subscribe to the RSS Feed

Friday, April 25, 2014

The HEMS Homeschool Convention

Posted by jlwile on June 18, 2013

There were a lot of people named "Wile" in this town!

My Canadian tour came to a close in Nova Scotia, which actually has a place in my family’s history. My father’s ancestors came from Germany and settled there, forming a small town called “Wileville.” As you can see, I got a chance to visit there. It’s still a small town, and there wasn’t much there except for a market/bakery and a gas station. Nevertheless, it was cool to see that nearly every street was named after a Wile, and there was even a lake called “Wile’s Lake.”

Of course, the main reason I was in Nova Scotia was to speak at the HEMS Homeschool Convention. It was another intimate convention that was held at an excellent facility and run by a group of incredibly dedicated home educators. One of the things I loved about the convention was that in addition to a vendor hall (where curriculum providers sold curriculum to those who needed it), there was also a “young entrepreneurs” section where young people could sell things that they had made. There was a wide variety of things to buy, from candy to plants. I ended up buying some cards from a very talented young photographer who started a photography business called Gracious Vignettes.

I gave a total of six talks at the convention, five of which were on Saturday. That’s actually a lot of talking, and I even told the conference attendees that I expected to be bored with myself after giving so many talks. They were very gracious, however, thanking me over and over again for coming to their “little” convention. This seemed to be a theme at both of the conventions I spoke at in Canada. The organizers and even the attendees seemed to be constantly apologizing for how small their conventions were. They had heard of the mega-conventions in the U.S. and were sorry that their numbers couldn’t measure up.

I hope I was able to dispel them of this notion. I think that big conventions and small conventions both have a role to play in home education. Big conventions can bring in lots of great speakers, and their vendor halls are simply brimming with choices when it comes to educational material. However, they can’t be flexible. I remember when I spoke at the FPEA convention in May, Diana Waring and I had a great question from the audience, but before we were able to answer it, the hostess cut us off, because the convention had to stay on schedule. I completely understand why the hostess needed to do that, and it is a consequence of the convention being very large. In addition, I can’t spend a lot of time speaking with a single individual at a big convention. In both of my Canadian conventions, however, I had long discussions with several homeschoolers who needed a lot of advice, and I was never cut off in any of my talks. That’s the beauty of a small convention.

As usual, I had a lot of good questions at this convention. One homeschooling mother asked me how long a textbook is good for. In other words, how many years have to pass before a textbook becomes obsolete? That’s a great question, because publishers sometimes produce new editions every few years, just to keep their new book sales high. Other publishers rarely come out with new editions. How often is it necessary for a home educator to think about buying a new textbook, despite the fact that she has an old textbook which covers the necessary material?

I told the mother that it really depends on the subject. Honestly, I think most biology texts are out of date in about 10 years. There is just so much that is being discovered on the cellular and molecular levels that even what we discuss in high school biology needs revamping every 10 years or so. However, when it comes to something like math, textbooks at the high school level hardly need updating at all, because at that level, nothing much is changing in the field of mathematics. In other subjects, like physics and chemistry, a textbook is probably good for 20 years or so. While lots of great discoveries are still being made in those fields, most of them don’t touch on what is taught at the high school level. Of course, I am sure there are educators who would disagree with me on this, so don’t take my words as any more than a suggestion.

Another homeschooling mother seemed very distressed about the fact that evolution is still taught in most schools today. She ended up asking several questions in one of my talks, and I continued the discussion with her privately afterwards. In the end, she just thought that there was no reason for evolution to be taught in schools, since there is “no evidence” for it. I tried to tell her that there is evidence for evolution. There is also evidence against it. That’s why there is a controversy among scientists. If there were no evidence for it, I honestly think most scientists would look for some other hypothesis regarding origins. If there were no evidence against it, there wouldn’t be an anti-evolution movement among scientists. However, there is a scientific controversy regarding evolution specifically because there is evidence for it and evidence against it.

Now as to why it is taught in schools, that answer is easy. The fact is that whether you believe in it or not, evolution is the reigning scientific dogma of the day. Obviously, the reigning scientific dogma of the day has to be taught in science class. Even in my creationist science texts, I teach the hypothesis of evolution. Unlike standard high school science texts, of course, I also discuss the evidence against evolution, but students who use my texts do learn the hypothesis. Indeed, many of the students who have used my texts and excelled at their university-level science courses report that they understood evolution better than most of their peers at university. Of course, they also know why there is a controversy about it, because they learned about the evidence that stands against it.

And honestly, I think that’s the best kind of education a student can have. When you present science in the context of a controversy, I think students learn it better. Educational research seems to support this idea. If you are teaching your children in a creationist framework, I applaud you. However, don’t teach them creationism to the exclusion of evolution. As they get older, they need to learn both sides of the story. Not only will it allow them to understand the reigning scientific dogma of the day, it will also allow them to learn the subject of origins better.

