E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Facebook
Twitter
Tumblr
Google Plus
YouTube
Flickr
PhotoBucket
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017
March 2017
April 2017
May 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Supporting Seven Oaks Classical School

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 4:00 AM (#)

This is a letter I sent last week supporting the charter application for Seven Oaks Classical School.

To the charter school board,

As the father of two sons, I write you today in support of the Seven Oaks Classical School's charter application. While I understand that some in MCCSC (including the school board and employees) are opposed to the application, I believe it should be approved.

I have two primary reasons why I support this application. Their names are Timothy Tibbs and Rob Tibbs. When my sons get older, I want to provide them with the best education possible, and I am excited at the possibility of learning in a classical environment. I am especially excited about instruction in Latin, which will help my boys develop an extensive vocabulary.

I am opposed to vouchers for private schools, because "with government money comes government strings." SOCS is not a private school, despite the dishonest attempts to mischaracterize it as such. It is a public school, bound by the laws of the state of Indiana.

Some have worried about the values this school will teach, and are worried about this being an enclave of conservative thought. As you know, the primary place where children get their values is their parents, not their school. Children from conservative home swill be taught conservative values, regardless of whether they are at SOCS or MCCSC.

For example, Seven Oaks will not be teaching creationism, but many SOCS students will be taught that anyway - by their parents, not the school.

Some within MCCSC have worried about "losing" money to SOCS, but that carries an assumption that that money belongs to MCCSC to begin with. It does not. That money belongs to and follows the students. The objection to losing the money looks more like turf protection than a real concern for the students at MCCSC.

As you know, all children are different. Different methods work for different families. This is a method that will work for many families, and will greatly improve the learning for students. I ask you to allow us this choice, so we can try this method. No one is forced to attend SOCS, but I ask that you be pro-choice and allow Monroe County parents this opportunity.

(4 Comments)

Note: All posts must be approved by the blog owner before they are visible on the blog.

Comments:

At October 2, 2014 at 8:20 AM , Blogger Mike Newton said...  

"As you know, the primary place where children get their values is their parents, not their school."

If only! During eight years teaching in Nevada, I constantly faced parents who demanded to know why their kids behaved badly. The flip side consisted of families who unilaterally "exempted" their offspring from history classes that mentioned religion in any form, and one weird clan who demanded the "right" of their 6th and 7th grade kids to smoke across the street from school at recess--this despite a closed-campus policy and a state law forbidding possession of tobacco by anyone under 18. In both cases, the administration folded, terrified of "making waves" in a trigger-happy small town.


At October 2, 2014 at 5:53 PM , Blogger Scott Tibbs said...  

The cases you mentioned are cases of parents instilling values in their children.

Not good values mind you, but values nonetheless.


At October 3, 2014 at 8:27 AM , Blogger Mike Newton said...  

You seem to be saying that parents who instill criminal values in their children (the tobacco violations) are somehow justified in your eyes, under the banner of "parental rights." Why not take it to extremes and say Ma Barker was simply "misguided"? Surely you're rational enough to agree that school administrators should oppose and reject parental demands that their children be granted official permission to break laws on or near campus during school hours?


At October 3, 2014 at 9:05 AM , Blogger Scott Tibbs said...  

No, I am not saying that. I said they were instilling values.

Not good values, but values nonetheless.

My point was that parents instill values in their children, for better or worse. Your examples proved my point.

The school should not have buckled. The principal should have been fired.


Post a Comment


Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name cannot be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you have to subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

  5. All moderation decisions are final. I may post an explanation or I may not, depending on the situation. If you have a question or a concern about a moderation decision, e-mail me privately rather than posting in the comments.

Thank you for your cooperation.