anyone heard of the Church developing a home schooling program? (Have a friend who's interested.) 

Thanks! 

It has long been a principle of the Church that the home is the center of educating children.  That other resources can be utilized at the discretion of the parents.  From “The Family Proclamation”: 

Quote

Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

 

 

The Traveler

[mikbone]

Home centered, Church supported

[Backroads]

I'm quite sure it's just a rumor. I believe the Church has yet to release its official church-sponsored homeschool curriculum. Honestly, I think it might be tricky to do, as different states have different education and homeschool standards. 

That said, there are a few curriculums that are certainly LDS-friendly. 

[zil2]

25 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I'm quite sure it's just a rumor. I believe the Church has yet to release its official church-sponsored homeschool curriculum. Honestly, I think it might be tricky to do, as different states have different education and homeschool standards. 

This was my thought, but I said I'd ask.

26 minutes ago, Backroads said:

That said, there are a few curriculums that are certainly LDS-friendly. 

If you, or anyone, have links, I'm sure my friend would appreciate them.  (Not asking you to go hunting, but if you happen to know a few, that would be great.)  Thanks!

[Backroads]

31 minutes ago, zil2 said:

This was my thought, but I said I'd ask.

If you, or anyone, have links, I'm sure my friend would appreciate them.  (Not asking you to go hunting, but if you happen to know a few, that would be great.)  Thanks!

The one that immediately comes to mind is The Good and the Beautiful. 

[zil2]

26 minutes ago, Backroads said:

The one that immediately comes to mind is The Good and the Beautiful. 

Thank you!  I'll forward it to her and let her know to search for similar.

[JohnsonJones]

I don't think there are any official LDS home schooling programs (for education, there is always "Come Follow Me" for families, but that's more gospel education, not secular).

I did find a few links that listed LDS inspired or those programs written by LDS individuals.

 

LDS Homeschool Curriculum

homeschoolhere homeschool curriculums

 

These list several which are LDS inspired or LDS creators.

Some that popped out at me

American Heritage School - offers LDS focused online classes, appears to be more of a local school though.

The Good and the Beautiful - Already mentioned above, was originally created by someone from the Church.

LIahona Prep Academy - I'm not sure how full of a home education program this is.  It appears it could also be a local type school.  It is from Utah.  It strives to produce a gospel focused secular education.

Ensign Peak Academy - I do not know how connected it is to the actual Ensign Peak, but it's reference is unmistakably towards the Church owned Ensign Peak.

The next article lists some others... 

Family School - They note that this is the most popular for members of the Church and Homeschooling.  They point out that it is LDS focused. 

 

LIfe School K-12 - Is stated to also be a program focused on LDS families. 

[Backroads]

18 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

LIahona Prep Academy - I'm not sure how full of a home education program this is.  It appears it could also be a local type school.  It is from Utah.  It strives to produce a gospel focused secular education.

Ensign Peak Academy - I do not know how connected it is to the actual Ensign Peak, but it's reference is unmistakably towards the Church owned Ensign Peak.

These are both private schools, though ones that provide distance education. Good options if a family is willing to move away from a more pure homeschool idea. 

[zil2]

Thank you, @JohnsonJones and @Backroads!

[Carborendum]

58 minutes ago, Backroads said:

These are both private schools, though ones that provide distance education. Good options if a family is willing to move away from a more pure homeschool idea. 

Thank you for providing that.  I'm sure these people have very good intentions.  I wish them the best of luck.  And I hope that their good intentions bear fruit.  But I see a danger here as well. 

There is a reason why the Church has discouraged private "study groups" for the Saints.  If it is not led by the Priesthood in an official capacity, there is a danger of a hierarchy forming within the group and becoming a splinter group.  Imagine if they form a lot of their policies to follow Church policies and values (as best as they can interpret).  Then they find out that the Church actually says something contrary to those policies/values?  How easy is it for the faculty (and student families) to mistake their well-intentioned policies as doctrine?

If they're wise, they will change their policies accordingly.  But as a non-Church-affiliated entity, they may find that more difficult due to legal issues.  If they are foolish, they will begin to murmur against the Church for making some "changes" with which the faculty disagree.  And that may lead down a different road.

The school my children go to has an interesting way of dealing with that.  They allow non-LDS families to attend.  You might think that's worse, but actually it is better.

The faculty and student population is about 90% LDS.  But it is that 10% that keeps us in check.  We want to promote the LDS values without turning it into an LDS-doctrine-based school.  And for the sake of the non-LDS students, we cannot follow exact Church doctrine.  We have to merely have those values "in spirit" within the school rules.

It is also because of that "slight non-LDS influence" that we are able to maintain a balance.  We simply cannot have it be a completely LDS doctrine based school.  But it is kept as a school that LDS will always feel comfortable.

My 2 cents.

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

There is a reason why the Church has discouraged private "study groups" for the Saints.  If it is not led by the Priesthood in an official capacity, there is a danger of a hierarchy forming within the group and becoming a splinter group.

Is this the discouragement to which you refer?

