Talk:Accelerated Christian Education/Archive 1

Promotion?

This article seems to me to be promoting and prepping the subject, instead of simply explaining what it is. Zoso 01:40, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Personal experience

Speaking as someone who went through this program from 7th - 12th grade: ACE is good in some ways, and terrible in others. Much of the information in the paces (at least when I was in school) is very 'dated'. Half of one entire pace was dedicated to bashing it into the students skull that dating is BAD. The 'recommendations' they gave basically said to NEVER be alone with a member of the opposite sex, not even on a double date. Dating should only be allowed with at least one parent present at all times. Although 'world history' is taught, you really learn very little about what really went on. You are more likely to learn about the life and death of Martin Luther, than to ever read anything about the French Revolution. Since student interaction is restricted to lunch and break times, students tend to graduate lacking small but important social graces, having the inability to cope with groups of their own peers who do not already share their point of view, and just basically unprepared for the 'outside world'. The principal at the school I went to, knew nothing about what GEDs were. He claimed that a GED was worthless and that you could not go to college with only a GED. When I did get to college I was completely unprepared. Since student/teacher interaction is even more limited than social interaction (with the teacher doing very little teaching) I was completely a fish out of water. I had never been schooled in proper study methods, had never written a paper more than two pages long, and had no idea how to do any sort of research at all. My knowledge of literature was a joke, it being previously limited to the KJV Bible, and other religious books such as Pilgrim's Progress, and biographies of famous Christians.

In all, I would NOT recommend this program to anyone that wants their child to succede in the real world. --Gentlebutterfly 19:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

I spent far more time in an ACE home school then the previous writer ever did (3-12). And guess what? I graduated successfully with a SAT score ranking me higher than 98% of 2 million other college bound seniors.

My brother, who spent seven years in the program is nearing engagement with his girlfriend, and he, an older sister who also did the program, and I have never noticed a lack of social skills. In fact, we have received comments that our behaviour is far superior to that of general youths of our age. My sister is now a middle level manager in a records office, and doing well in her job.

All three of us have gained acceptance into universities (Library Studies (Offered honours), Computer Studies (Offered Honours), and a Law/Business double degree).

Our education was flawless, our social training impeccable, and our view of the curriculum totally positive.

Obviously there are downfalls like any curriculum, but like every other curriculum it can mostly be put down to bad influences (Like class bullies or teachers).

This program is not designed for the non-believing family, but just because it includes a vast amount of Bible studies, does not make any of its core subjects less apt at providing a good background for university studies and indeed life in general.

Horrible understanding of gender relationships:

I must say that I'm quiet disappointed by how ACE sees a boy-girl relationship, which views girl only as a sexual object for any teen male and therefore restricts for a girl staying alone with a boy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but even in Islam such harsh measures of gender relationships are not executed. Also keep in mind the propaganda in one of the PACE's which states - "A Christian should not date/marry a non-Christian.". Really disturbing isn't it? --GeorgeTopouria 18:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a discussion board. Please reserve this page for discussions of the article, rather than the subject of the article. Blarneytherinosaur talk 03:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Potential downfalls:

1. At the school level. There are various degrees of certification that School of Tomorrow can bestow upon a particular school to indicate levels of excellence. However, they are not required, and not all schools are quality run institutions. Make sure you spend time checking out the school, its staff, and its reputation. Especially recommended is checking with the local police precinct to make sure that none of the faculty is a registered sex offender.--[[User:24.164.175.46] 05:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

2. At the parent level. As indicated in the write-up, the ACE program requires parental involvement. Make sure as a parent, you are up for the extra responsibility of being involved in your child’s education. If you cannot devote some time at the end of the day, this probably is not for you.

3. At the student level. This is a curriculum that requires discipline. It is relatively easy to cheat the system as most work done within a “PACE” is graded by the student themselves. If they lack character, and if the parents are not involved to check up on them, and if the school is poor; this can go unnoticed. Obviously, this will prevent the program from working correctly.

The simple fact is, all three must work together or the system will break down. Done properly, it can be excellent. Done poorly, it will most certainly be a disaster. It is really simple, as with so many things in life: Garbage in; garbage out.

As a final matter of opinion, one author mentioned the some subject matter becoming dated. This is my opinion as well. I feel that ACE simply is not keeping pace with other publication companies such say, Alpha & Omega (www.aop.com). Further, their introduction of computerized curriculum helps to alleviate some of the issues I pointed out above.

