CE and BCE: An evil plot or a non-issue?

A school district in the St. Louis metro area in undergoing a bit of a kerfuffle over the use of the disgnations of CE and BCE in lieu of BC and AD in social studies classes. From Tim Townsend, religion writer at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Dean Mandis, insurance executive and father of two students in the Rockwood School District, stood before the district's superintendent and seven School Board members Thursday night at Crestview Middle School. He had three minutes to broach an issue that had been bothering him for a month or so.

Wearing a navy, pinstripe suit with a patterned purple tie and black leather loafers, Mandis adjusted his rimless glasses, took a breath and began.

Mandis' daughter, an eighth-grader, had come home from school recently with evidence that she was being taught something other than the traditional calendar dates of B.C. (Before Christ) and A.D. (Anno Domini, Latin for "in the year of the Lord.")

Instead, her teacher was quizzing social studies students on alternative calendar designations that are increasingly common in higher education — C.E., for Common Era and B.C.E., for Before the Common Era.

"Introducing B.C.E./C.E. in conjunction with B.C./A.D. in the classroom is to deny the historical basis of the dating system and ultimately leads to confusion," Mandis told the board. Mandis said this teacher's decision was "irresponsible" and possibly "a dangerous and slippery slope."

In the hallway outside the meeting, Mandis initially said he was uninterested in the religious issues at stake. But he eventually admitted he wasn't bent out of shape because of an affront to the Gregorian calendar.

"This is a movement that's occurring nationally," Mandis said of the adoption of the B.C.E./C.E. system. "The intention is to secularize our schools and our country."

Thomas Madden, a history professor at St. Louis University and director of the school's Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, said the movement to use C.E. and B.C.E. in western academia began in the 1980s and is "much more prevalent" now.

"B.C. and A.D. are references directly to Christ, so B.C.E. is supposed to be more sensitive to non-Christians," Madden said. The idea is that when B.C. and A.D. are not used, "non-Christians don't have to be confronted with numbers that reference Christ's birth."

A similar debate surfaced in Kentucky in 2006 when a staff member at the Kentucky Department of Education proposed substituting the newer designations for B.C. and A.D. in middle and high school social studies classes across the state.

But Christians fought the proposal, and it died before it could be implemented.

"Since our inception, Christianity has played a key role in the formation of our nation, and there's no reason to back away from that reality simply because some bureaucrat authorized a shift," said Kent Ostrander, executive director of the Kentucky Family Foundation, which led the charge against the change.

Last year, former state Sen. John Loudon, R-Chesterfield, filed legislation to make B.C. and A.D. Missouri's "official dating standard," so the state could not "use any other designation."

"It was met with a jaundiced eye," Loudon said. "People said, 'No one's deliberately trying to scrub the calendar of any mention of Jesus Christ.' But, in fact, there is an effort, as evidenced by what's happening in Rockwood."

Craig Larson, Rockwood School District superintendent, scoffed at the suggestion that his teachers are attempting to secularize their students.

"There's no agenda here," he said. "We're just teaching kids how to understand dates."

Last week, Larson reacted to the debate on his blog.

"Within the last 10-15 years, CE/BCE has started to appear in student textbooks, usually along with AD/BC and sometimes with just one or the other mentioned," he wrote. "Teachers make sure that students are aware of both designations so they are literate when they encounter either notation."

Madden said the hypercompetitive textbook market has meant that more publishers are using C.E. and B.C.E. as a way to distinguish themselves as more religiously sensitive alternatives to traditional texts.

Both Larson and Bill Gerling, social studies consultant for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said there was no official policy on dates.

Gerling said the issue had not come up before, and that curriculum decisions are left up to district officials.

But, he said, "there are all kinds of calendars out there — Jewish, Muslim, Chinese — and if you're going to teach world history, you need to introduce kids to different cultures."

But such reassurances have not calmed some of the district's parents. More than 600 people have signed a petition demanding the continued use of B.C. and A.D., and declaring that the B.C.E./C.E. system "is inconsistent with the traditions and principles upon which our country was founded."

As it happens, foundings and births have been standard pegs for calendar measurements through history. A sixth-century Roman monk is credited with calculating the date of Christ's birth, and a century later, the English monk Bede began tying history to that date. The designations B.C. and A.D. were widely used by the 14th century.