38.7.12: "Self-Awareness Groups    Many private groups and commercial organizations have programs that claim to improve self-awareness, self-esteem, spirituality, or family relationships. These groups tend to promise quick solutions to problems that normally require time, prayer, and personal effort to resolve. Although participants may experience temporary relief or exhilaration, previous problems often return, leading to added disappointment and despair.

Some of these groups claim or imply that the Church or individual General Authorities have endorsed them. However, these claims are not true.

Church members are warned that some of these groups advocate concepts and use methods that can be harmful. Many groups also charge exorbitant fees and encourage long-term commitments. Some combine worldly concepts with gospel principles in ways that can undermine spirituality and faith.

Church leaders are not to pay for, promote, or endorse such groups or practices. Church facilities may not be used for these activities.

Members who have social or emotional concerns may consult with leaders for guidance in identifying sources of help that are in harmony with gospel principles."

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by NeuroTypical

[mordorbund]

20 hours ago, zil2 said:

Has anyone heard of the Church developing a home schooling program? (Have a friend who's interested.) 

Thanks! 

I don’t know if it was officially sponsored by the Church, but Joy School used to be a coop curriculum in the 80s. https://www.deseret.com/2011/7/28/20206386/mormon-parenting-childhood-comes-before-school

[Carborendum]

10 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Is this the discouragement to which you refer?

No.  Thanks for showing that to me.  It seems that this is somewhat along the same lines.  But it is not the policy that I was referring to.  It is really about secret combinations. We don't need a policy to tell us about what the BoM already warns us about.

There was a big deal about 25 to 30 years ago where people were meeting for study groups which then led to TOP (True Order of Prayer) groups (temple style prayer circles outside of the temple).

There was no change to the Handbook (AFAIK).  But there was a letter sent from HQ to local leaders to stamp these out.  Bishops/Stake Pres began asking about such participation in Recommend interviews.

I need to clarify that the "discouragement" is exactly that.  They are not forbidden.  But based on past history, we have to be aware of the danger of having private groups outside of official channels. 

Official channels have check and balances.  Without such checks, it is too easy for people to just say, "Hey, we're all endowed here.  We can discuss things about the temple.  It's ok."  And it rolls downhill from there.  So, for me, I'd like stay far away from that edge of the cliff.

In a public forum, there is no such danger.  We don't have "private groups" that we can "share secrets".  And that is the big deal.  Once we form a group that meets regularly to discuss things secretly that we don't feel appropriate to discuss in pbulic, then we've just formed a secret combination.

At the same time, we all know that we have a right to privacy.  And there is a difference between privacy and secrecy.  As a rule, if what you study in private is something we'd feel fine with having pasted across the front page of the NYT, then, we're probably ok.  But when secrecy leads to license, that is dangerous.

Edited November 20, 2023 by Carborendum

[NeuroTypical]

On 11/20/2023 at 6:41 AM, Carborendum said:

There was a big deal about 25 to 30 years ago where people were meeting for study groups which then led to TOP (True Order of Prayer) groups (temple style prayer circles outside of the temple).

Gotcha.  Glad those got spoke out against. 

I didn't think the brethren had ever told us not to get together with friends and talk religion unless there's a priesthood leader there because otherwise we'd go astray.  I think I remember something about what you mention here.

[Vort]

On 11/20/2023 at 5:41 AM, Carborendum said:

There was a big deal about 25 to 30 years ago where people were meeting for study groups which then led to TOP (True Order of Prayer) groups (temple style prayer circles outside of the temple).

If I recall correctly, before about the time I received my own endowment, one practice was for some endowed members of a stake to meet together at the stake meetinghouse and follow the temple ritual described as the "true order of prayer". This was before my time, so I'm passing on what I have been told rather than what I participated in. I suppose this practice would have ended maybe as late as the 1970s. So if this practice had been resurrected in the 1990s, that might have been not all that long after it had been suspended, so perhaps would not have been as outrageous and scandalous as it might sound to us now.

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

If I recall correctly, before about the time I received my own endowment, one practice was for some endowed members of a stake to meet together at the stake meetinghouse and follow the temple ritual described as the "true order of prayer". This was before my time, so I'm passing on what I have been told rather than what I participated in. I suppose this practice would have ended maybe as late as the 1970s. So if this practice had been resurrected in the 1990s, that might have been not all that long after it had been suspended, so perhaps would not have been as outrageous and scandalous as it might sound to us now.

I don't know about the practice in the 70s (and possibly before).  So, I can't comment on that.  But I do know specifically that just after I had heard rumors about them in the early 90s that I heard the question in my Recommend interview.

A Church historian (a brother in my ward at the time) told me that some individuals in the Brigham Young era were permitted to carry on Temple ordinances in their homes for a time.  But he didn't have any details on it.  My suspicion is that either A) He was mistaken or B) These were special circumstances (similar to how baptisms for the dead were initially allowed outside the temple).

I have since realized that despite being an official Church historian, he seemed to be prone to believing rumors rather than documented history.  For instance, when I asked him where he found the people having (approved) temple ceremonies in their own homes, he said, "It was in a journal I read a while back."  Whose?  He didn't know.