• 2 ACE teaches the students too great a deal of independence for this. Homeschoolers are a special representation of this, even a harder challenge of resposibility is set up than it is in many schools. All the parents that I came across with their children involved (including mine) are very little involved save a little discipline and updates on the student's progress.

• 3 ACE is there to teach students discipline. I would prefer children learn this discipline in their younger years and grow to understand the nature of the importance of the information than in college or later. Rightly so, cheating is definately frowned upon, but the student is getting on by himself rather than so dependent on a teacher as ABeka does.

• ACE is certainly not very 'dated', but it is not very simply easy just updating them. Updates are constantly being made. As a personal friend to an editor of these PACES, there is always work to do. The creators of the PACES are very careful and meticulous about the information they put into their work. It takes them a year to redo a whole twelve PACES. With that kind of care, indepedence, and unforgetable information, the only reason a student would have no need of PACES were if they could not learn via by them and must listen or directly require a teacher.

If a parent forsakes ACE because they don't think their children are fitting for responsibility or cannot learn on their own and want some other teacher instructing them in a classroom somewhere outside parent's reach, then that is up to them.

• I cannot argue, however, that the PACES biggest downfall, however, is in the relgious part of things. It depicts Christianity as a big religion with strict guidelines and rules to follow and is chalked full of legalism. The schools that use the PACES are usually the same as well. The second ACE school ever made (Which I did attend for a number of years) has over 300 do's and don't's with punishable consequences for common forgetfullness. I'm surprised that isn't in the artle (or is it and I missed it?). Forgetful students have come to the brink of suspension simply because the schools do not understand that punishment is not a good route to go to fix forgetfulness or other common problems.

Colonel Marksman 02:40, 26 March 2006 (UTC) --24.164.175.46 05:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

ACE is different from School of Tomorrow

I think that when discussing ACE we need to remember that there are two different groups of people who use ACE. Many of the opinions, pros and cons of the curriculum are actually related to the setting and not the curriculum. If we are talking about ACE in reference to alternate education (homeschooling) then we need to stick to that side when writing Lrldcs 18:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that much of this article is talking about School of Tommorrow and not ACE. There is a big difference and we need to decide what we are writing about in this article and split it if neccisary. ACE is strictly the curriculum, it is used by many homeschoolers and also by School of Tomorrow. SOT is the name of the school set up and is what this article is discussing when talking about supervisors, cubicles, check off sheets and demerits. This is also what I was discussing above. Many of the critisisms that people have are not over ACE but SOT and it's systems. I wouldn't mind tidying up the article. It needs headers and citations. If it is OK I would like to only discuss ACE in this article and make a seperate for SOT. They could be linked to each other. It is bedtime though (I'm an overnight employee) so I'll see what others think and start later. Lrldcs 18:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Can we find sources to cite the following things and then they can be put them back in the article if they are writtian objectivly.

• Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) was founded by Dr. Donald Howard
• It is purported to work especially well with students that are either much more or much less capable than others their age.
• Because of these practices, the ACE system has acquired a bad reputation with some atheists, as well as members of religious groups with different beliefs. (I think the author was reffering to the Bible based curriculum and statement of faith of ACE.
• The curriculum is widely used in the United States, Canada, Mexico, Great Britain, the Philippines, and South Africa.
• ACE is headquartered in Lewisville, Texas, a suburb of Dallas.

The following things should be moved to either School of Tomorrow or Lighthouse Christian Academy

Learning Centers, supervisors, convention, goal cards, demerits, flags, parents signing checkups. Lrldcs 03:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

OK well I'm not really understanding what's going on. I made a page for SOT but if you click on it you get redirected to ACE which as I said above are not the same thing. I can't find the SOT page since I am getting redirected.Lrldcs 05:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

YES! What's the point of a recursive link?? Get rid of the link or make it a separate page. And, since I want to learn my way around Wiki better: How do you actually get to a redirection page in order to alter it? Or must moderators do that? Kilyle 05:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can change a redirect page. When you click on a School of Tomorrow link and it redirects you to Accelerated Christian Education it will say at the top of the article "(Redirected from School of Tomorrow)" click on the blue link in this line and it will take you to the redirect page. Blarneytherinosaur 03:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal experience 2

I graduated from an ACE school in my junior year as valedictorian. Right around the time I started my freshman year I had finished all requirements for high school. I spent the next couple of years doing various electrive tracts to keep me busy. I found my education was piss poor. I had to rebuild my education in college. I started out with a scholarship and taking honors courses at college because of what my official academic record demonstrated. I found out, through experience, that there is a big difference between what a person's official academic record says and their actual level of scholarship. Building a decent education in college was painful, expensive, and time consuming.