"We have to have some way of measuring the year, and that measurement has to be pegged to something," said Madden. "Most cultures peg that measurement to something important to them."

Ancient Romans used the formation of the city of Rome. Muslims use the hijra, Muhammad's flight from Mecca to Medina in 622 A.D.

Despite the increased use of B.C.E. and C.E., many scholars feel the designation is more cumbersome than traditional dating and is understood by fewer readers. The Chicago Manual of Style, used by many academics, has no preference for B.C.E. or C.E. The Associated Press Stylebook prefers B.C. and A.D.

But the most fundamental problem with the B.C.E./C.E. system is that at its root, the newer system is still a measurement of time based on the birth of Christ. The definition of "the common era" is the 2009 years since.

"Usually it's used to make the person using it feel better about themselves — that they're more sensitive and aware of other people," said Madden. "But it doesn't change what the numbers measure."

On Thursday night, School Board members sat behind a dais decorated with the slogan, "We do whatever it takes for students to realize their potential."

They had listened silently as Dean Mandis expressed his concerns. Then, as someone informed Mandis his three minutes were up, he came to the crux of his argument.

"Our students in the Rockwood School District," he said, "deserve to know what 2009 refers to."

Ever since the sixth century after the birth of Christ, when the monk Dennis the Short (Dionysius Exiguus) appended the abbreviations of "AD" and "BC" to dates in the Julian calendar (and miscounted, I might add), there has been controversy over how dates are calculated, much less designated, in the Western calendar.

Changing the abbreviations after dates doesn't change the fact that they are calculated-- incorrectly, I might remind you-- from the birth of Jesus Christ. This is a tempest in a teapot by those who see conspiracies in every change. And as a teacher, I would like to know that our students know what the details and the significance of historical events are over what the number may or may not mean.

No matter what letters come after the date, the fact that the date is supposed to be calculated from the birth of the Christian messiah is not changed. So really, the use of "CE" over "AD" doesn't matter that much, in my opinion. Christian beliefs are still driving the calculations, and obscuring that really doesn't make it any more or less of an imposition upon those who are not Christian.

Good-bye (Or, It took 11 years to finally fire dis guy?)

Holy macaroni. From Mount Vernon, Ohio:

Demonstrations on the town square show how divided people are over the school board's decision to fire a science teacher accused of preaching his Christian beliefs in the classroom and burning crosses on students' arms.

John Freshwater, 52, was fired last month after an outside consulting firm released a report concluding that he taught creationism and was insubordinate in failing to remove a Bible and other religious materials from his classroom at Mount Vernon Middle School.

Some residents consider him a courageous fighter for religious freedom. Others say he has brazenly violated the church-state divide.

"This is going to be a mess," said Dr. Allan Bazzoli, who has written letters to the local newspaper criticizing Freshwater. "Resident against resident, and worse, student against student."

Freshwater's supporters have rallied on the town's square urging school board members to resign. A much-viewed sign about a mile from town reads: "If the Bible goes, the school board should follow."

"The Bible, that should be OK to have," said James Mills, 25, a former student of Freshwater. "Isn't it in the Constitution that we have freedom of religion?"

Mount Vernon, a small city in central Ohio surrounded by farmland, is dotted by churches of just about every denomination. The town has a strong evangelical presence.

Freshwater, who has filed an appeal with the school board over his firing, said Monday he's disappointed with the way the investigation was conducted. His appeals hearing is scheduled for Aug. 26.

"They used half-truths. They didn't interview people who had been in my classroom," he said. "Science teachers at the high school: Why would you interview them?"

Freshwater likely will be suspended without pay during the appeals process, which could extend into the fall, said David Millstone, the school board's attorney.

Messages seeking comment were left with middle school Principal William White and other school administrators.

Freshwater has served as a science teacher and wrestling and football coach in Mount Vernon City Schools since 1987. In their report, investigators noted that some students described him as a great guy.

Some residents blame school leaders for letting the situation come to a boil. Officials knew that Freshwater used a science tool to burn images of a cross on students' arms in December, according to findings by outside investigators.

