Comments on: Release Time v. Early Morning Seminary

By: Anon for this

Anon for this — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:21:13 +0000

I realize this discussion is dead, but I want to add anyway:

I graduated in 04 from dist. 91. RTS was my saving grace. I was able to take a break from the often-grueling schoolday (I was one of the 27% who was proficient in all subjects, taking AP classes, and very college-bound) and recharge on a spiritual level. I learned far more about the gospel from CES instructors (who actually knew something about it) than I did from the random men called to by my SS teachers on Sunday or the misguided and highly political teachings from my YW instructors. The instructors were also available for informal counseling/advice sessions during lunch, which was a huge benifit to many students, myself included.

Dist 91 has been deliberately (imo) making it increasingly difficult for students to take RTS for several years now, and this proposition doesn’t surprise me in the least. What I think is fascinating about the whole situation is that changing from trimesters to semesters will *reduce* the number of classes that students are able to take, whether or not they are LDS or wish to take RTS. It will also eliminate a student’s ability to graduate early. This may make it easier for teachers to drill students with the basics and help them score better on No-Child-Left-Behind-mandated tests, but it will reduce the exposure to elective classes, including art, music, and advanced math and science. The college-bound students will find their transcripts looking weaker, and the other students will lose the proven benefits of elective classes. Why isn’t this the bigger issue?

By: Lisa

Lisa — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:24:36 +0000

It is amazing to me that so many people responded to the topic of ELIMINATING release time. If anyone actually went to the district web-site and looked at the options, they would see that District 91 was going to allow 5 release time semesters, and would require students to find 3 semesters of alternative release time. This could be accomplished by taking required courses online, (allowing for the extra 3 semesters release time), completing home study, or trying to establish a small early morning program. I have looked into this issue – 27% of District 91 HIgh School Seniors last year were proficient in math, science, reading, and english. & nearly half of all graduating seniors had failed at least one class. The administration blames this on the flexibility of the Trimester system and would like to implement a semester system. People should have studied the option, and then if they chose option C I think that is great, but at least they knew what they were voting for and really talking about. I am afraid that many people just did what they were told to do and wrote “I support option C”. As it turns out option C is no longer even feasible for some reason, and it looks like the school district will go back to the status quo. Does anyone want to hire someone from my school district who has a non-proficiency rate of 70%? Let me know, its my kids will one day need a job?

By: mary

mary — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 05:56:23 +0000

As a convert to the Church at age 17, my SS teacher asked why I knew more about the doctrine, Church, gospel, etc. than any of the other kids in SS. I had never taken Seminary.
For years I had read every Church book I could get my hands on. If you look at the Seminary
manual it is quitebasic and whether a class is “good” is dependent entirely on who teaches it(as is the case with anything being taught.)
My daughter did home study seminary each year of H.S. Most teachers taught on her level.
The last one was used to teaching the primary kids–and that’s the kind of lesson she gave her.
It’s just my opinion but I learned the most from reading Church books written in depth on a particular topic and discuss them with others. Great way to learn! Also, kids need their sleep and some kids have health issues–not everyone fits into one mold so I think Seminary time needs to be flexible–especially at such a vulnerable age when we want to keep the kids liking Church.

By: John Taber

John Taber — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:08:11 +0000

At least Sunday School is right there in the same building, in the middle of the three-hour block. And since 1995, high-school-age kids have had the four years of Gospel Doctrine roughly at the same time.

EMS in retrospect wasn’t worth getting up early for.

RTS would have been awkward because much of high school I was carrying a full load. And to me it’s not worth the expense or other boondoggles. (Don’t get me started about “Missionary Week”.)

By: Susan Martin

Susan Martin — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:55:52 +0000

Oh, BOOOOOOOOOO-HOOOOOOOOOO
You poor pitiful souls wouldn’t know how to even survive out in the REAAAAAAAAAL world. Here in Missouri we have seminary clear across town at the stake center at 6 AM.
Suck it up, get a backcone and GROOOOOOOOOOOOOOW UP !

By: E

Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:07:36 +0000

I understand what Raymond is saying; I don’t see his statement as snobbery. I also came from a home where my father was not active at the time and there was virtually no gospel teaching. Seminary was much more in depth than sunday school. And really, how could sunday school ever compete in less than one hour each week?

By: Tom D

Tom D — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:24:56 +0000

Re #50
I would agree that there are more polite ways to say what Raymond said in #48, but I can see where he is coming from. I am intellectually inclined myself, but not too many others in my home ward were. This is not meant as a slight to them, but it does mean that there are “different strokes for different folks”. Despite the best efforts of the Brethren to gerrymander diverse wards, I have lived in radically different wards. I liked seminary.

By: Tony

Tony — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 04:04:47 +0000

Re:# 48- “My ward was heavy with fathers who worked for Kennecott Copper and the Postal Service, with very few college graduates, so the usual level of PH and SS teaching was pretty basic. Most Seminary courses were a definite step up.”

Wow, I’m a college graduate (cum laude!) and even I’m offended by the level of snobbery and elitism in that statement.

By: Raymond Takashi Swenson

Raymond Takashi Swenson — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:09:03 +0000

One more point: At the time I was first enrolled in Seminary, my father had been semi-active in the church. We had no regular home instruction on the gospel. The challenge to read the Book of Mormon and ask for a testimony of its truthfulness came in Seminary, and nowhere else. Certainly it is possible for a child to receive all necessary gospel instruction from his or her parents, or from the normal Sunday Meetings, but Seminary provides another opportunity to teach what all too many parents and Sunday School and Aaronic Priesthood advisors fail to teach. When the stakes are so high, I would not willingly forego a means that has successfully made a difference in the lives of so many, including myself.

By: Raymond Takashi Swenson

Raymond Takashi Swenson — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:02:17 +0000

re: #39–Memorizing about 40 scriptures over the course of a year took only a small percentage of time, and was done outside of class, in preparation for “scripture chase” competitions that took place once a week. The bulk of seminary class time was spent in more detailed explication of the scriptures than was possible in Sunday School, especially given the lack of specialized training and preparation of many Sunday School teachers. My ward was heavy with fathers who worked for Kennecott Copper and the Postal Service, with very few college graduates, so the usual level of PH and SS teaching was pretty basic. Most Seminary courses were a definite step up.

The scriptures need context in order to be understood. That is especially true for the Bible and its related branch, the Book of Mormon, and the Pearl of Great Price. Even understanding the Doctrine and Covenants requires some familiarity with the history of the church and the language of America 170 years ago, something that is not taught in most public schools. A good Seminary teacher can take students beyond just identifying what appears to be the modern meaning of a few passages and understand the questions and problems that prompted specific revelations, as well as gain confidence in them through the statements of witnesses (such as to the receipt of D&C 76).

My 10th grade seminary fielded a team that competed in a regional “Seminary Bowl”, much like the classic College Bowl TV show competition, in which broad understanding of the scriptures and church history were necessary. In 11th grade, I was in a special seminary class in which we each had research assignments. My project was ferreting out references to the School of the Prophets in Church History and compiling a report on what it involved. (This was back in the days before one could do digital searches) It was one of my earliest experiences in documentary research.

I don’t know if my experiences were exceptional. I know that, in the little time available for me to be with my Home Study students, I tried to give them a more than superficial insight into the meaning of the scriptures. One of my fellow inistructors in that program was Colin Mangrum, who is still a professor at Creighton University Law School. I think it likely that his students had an exceptional experience. Those who have never attended Seminary themselves should take the time to visit a sampling of Seminary classes before they pronounce on the value of the experience.