Alumni prove academic excellence?

"Over a million alumni demonstrate that Individualized learning produces academic excellence."

No, it doesn't. It demonstrates that individualized learning has a large following. It no more demonstrates that it produces academic excellence than the fact that millions of people in the world live in socialist countries demonstrates that socialism is an excellent political model.

"The child is given a diagnostic test to determine current academic ability and clearly identifies any learning gaps within all subjects. For example, your child’s English grammar may be above his/her grade level. However their punctuation skills may be below grade level. Your child is then placed in curriculum at his/her academic performance grade level in each subject and the learning gaps are then addressed."

Implies that the school treats English grammar and punctuation skills seperately - that students are given one pace level for English grammar and another for punctuation skills. That's not what happens.

• We cannot, however, forget that this is a true account. One cannot say 'no' to a true account. PACES are not necessarilly for everyone. Some students find they simply cannot learn off by themselves or by reading. Other students have learned how to forget what they learn (beats me how they do that... I found it impossible), and if a student manages to forget the PACES, they are very doomed. My sister and I are showing that difference in ABeka. I was desperately holding on to ACE and fighting for my life against ABeka. In the start, my sister found that trying to relearn and start afresh in a schooling system that builds off from all the past years became destructive for her. Colonel Marksman 03:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

• • My personal experience was not that I forgot what was in the PACES. I still remember a great deal of what was in the PACES. The problem I found was that what was in the PACES was flat out -wrong-. After almost 20 years out of the school, I still find myself bringing up some factoid that I learned in the PACES only to discover that it is wrong and was wrong when I was studying it. For example, one of the science PACES argued that the 2nd law of Thermodynamics disproves the Big Bang theory. It doesn't and it was known by mainstream science that it didn't when I was studying that it did in the PACES.198.97.67.59 13:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Ace and Christi Comics

I'm surprised that no one is yet to mention the comics. No doubt, my school fellows loved to make fun of the comics and about angelic Ace and Christi, fatty Pudge, and evil Susie and Ronny. These may be fun and great for kids, but the older teenagers do not see maturity in the PACES till the 11th and 12th grade where storyline changes and the student's unpredictable future evolves into serious concern. I don't have the gut as of now to post anything and I have no clue what I would say. Any suggestions? Colonel Marksman 03:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, the comics. Our teachers were careful to point out that his name was pronounces "A-See". I guess "Ace" sounded too much like the kind of kid who rode a motorcyle and had a packet of Luckeys rolled up in his t-shirt sleeve. --12.5.10.153 15:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

One thing that disturbed the hell out of me about the comics was that at no point in my entire education do I remember the black kids (Booker and co) ever even coming close to interacting with Ace and the rest of the Pure White Guys. They had their own preacher, their own supervisor, and their own friends. It was really, really creepy, and in hindsight, possibly a little racist. Shame that nobody important has actually studied the actual comic continuity and brought this to light, or it might be worth mentioning in the criticism section. --203.36.217.32 06:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

some queries

1. If someone transferred from an ACE school to traditional school, will he be placed in a grade according to his age or is he tested for placement?

2. How does one who graduates from ACE school get into a college or university?

3. Is ACE recognized by public and university education establishments?

Education is state-run. So, the answers to your questions are probably going to depend to some extent on your state's laws. You should ask your local Board of Education these questions. Personally, I had no trouble getting into a university after I graduated from an ACE curriculum school. My ACT and SAT scores were high and I was even given a scholarship.

However, ACE excels at teaching students to the test. You aren't taught to use what you are taught in a free-form environment. As a result, I was unprepared for higher learning, lost my scholarship within two terms of being at the university, and had to take remedial classes to catch up.

• For some reason, my district's public school didn't recognize my ACE school's accreditation, but universities and colleges in the area did. In my senior year of high school, I couldn't enroll back into the A.C.E. school due to lack of funds. When I tried to enroll at a public high school, I was told that I would have to repeat a grade in every subject except English (My ACE Supervisor had a Masters, meaning that the ACE's English accreditation was recognized, but not any others). So, the only option in my mind was to enroll in ACE home school program, which completely rendered all my life's accomplishments up to that point meaningless.