Comments

8 Responses to “The HEMS Homeschool Convention”
  1. S.J. says:

    I’ve followed the approach in your last paragraph with all my kids, and to my knowledge, all six of my college age or older children are still highly skeptical of the conventional old-age/evolutionary paradigm, including two who are nurses and one who works for a major oil company.

  2. I attended a small convention locally and loved it, but they didn’t have a display of the main curriculum we use. Your take on them is right on.
    There have been two people visiting my facebook page who were of the impression they shouldn’t teach evolution to their kids at all. I hope they listen to your advice.
    My parents didn’t think about teaching evolution one way or another and just taught what was presented in the ACE and other curricula available in the late 80s. My brother fell for the first cool Scientific American article he read for himself and has never considered special creation again. I don’t want my kids or any others that vulnerable!

  3. jlwile says:

    Thanks for your comments S.J. and Cheri. I think the contrast between them is great. S.J. taught both sides, and his children are all skeptical of the conventional old-age/evolutionary paradigm. Cheri’s brother was not taught both sides and ended up being easily lured into that paradigm. I can’t say that this holds as a general rule, but I do think the contrast is illustrative of the most likely scenarios.

  4. jm says:

    Would you consider writing a post that links to or explains some of the evidence FOR evolution? I do not believe in evolution but plan on teaching my kids both sides of the argument. I do not want them going off to college and then feeling they were brainwashed at home when they are confronted with the evidence for it. Is there much evidence for it? To be honest, when I read or watch something having to do with evolution it seems to be much speculation but little in the way of concrete knowledge. But I am no scientist…

  5. jlwile says:

    Thanks for your comment, jm. I have written a couple of things about the evidence for evolution. Here is one that discusses the pseudogene argument, which I think is the best argument the evolutionists have. I also think the geological column is, on balance, evidence for evolution. It has many problems (see here, here, and here), but overall, it is pretty much exactly what you would expect if evolution actually happened. You can also watch a debate between me and an evolutionist from 2009. He presents evidence for evolution in his opening argument.

    One of the best things you can do is read both sides. For example, not all that long ago, Dr. Richard Dawkins wrote a book called The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. In response, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati wrote a book called The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution, which argues against Dawkins’s book. You can read both and see who you think has the more convincing arguments.

  6. jm says:

    Thank you Dr. Wile! I am currently reading Seven Days That Divide The World by John Lennox and enjoying it very much. I will move on to the two books you mentioned next. In the meantime I will check out the links you provided. There is so much knowledge one must have in order to form a legitimate opinion that I feel more than a little overwhelmed at times.

    I enjoy your blog – thanks for taking the time to write.

  7. S.J. says:

    I treated the whole issue as an exercise in rational argument, and I started my kids out by having them read “Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds,” by Phillip Johnson, author of the ground-breaking book “Darwin on Trial” (which I also recommend). Johnson is an accomplished lawyer, and lays out the importance of identifying the worldviews and assumptions behind any argument. He’s also a great writer!

    I also found the Discovery Institute’s high school text, “Explore Evolution” to have an accurate depiction of both pros and cons on the issue, though I suspect others might find it more biased than I did. DI has a new curriculum out, called “Discovering Intelligent Design,” which I haven’t looked into yet. Jonathan Wells’ book, “Icons of Evolution,” is also eye-opening, as are the two books by Carl Werner, “Living Fossils” and “Evolution: The Grand Experiment.” While blatantly creationist, they contain a lot of information I haven’t seen elsewhere.

    On the pro-evolution side, I found National Geographic articles to be very helpful in presenting those arguments. I also had them read books by theistic evolutionists, such as Mary Daly’s “Creator and Creation,” which is geared toward Catholics. If someone wants to get into technical geological arguments, the book “Science and Earth History” by renowned geomorphologist Arthur Strahler is the best I’ve found, because it’s devoid of the ad hominem attacks and ridicule evident in many similar books. Strahler also lays out very plainly that the fundamental assumption of conventional scientific thinking is the exclusion of supernatural forces and causes, because, as he puts it, “if science must include a supernatural realm, it will be forced into a game where there are no rules.”

    That’s fair enough, but it lays bare the fact that science, while an important component in the search for truth, cannot claim to be the final arbiter of Truth, unless, and only unless, the fundamental axiom is upheld that the supernatural does not exist–which is not a theorem provable by science.

  8. jm says:

    Thank you SJ! I am adding your suggestions to my reading list. My oldest child is 9 so I still have the time needed for information gathering, although we have already begun talking about the different views. Kids love dinosaurs so of course this comes up pretty early in life. We recently saw a performance of Dinosaur Petting Zoo by Erth. The T-Rex puppet had feathers here and there sprouting out of it’s back. I had recently read Dr. Wile’s post about dinos and feathers and did some additional looking online. (Thank you Dr. Wile – it was timely!) I don’t want to push a view on my kids but I do want to gently guide them. Ultimately this is something they will have to work out for themselves.

home | top