"I think things were just overlooked and overlooked and overlooked and then it just came to a head," said Kelly Montgomery, whose son was a student in Freshwater's class a few years ago. "It's been terrible for the whole community."

Freshwater told investigators he simply was trying to demonstrate the device on three to eight students and described the images an "X" not a cross. But pictures show the images depict a cross, the report said.

Investigators also found that at least one school administrator dealt with complaints about Freshwater for much of her 11 years at the district.

Jessica Philemond, an attorney for the unnamed student's family that is suing Freshwater and the school district, said that raises some troubling questions.

"I want to find out who had complained, to whom they complained and why for 11 years nothing was done," Philemond said. "They could have taken action a while ago."

Bazzoli and other critics say the public's support for Freshwater may be wavering. A demonstration last month in which supporters urged school board members to resign attracted just 25 people.

"When teachers have a contract, they have to follow the state guidelines, and he deliberately went against the guidelines," said Anita Van Winkle, 57, as she sipped coffee at a cafe near the public square.

Where to begin?

1. He was burning students' arms? He was BURNING. STUDENTS'. ARMS???!!??? I believe this is also known as "branding." And branding is a barbaric practice-- and if you've done this to yourself as an adult, uh, oooh-kayyy, but he was branding middle schoolers. The scars may or may not be permanent: I burned my arm severely in junior high, and it took about fifteen years for that scar to fade.

2. And the school administration tolerated this? The parents tolerated this? I could go on all day about this, but really, what more needs to be asked? Apparently, parents HAD complained about this "great guy's" methods for years, and administrators took no action until now? I am sure he is a great guy. But I would put to you that he is not a great teacher of science. Further, the administrators absolutely mishandled this situation-- and apparently for years.

3. This was an interesting quote by a former student: "'The Bible, that should be OK to have," said James Mills, 25, a former student of Freshwater. "Isn't it in the Constitution that we have freedom of religion?'" First of all, apparently his social studies education was apparently also lacking if he does not know the contents of the relatively short First Amendment to the Constitution, of which this is the very first clause:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...."

To scratch the surface of this, the above clause means that Congress shall not pass any law directing that any particular religion be tax supported (that's what an "established" church is), nor shall Congress pass a law outlawing the practice of any religion. The word "freedom" actually never shows up in this clause. But besides that, one could make the case that a teacher preaching his religious beliefs could be prohibiting the free expression of other religious beliefs. Teachers are enormously powerful influences.

4. I'm sure the case will be made that the majority of people in the town share his religious outlook. This does not matter in the slightest. Even if only ONE student in his class did not every student in his class DOES share his religious sentiments, his proselytizing is completely out-of-bounds.

5. How does Mr. Freshwater's teaching of his religious beliefs fulfill the requirements of the science curriculum? See, there are things that are BELIEVED, and then there are things which are subject to scientific proofs. I am a person of faith, and I believe that this wonderful universe demonstrates divine providence and love in every natural law and in every meteor shooting across the night sky and in every toddler taking her first steps. But this is a religious belief-- NOT something that I should be "teaching" in my classroom.

I do have to teach about what various religious groups believe in my history class. But I outline the beliefs, explaining how those beliefs affect behavior (and therefore history) and then off we go to the next topic. Usually my students are unsure of my exact religious background (the Jewish kids often think I'm Jewish, in fact, which I find amusing and a complement).

My own children attended a private school for several years that was run by a denomination to which we do not belong. And yes, their science curriculum was chock full of stuff like this from that hilarious movie Mean Girls: "And on the third day, God created the Remington bolt-action rifle, so that Man could fight the dinosaurs. And the homosexuals. AYYY- MEN!" So I was constantly telling my children, "No, honey, we do not believe that Catholics will burn in hell. No, honey, we do not believe that dinosaurs and men lived on the planet at the same time." But I liked other aspects of the school, so we made the sacrifices and knew what we were getting into. And told my kids to just think for themselves.


Bottom line, though, is this: American students have an absolutely ABYSMAL grasp of scientific concepts in any case. Teach the SCIENCE, Mr. Freshwater, and leave the religious content to their parents and their clergy, PLEASE! And if you find that teaching science violates your conscience, then find something else to do for a living.