• I then took the ACT, completely unprepared, and got an average score. And what does a 4.0 mean when it comes from an A.C.E. school? Nothing. Despite never having earned an academic scholarship (I have earned some art scholarships), I will be graduating with honors in a few months with two BFA's. My sister, who had never shown any of the aptitude that I have, got a full ride to a nice liberal arts school because she was involved in many extracuricular activities at a public high school(that A.C.E schools lack). Despite knowing that I was artistically gifted early in life, I had no opportunity to grow until my very first art class in the university. Quite frankly, I think a parent can do much, much better than the so-called "School of Tomorrow". Yodamite 05:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality

I understand the need of 198.97.67.59, due to his 'bad' experience, to demean ACE curriculum. However, Wikipedia is not the medium for such attacks, as all articles must conform to the Neutral Point of View. (NPOV) If this user wishes to make changes like this repeatedly, then he (or she) should become a user, so that their decision is on their username not just a random IP address. I am willing to discuss this in an orderly fashion, but this section of the article is obviously not in compliance with the NPOV, and therefore also in violation of The Five Pillars of Wikipedia. If we can mediate this dispute with the creation of both viewpoints, I would be amiable to that, but the arguments must not be general character assasinations against the "Christian Right" schools, but against ACE in particular. Arguments against homeschooling or Christian Curriculum should be placed on their appropriate pages, not on an informative page on this particular curriculum. Please leave any comments on this page here, and if you wish to write on my talk page, do not write anything I cannot post here. Rrpbgeek 14:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I understand your need to defend this school system due to, well, I'll be polite and not insinuate that you are driven by personal motivations, but the block quote I included in the article is not POV. It is from an academic, peer-reviewed, article (which is linked to at the end of the quote). Insistent attempts to delete it are 1.) When done on the arguement that "that's not true" on the basis of independent research, against Wiki policy and 2.) When done on the arguement that it is "not NPOV" needed to be demonstrated as such in light of the fact that it does come from an academic peer-reviewed journal article. NPOV does not refer to failing to point out that something is bad.198.97.67.59 14:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I highly encourage anyone else who has quotes from academic, peer-reviewed journal articles which discuss ACE to add them to the article. The addition of more intellectual content should be encouraged. The fact that all such articles which I have found are critical do not mean there shouldn't be such articles quoted here. That'd be like arguing that academic articles on phrenology shouldn't be in the phrenology article because all of those articles are critical.198.97.67.59 14:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

But how much of it is a review on ACE, and not a general review of the Christian school curriculum. Just because it gives a token reference does not mean that its decribes it. Rrpbgeek

Did you see the part where it states, "Gehrman(1987) and Speck and Prideaux(1993) have analyzed the Christian Right curriculum of the ACE and found the following.."? Which parts, specifically, are you contesting and why exactly?198.97.67.59 15:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The criticisms section is written like an editorial instead of from a NPOV. Statements like

As might be expected, the demand for obedience by youth to authority and the Bible leads to direct conflicts with the processes and the theories of contemporary science. The much debated Christian Right alternative to evolutionary theory, Creation Science, is offered to the public schools as a way to present the facts of science in such a way as to be fair to Christian children. However, Creation Science simply is not science. It cannot be taught as science without distorting science. When public school boards and administrators seriously consider Creation Science as science curriculum they demonstrate their ignorance of science, their ignorance of U.S. law, and their lack of understanding of the goals of the Christian Right.

and putting quotes around proof are not neutral. Since a significant part of the article is criticism, I suspect that the whole article was produced to crticize not just ACE, Christian education in general.--Jorfer 23:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

How about assuming good faith? I did the bulk of the work rewriting this article a month or so ago, but have not yet had the time to go through the criticism section. I would have appreciated any help with the criticism section.

I agree that we still have an disproportionate amount of information critical of ACE and that the tone of the criticism section is not neutral. Posting a proposal here concerning which parts to keep and which to lose would be a way forward, and that offer is open to everyone. Blarneytherinosaur talk 08:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep it all (I've always been against removing sourced, relevant material in Wikipedia), but balance it by adding content from peer-reviewed articles from academic journals which have the same rigor as Phi Delta Kappa and takes the opposite position. Before anyone comments, I recommend that they read [Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial]-Psychohistorian 12:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I have started a rewrite of the criticism section on one of my subpages. It is intersperced with my comments. Blarneytherinosaur talk 04:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment about the article removed fromed from the article

Moved from article: The following section includes many, many errors. The work in ACE does not consist of low-level cognitive tasks. As is the case in many curriculums, tasks and assignments vary. This writer appears to have found some instances where memorization or recall of facts was required, and has decided that the entire curriculum consists of low level tasks. ACE in fact is a very challenging curriculum that uses many methods of instruction.

