Accelerated Christian Education Validated by UK Government Agency

This is the most important blog post I’ve written yet. It’s not as populist as the Top 5 posts, but please read it, comment, tweet, share on reddit and reblog. This is a crucial news story and it needs to get out there.

Earlier this year, Naric, a UK government agency, recognised the International Certificate of Christian Education (ICCE) as comparable to Cambridge International A-Level standard. This is a travesty, and not just because of Creationism. ICCE is the certificate students get for completing the fundamentalist curriculum Accelerated Christian Education.

If I were to make a list of the problems with Accelerated Christian Education, the Creationism, and associated lies taught as fact, would come third or even fourth.

Number 1 would be the tendency for these schools to indulge in physical abuse of children.

Number 2 is how destructive it is educationally. I write so much about ACE’s Creationism mostly because it’s popular – my two posts on lies taught by ACE account for almost 50% of this blog’s traffic. I really need the public to be on side if we’re going to beat this. But I can’t get the public to engage with the real problem, because the real problem is education. Most people find education boring, and laughing at Creationism interesting.

Well, you should care. And I’m going to show you why.

The first time Naric made this frankly ludicrous judgement was in 2008. I brought it to public attention in 2009, and Naric’s defence was that they didn’t look at curriculum content, only academic rigour. This is a stupid argument (and their spokesman later backpedalled in a phone call with me). But OK Naric, let’s accept your position. You’re saying that ACE School of Tomorrow materials are as academically rigorous as CIE A-levels, ignoring the content.

This is simply false. Since I can’t get anyone to care about this when I discuss it in depth, here’s a bullet point list of reasons why:

  • ACE PACE tests are laughably easy.
  • Students know in advance what the questions will be on the tests.
  • Tests consist solely of short answer or multiple-choice questions.
  • This makes it possible to learn all the answers by rote, or “parrot fashion.”
  • Some questions in the tests aren’t even relevant to the subject.

OK, so one at a time then:

1. Tests are laughably easy.

Here are some genuine example questions from ACE’s 9th grade tests (that’s Year 10, British readers – GCSE level). These are from the PACEs I bought earlier this month.

World History

“The two events which are the focal points of world history are the _____________ Advents of Jesus Christ.” a. First and Second  b. Second and Fourth   c. Seventh and Eighth

“The very next event on God’s calendar is the __________ Coming of Jesus Christ.” a. First  b. Second  c. Sixth

“The leader of the Katanga Province was _________________.” a. Patrick Henry  b. Mohammed Ali  c. Moise Tshombe

Sir Edmund Hillary and Tensing Morkay were the first two men to climb Mount_________ a. Everest  b. Lemmon  c. McKinley.

True or False: Moses was given God’s Law on Mt. Sanai.

Egypt is located on the continent of ____________.

New Testament Survey

True or false: The angel that announced both the birth of John and Jesus was Gabriel.

True or false: The inspiration of Scripture does not destroy the individuality of the writer.

Mark wrote his Gospel primarily to the ____________ in Rome.

Biology

__________________ formulated the theory of evolution A. Gregor Mendel  B. Adolf Hitler   C. Charles Darwin  D. Charles Mendel

__________________ is the study of inherited characteristics. A. Embryology   B. Genetics  C. Cytology  D. Biology

Does it get harder higher up the grades? Here are some questions from a 12th grade (Year 13, Upper Sixth UK) Economics test:

_______________ is the excess of total revenue over total cost.

Our _____________ are limited, but our wants are unlimited.

When demand is greater than supply, prices are usually _________ than when the reverse is true.

______________ is a single business that is the only source for a good or service. A. Monopoly, B. Trust, C. Entrepreneur, D. Competition.

Yes, Naric. I can smell the academic rigour from here.

2. Students Know In Advance What the Questions Will Be

A PACE is broken up in sections. After each section there is a review, called a Checkup. There are two or three Checkups per PACE. After this, there is a Self-Test, a mock test, during which students are not supposed to look back in the PACE for answers. After completing all this (each PACE is typically about 40 pages), they are tested.

Every test consists solely of questions from the Self-Test and Checkups. The majority of the questions are from the Self-Test – generally revising only the Self-Test is good enough to pass comfortably. The questions might be slightly modified in the test – they might be multiple choice rather than fill-in-the-blank, or you might have to select the correct definition from a list. But the questions themselves are unchanged, even in wording.

3. Tests consist of short answer questions

This is so important: Children get their concept of what learning should be from the way they are taught. If you only teach children facts, they believe that learning is about facts. If you only teach them memorisation, they think learning is memorisation. What you teach children is your message to them about what is to be valued in life.

Short answer questions can only ever teach independent facts. You can’t cover concepts, ideas, evaluation, opinions, or higher-order thinking with this means of testing. So children don’t learn those skills, and they don’t think they are valuable.

4. It’s possible to learn everything by rote

Here’s the second important thing about children: They are master strategists. Children will work in whatever way gets the best results. The best strategy for passing ACE tests is to memorise, verbatim, the sentences that will appear on the test, rush to the testing table, and scribble them all down. This is more effective than learning deeply, with an understanding of meaning and concepts, because if you don’t write down precisely the wording ACE expects, you won’t get the marks. In ACE, the student who takes a surface learning approach will score more highly than one who learns deeply.