On another forum (which shall remain nameless) there were several people who were congratulating a relative newbie to that forum for finally drumming up the courage to host a prayer circle in his home.  They spoke of it as if it were expected of us.  They simply couldn't fathom why we shouldn't do it.

SMH

[Carborendum]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Gotcha.  Glad those got spoke out against. 

I didn't think the brethren had ever told us not to get together with friends and talk religion unless there's a priesthood leader there because otherwise we'd go astray.  I think I remember something about what you mention here.

Yes.  I hope I at least began to define a line between "a bunch of people getting together to talk religion" vs "a religious enclave outside of authority."

[Backroads]

One time, at Scout camp, where we happened to have a large number of church members teens/young adults, there up started a little scripture study group.

It was amazing how fast it got out of hand. 

People start up stuff with the best of intentions, I'm sure. I don't know if I blame the adversary or just the chaotic nature of humanity and maybe that road to hell they talk about, but I think there is wisdom in not letting your followers of a creed go complete nuts in name of creed.

[Carborendum]

5 minutes ago, Backroads said:

One time, at Scout camp, where we happened to have a large number of church members teens/young adults, there up started a little scripture study group.

It was amazing how fast it got out of hand. 

People start up stuff with the best of intentions, I'm sure. I don't know if I blame the adversary or just the chaotic nature of humanity and maybe that road to hell they talk about, but I think there is wisdom in not letting your followers of a creed go complete nuts in name of creed.

Out of curiosity... what happened in the case of this study group?

[zil2]

Meanwhile, apparently I need to be more clear.  A sister in my ward is interested in home schooling her children and wondered if the Church had created a curriculum.  That's all.  This is not a weird gospel study group headed for secret combination scenario.

[JohnsonJones]

You guys are a little strange in some ways.

I've NEVER had a group that got together and did these weird things or got out of hand like what you are suggesting (never had the temple questions regarding certain topics brought up here as a question for my recommend either, so it MAY have just been a local thing for whatever area someone was in).

The closest to a cult type thing I've experienced has been southern football.  That's not connected to something with the Church though. 

I can't even imagine people forbidding any members from meeting together.  What's the point of a ward or stake then?  In most areas outside of Utah and the Arizona to Idaho corridor the members are NOT close together.  Getting together with members gives strength to each other in communities which are mostly other religions and faiths or beliefs. 

Normally it's been eating a meal or something to that effect.

What type of crazy people do you have in your areas where they decide to go out an start creating their own gospel?

Even when I visited Utah I didn't see anything that strange, and members are much closer together.  The go to the same schools, they go to the same dance academies, they go to the same sports teams, etc.  I didn't see any football teams in Utah suddenly start sacrificing babies to the Sun before the football game or anything!

This is just gone off on such a weird tangent?

The implication is that those who are members of the Church go into sacrilegious activities as soon as they get together as a group.  If Southern Baptists in general don't do this...why WOULD MEMBERS start doing these types of things?

(Edit: I bring up Southern Baptists because in general their Churches are much more independent in how they operate and work than our Church.  Basically the Church board is the regulating committee, and thus would be far more like that school situation where you have a group of people working together independently on gospel studies and coordination than you do in our Church...etc).

It actually makes very little sense.

Unless you hang out in crowds that are already susceptible to this type of thing (which is more a fringe group type thing from what I see), then this IS NOT NORMAL.

The little bible study group that gets together with the grandmas for the Southern Baptists on Sunday and then put together yard sales and bridge games on the other days...THEY DON'T go wacko like what is being described in these threads, and they are very MUCH into Bible study and discussion.

The Come Follow Me program for families doesn't seem to inspire this wacked out behavior amongst small groups studying the scriptures together.

Maybe I'm just an unusual member of the Church or something, but this entire "warnings" that I'm hearing in this thread about people who get together to have schools focused on gospel principles or people getting together to study the scriptures seem really odd.  Who in the world associates these types of things with people going into wacked out ideas where they branch off and develop their own gospel teachings in a short amount of time?

This is definitely not something I can relate to.  I've seen a LOT of strange things as a professor at a University, but unless a group is already full of outcasts who can't fit in, I can't say I've seen ANYTHING of the LIKE occurring in gospel focused groups or other such things around me amongst the general populace of students or anyone else.

Edited November 22, 2023 by JohnsonJones

[Backroads]

17 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Out of curiosity... what happened in the case of this study group?

A couple of kids were getting mad at the people weren't coming. A few were insisting on weird interpretations they got from family members. One person wouldn't let someone ride in his car to go to church on Sunday. Some bullying started up.

[Ironhold]

19 hours ago, zil2 said:

Meanwhile, apparently I need to be more clear.  A sister in my ward is interested in home schooling her children and wondered if the Church had created a curriculum.  That's all.  This is not a weird gospel study group headed for secret combination scenario.

Check with Brigham Young University to see if they've prepared anything. That's my suggestion.