It is also not true to state that students may not get up without permission. In the ACE system, there are different levels of "privilege" granted to students. Some students may have to ask for permission to get up while others with a different "privilege" level do not. The article's assertion that ACE students are not allowed to get up is the equivalent of noticing a student in a public school being held in ISS and asserting that all public school students are not allowed to go to class with their friends.

Students do not grade their own written essays. The article contradicts itself because it states that only low level tasks are used in ACE but then says that students write and grade their own essays.

ACE maintains a partial list of colleges and universities that have been attended by former ACE students. Many of these are state colleges, like the two that are on the list due to my own attendance. I have two B.S. degrees, a teaching license, and a 4.0 GPA in an MBA program that is still in progress. Anyway, the article that apparently should convince you that the ACE program is inadequate follows here.

Criticism

"ACE in fact is a very challenging curriculum that uses many methods of instruction." My own experience was that ACE focused on low-level cognitive skills. I routinely finished a PACE in a day's time only to pass the PACE test with a 100% score. I had many many weeks in which my star chart had stars stacked on top of one another for the week. The PACE work was trivial and unchallenging and, as I learned in college, woefully insufficient.

"Students do not grade their own written essays." Yes, they do, but not always. What's worse, when they didn't, those essays were graded by people who lacked degrees in English education. But an example of the lack of reading comprehension skills in ACE is the fact that, if you read the article, you'll find that that last part (about students grading their own essays) isn't part of the article. Its a seperate piece.

• • Then source it or remove it. Rrpbgeek
  • Also, are the commentaries on specific books not read for the literature classes from the article itself, and if so, what is the source for that information? If it is not, and is a post-article addition, why is it included? Rrpbgeek
    • The commentary on specific books not read for literature class is from the article itself. There is a substantial reference section at the end of the article and the article is linked to from this article. I'm not sure it is really necessary to cut and paste that article's references section and move it to this article. You wouldn't do that with articles you referenced in a document for something else.

"The source it or remove it." I think that sounds fair. I'll remove it for now and think more about whether to put it back in.198.97.67.57 15:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

• Thank You. Rrpbgeek

I hope that you are not including Math as part of your assessment. Sorry, but I highly doubt that Algebra I and II PACEs were finished in a single day. I've been able to compare the ACE math education to that of public school math, and public school math was a breeze compared to ACE math. I can agree that English, Science, Social Studies, and others did little to prepare the student for higher learning in those respective subjects, but my ACE Math expericence more than prepared me for basic advanced University algebra.

I went to a School of Tomorrow with some smart cookies that have since gone off to prestigious Universities (I'm not one of them--I'm an art punk), and THEY all had trouble with ACE algebra. One of the problems with the math PACEs is that the written tutorials would deal with common algebraic problems, but the exercises were all atypical brain twisters that you would find no real world application for. The person at ACE HQ who wrote up the problems must have been sadistic. The math PACEs that we had were third edition. Yodamite 10:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Math was a little more difficult as I recall (this was about twenty years ago). It usually took me two or three days to complete one of those PACES (other than the Geometry and Set Theory PACES which I would finish in a day - they were the only subjects that didn't completely bore me). I do remember having completed Algebra 1 and 2, Geometry, Discrete Mathematics (which I took as an advanced elective because they had nothing else to offer me), and one other sequence (Trig maybe?) by the time I was through my sophomore year of High School. I probably could have completed more in that time, but I was a lazy kid and had trouble staying on it because of the boredom.71.74.217.83 21:04, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• To me, the ACE system has one huge problem. (aside from religious issues) This mainly applies to private schools instead of homeschooling. For the most part, students are expected to stand on their own. This can be problematic for children with mild dyslexia or with attention deficit disorder. As someone who grew up with ADD, I can say from experience that having to sit and read a PACE, and then go and "score" it yourself with basically no clarification from a teacher can be extremely frustrating. Especially when it comes to more advanced math like algebra and calculus. You're basically told that you are wrong, with no explanation as to why. You are fully expected to "score" your own work, and then "forget" that you just saw the right answer a moment before when you scored it. So really you're checking your answers, going back to the desk, and writing what you already knew to be the right answer. This makes re-scoring a formality, and also seems to be the antithesis of learning. --Unexplainedbacon 16:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