Religious charter schools: just another way to draw students?

Can a charter school about Judaism not teach Judaism?

A school opening this month is named for a Jewish high priest, is directed by a rabbi, will have kosher food and will teach Hebrew. It's also a public school, funded by public tax dollars and following state curriculum guidelines.

Ben Gamla Charter School, billed as the nation's first publicly funded Hebrew-English school, has prompted fears of religion creeping into public schools and has even drawn criticism from groups that defend Jewish causes. Similar criticisms have been raised against Arabic-language charter schools elsewhere, with some saying those schools teach Islam.

Organizers insist that while Ben Gamla will teach Hebrew language and culture, it won't cross the divide between church and state.

"To me, it's very obvious that we're not teaching religion," said Rabbi Adam Siegel, the school's director. He previously directed two private Jewish day schools in Miami Beach. "Religion is prayer, it's God, it's Bible. And so if you stay away from there, you're not teaching religion."

Ben Gamla is the brainchild of former U.S. Rep. Peter Deutsch, who said he was as surprised by the controversy surrounding the school as he was by the interest in it.

Its new building, set to open Aug. 20, will replace earlier quarters leased from a synagogue that had only enough room for 100 children in kindergarten through third grade. Within weeks of publicizing its opening, Deutsch said, the school received more than 800 applications. The three-story building the school is moving into has space for more than 400 students, through eighth grade.

"If we had 50 kids I would have been happy," said Deutsch, who hopes to open other schools in Miami, New York and Los Angeles.

Charter schools are publicly financed and run independently, sometimes by private entities. Some specialize in a language, a trade or some other subject.

Ben Gamla students will follow state curriculum, but also will take a Hebrew language course, and one of their core subjects — math or physical education, for example — will be taught bilingually.

The Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the school sets a dangerous precedent.

"Whenever you have a public school, a public charter school, that focuses on a particular culture that has an intense religious connection, there is the risk that you will end up teaching that religion," he said. "It could happen because some people believe culture and religion are inseparable, or it could happen because many of the teachers and administrators are of one religion and don't recognize the problem."

Even the Anti-Defamation League and the Jewish Federation of Broward County have expressed concerns.

"There are unanswered questions as to how the subject matter of Jewish culture can be taught without also teaching the Jewish religion," said federation head Eric Stillman.

Maybe someone needs to explain to me why charter schools need to pursue some sort of exotic niche in order to succeed? We've got charter schools that focus on weightlifting. We've got charter schools that have a military theme, charter schools that have a Greek theme (the language kind, not the Delta House kind, hopefully), charter schools that have a weightlifting theme, even. Maybe it might be more effective if, instead of being boutique schools, they might actually concentrate on, oh, I don't know, excelling at teaching their students the subject matter necessary for literacy in core subjects, the arts, and the like? I guess they're trying to mimic magnet schools. But I imagine that they couldn't beat off the students with a stick if they simply excelled at providing their students with an education.... instead of some appearing to be stalking horses for eroding the wall (currently composed of jello, apparently, in some places) between church and state? (Please see my previous post for the history of the meaning of the 1st Amendment's Establishment clause.)

The story goes on to discuss Arabic language charters being accused of being Islamic schools in disguise. Recently there was some controversy over the principal at New York's Khalil Gibran International Academy over her affiliation with a group selling T-shirts with the legend "Intifada NYC." I understand the principal resigned over the controversy, but I do not know enough about it to have an opinion. Anyone from NYC want to take a stab at it?

For a while there in my junior high years, my school seemed like a Baptist themed school when I was growing up, but no money officially went into the local preacher's pockets, at least. If there are Jewish day schools in Hollywood, Florida, why does there need to be a publicly funded one? Does it get back to the idea of subsidizing people's religious education, as I talked about previously? I wonder how a Catholic-themed charter school would go over?

It would be one thing if we were talking about a language with future economic or foreign policy import, such as, say, Mandarin or Spanish, or yes, Arabic, if it is done right. I know there's a difference between a language and a culture or religion. I wonder if the people running this school are as clear on that point as some of the rest of us are, though. I just question the need for this type of niche marketing.