High level math

I am curious as to whether or not this ACE program offers opportunities in higher level math. Public schools offer Calculus, and sometimes AP Calculus courses to students with the ability. Would students with the same ability in the ACE program have the same opportunities? From the research I have done on the curriculum myself, no. It seems that curriculum choices are very few, even in high school. Education is supposed to broaden the mind, not close it.

Wikipedia is not a disussion board Blarneytherinosaur talk 02:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Pre-Alegbra, Pre-Geometry are done in the 6th grade. After that, in higher learning, there are PACEs for Algebra I and II, Geometry, Triginometry, Physics, Business Math, Chemistry (not a math course, but), some college math courses even. Are these not in the article? Colonel Marksman 03:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The high level maths courses may not be mentioned specifically in the article, but they could be included in the 'Academic content' section of the rewrite. We need to keep it balanced though, with a similar amount of content about other parts of the academic curriculum, i.e. if we write a paragraph on high level maths, we should try to mention the lower levels of maths, and the higher levels of other subjects. Blarneytherinosaur talk 09:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite

I have started a rewrite of this article. You can edit it at Accelerated Christian Education/draft. Please leave any comments about the draft here. Blarneytherinosaur talk 02:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Please leave messages about the rewrite on its talk page. Blarneytherinosaur talk 09:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I will transfer the draft to the article space tomorrow. Please feel free to make changes. The citicism section still needs cut down. Blarneytherinosaur talk 08:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Merge

Hi. Per the request at Wikipedia:Requested moves, I've moved the Accelerated Christian Education/draft subpage to the main title, and I merged the histories, as you can see here. A couple of edits were lost in the merge, but the represented no original content - there were two grammar corrections, a vandalism edit, and a reversion of that vandalism, that are all now invisible.

There remains a talk page here that I didn't merge into this one. Someone can copy content from there here, if they want; it's all signed anyway, and we're not worried about the GFDL history of talk pages, in general. Cheers. -GTBacchus^(talk) 07:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks GTBacchus. I'll copy and paste the drafts talk page onto this one. Blarneytherinosaur talk 01:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

From the draft talk page 6 November 2006

The following taxt is transferred from the Talk:Accelerated Christian Education/draft after that draft was moved to the article space 4 November 2006. Blarneytherinosaur talk 01:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Higher Learning

I will leave the first comment: There's nothing about the high school and college courses available in PACEs. I would write in the section, but I don't know what to put down. Colonel Marksman 03:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Exclusiveness Assumptions

It seems to me that some of the reviews are unfair. The way ACE curriculum-based schools are portrayed zeroes in way too much on the curriculum, believing that supervisors and schools "go by the book". If public schools were reviewed only in the classroom setting, the same reviews would turn up. I'm not defending it totally, but I'm merrily pointing out the article and the statements focus on the PACEs and not on ACE as a whole.

Perhaps, for ACE, it needs a broader perspective. Include information such as the facts that schools are run on their own schedules, with regular breaks and physical education according to the school's organization. The PACE's do not dominate the schooling system; it is the curriculum, but not the entire whole. I propose that we include a seperate section detailing this. Colonel Marksman 03:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

There is space to mention the range of ways schools use ACE in the "Private schools" subsection of the "Usage" section. However, we should try to keep it brief. Accelerated Christian Education is a curriculum. How it is administered in a particular group of schools should be included, in this case, in an article about School of Tomorrow, which could have a "see also" form the "Private schools" subsection. Blarneytherinosaur talk 09:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Move to article space

Although the criticism section hasn't been cut yet, I propose that this draft be moved to the article space. I will do so tomorrow, unless there is a good reason not to. Blarneytherinosaur talk 08:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Dade Christian School

As a student of Dade Christian and having read the student handbook, I can guarantee you that even if that policy existed in the past, it does not anymore. I actually know a student that I would describe as a hippie wearing it, and I am unaware of her ever getting in trouble.--Jorfer 23:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Attended ACE (Maranatha Christian Academy - Hazlet, NJ) from 3rd grade through high-school

The curriculum fostered an exclusive "cult-like" view of the world. Learning occurred via rote memorization of facts that were biased. Balanced discussions were discouraged. This is no surprise as the foundation of the curriculum is fundamentalist Christianity. I am a Christian and believe in moral behavior and adherence to Scripture. However, their literal interpretation of the Scripture with regard to every issue and refusal to remove what I referred to as "Scrptural blinders" led to dangerous brainwashing of children in their critical formative years.

Discipline was administered via a "demerit" system. If you accumulated 3 demerits, you were required to stay after school and stand staring at a wall for 20 minutes. 4 demerits earned you 30 minutes detention. 5 or more demerits earned you one solid hour of staring at a wall after school while they monitored this via a clock.

Demerits were issued for minor infractions such as accidentally "leaving your flag up" if you had a question. (For those unfamiliar with the system, students sat in cubicles and were not allowed to speak. If you had a question, you had to raise a flag on a wooden block (placing it on top of the cubicle). Supervisors, we didn't have teachers trained in childhood development, would answer your questions. They would not remind you to put your flag down. I was 8 years old and left my flag up three times and was forced to stand for 20 minutes staring at the wall.

Women (and girls) were not allowed to pray at the chapel service. Women in teaching positions were expected to wear head coverings based on a literal ancient depiction of proper dress for females within the church (subservient to men). It was the Christian equivalent of the Taliban.

No alternative theories were ever discussed. When I attended secular college, I needed to unlearn all of the trash that I had been fed for 10 years of my life. While I held fast to my faith, I learned that in order to defend one's faith, one had to understand all angles presented. The curriculum did little to foster that approach.

When I took classics in college, I had no clue about Greek mythology as the curriculum conveniently eliminated it. The school provided no facilities such as chemistry labs, so chemistry was learned via rote memorization. Students were warned not to engage in activities with "unsaved" friends ("unsaved" meaning anyone who did not adhere to fundamentalist principles).

And then there was athletics. This consisted of gym class (running laps around the church parking lot). I had pneumonia three times in my life and was forced to run laps for gym class in 35 degree weather. When I told the Supervisor (later Pastor) that I couldn't do it, I was ridiculed.

The school made no provisions for students with special needs. I never did well in athletics due to minor neurological impairment which impacted my balance and other fine motor skills such as catching a ball. During intermural competition (flag football and basketball) I received constant ridicule. I was forced to be on the team because they didn't have enough students to qualify as a team. Winning meant everything to the Supervisor (later Pastor) who would make snide remarks about my athletic performance.

It took me 4 years of college, three years of graduate school, and approximately 5 years in the workforce to learn basic essentials such as working cooperatively in groups, defending viewpoints, and speaking with others / developing friendships. I just want to warn anyone considering ACE to carefully examine the curriculum, and more importantly, examine the church sponsoring the school.

I earned a B.S. (Summa Cum Laude), an MBA, and post-MBA through MY OWN Determination and failure to accept Maranatha's shallow (and narrow) world-view.

155.201.35.50Mark Z.

Recommended Reading: Churches that Abuse by Ronald Enroth.

In my school, we were given yellow slips for detention to take home, to be signed by our parents, and brought back the next day. Detention time was to be spent on the day following the time of infraction, before and after school in our offices (only if we had 10 minutes or less--20 was divided between morning and afternoon detention periods. Any period over 20 had to be spent in the afternoon in its entirety.) Just the same as what you experienced in your school, we weren't allowed to do anything during detention. Doesn't the Bible say something about idle hands?

One thing that my school added was a mandatory swat for 5 demerits. At the time of registration, parents sign a contract that allows the school to perform limited corporal punishment. I remember, in kindergarten, getting a swat for a number of small violations such as "leaving your chair out" and "talking out of turn", and then getting a spanking at home by my imbecile father for getting 5 demerits.

Regarding inattentive monitors, I had similar experiences. Mine were near sadistic when it came to being unhelpful and uncaring. I truly believe it was some sort of mind-game with them to purposefully catch students in the act of violating silly rules. It was not unusual to find a yellow slip on my desk, and I wouldn't have a clue as to what I did until I read it. Making things unbearable, the school's entire staff (besides the principal and supervisors) was made up of volunteers who were "paid" in curriculum discounts. Because the school was so desperate for help, abusive P.E. teachers and dangerous bus drivers were not fired. --Yodamite 17:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)