Why is this a problem? Because learning by rote does not provide any evidence of understanding.

Here’s another Year 10 Biology question: “The term genetic ______ refers to the total number of defective genes in a population.” Let’s say the student memorises this word, ready to pop it in on the test. Do they know what it means? The assessment doesn’t give any evidence either way. They might understand, but without asking them to apply it in another context, there’s no way of knowing.

Here’s what I mean. Read this sentence out loud five times or until you have memorised it.

“The epistemology of praxis recapitulates the fantasy of linguistic transparency.”

Do you understand it? Well, if this were an ACE test, they would simply remove a word at random. If you put the correct word on the line, you’d get the mark.

This is an utterly meaningless method of assessment.

5. Some questions on the test aren’t even relevant to the subject.

I once scored a low B grade on an ACE English test. When I got my result, I was surprised, because I felt sure I’d known the right answers. It turned out I was right. I had scored 100% on the English questions. Unfortunately, the same test also contained some questions on ACE’s religious views, from the PACE’s accompanying Wisdom Pack. I had got most of those wrong, and my grade suffered as a result. In one test I took, memorising a Bible verse accounted for 10% of the overall mark. In almost all PACE tests, regardless of subject, Scripture memorisation counts for 2-5%. Which, when the pass mark is 80%, is significant.

Here are some examples from other subjects:

Love is not an _____________________ but a conscious ________________. From a Biology test.

True or false: Our peace – as Christians – is in Jesus Christ. From a History test.

Where can we find the answers to moral questions? _______ Biology again. The correct answer is “We can find the answers to moral questions in the Bible.” Any other answer would not score a mark.

So when an employer, or university, looks at the ACE student’s results and sees a middling grade in a subject, how can she know whether the student is superb at the subject but rubbish at answering ACE’s questions on morality, or vice versa, or mediocre at both?

So that’s it. Entirely ignoring curriculum content, a government agency has titanically screwed up. They have endorsed a worthless curriculum, which casts doubt on their credibility as an organisation. This means that students who are not suited to higher education could get places at universities in preference to students who received a better education, on the basis of Naric’s inaccurate recommendation.

This is a scandal and I will not shut up about it. Nor should you. Write to your MP and complain. Write to Naric and complain. Write to David Willetts MP, the minister responsible at the Department for Business, Information, and Skills, which awards ECCTIS Ltd the contract for Naric in the UK. Please forward this to everyone who you think might care. Especially if they’re at all influential.

Related Posts:

Note: If you follow the link to the Naric story, you’ll see they say (I can’t check word-for-word because the page is down at the time of writing; I hope it will be up when you read this) that they do not recognise the ACE materials in isolation, but rather the ICCE as a whole. This is a false dichotomy. ACE materials account for, at a minimum, 80% of the ICCE. If the ACE materials are worthless, and I think I’ve demonstrated that they are, the whole qualification is invalidated.

About these ads

About Jonny Scaramanga

I grew up as a Christian fundamentalist in the UK. Now I am writing a book and blog about what that's like, and what fundamentalists believe.

Posted on June 25, 2012, in Accelerated Christian Education, Christianity, Creationism, Education, Faith Schools, Fundamentalism, School of Tomorrow and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 52 Comments.

  1. As a retired public school teacher in Canada, this article makes me want to (excuse the term), “puque”. I still remember my mother telling me that she didn’t want to send me to a Catholic school because of the abuse by nuns. This is abuse of your brain! Obviously, this school system does not want students to learn to think critically, because they might start to realize what “bullshit” their holy (NOT), buybull really is ! http://www.vaticancrimes.com http://www.whypeoplelaughatcreationists.com http://www.whygodwon‘thealamputees.com
    http://www.foundationalfalsehoodsofcreationism.com

  2. Jonny, am reading your website with interest. Just wondering why do you not rather concentrate your insight and expertise on changing the UK public school system which sadly has often been found guilty of child abuse (e.g. Nigel Leat Case in January 2012), was recorded in 2008 as having the highest level of bullying in Europe, and holds educational standards which are in a state of worrying decline (see OECD PISA rankings). At least the ACE curriculum offers parents an alternative to this very unattractive prospect for their children.

    • Well, several reasons. First, any abuse within the national curriculum is not currently within my area of expertise, while ACE is. Second, I don’t think abuse with the national curriculum is institutional, whereas I think the ACE system is intrinsically problematic.

      Your “at least ACE offers an alternative” is a line trotted out by parents and advocates of ACE, which makes me wonder if you have some kind of connection with the system. In my view, ACE offers no alternative, because while there is minimal bullying among the children at those schools, the other problems are far worse.

      Perhaps I only know lucky people, but what I know of state secondary schools, from friends and family that attended, is that they’re pretty good. ACE are always scaremongering about state schools, but from my research, it seems unwarranted.

      Anyway, I’m going to university to do educational research, and I will be comparing the national curriculum with ACE and giving my best evaluation of both.

  3. Donald Miller

    The same problem exists in the US, where the urge to be entertained by the “news” greatly outweighs the merits of the content. Same applies to acting on an important issue. The Right is far more active than the Left. This is a serious problem because the rightwing is driven by its religious agenda and the rest of the country is inactive and indifferent to the threat.

  4. Yes, if we bring up ignorant children, who are trained to believe what is written and told to them, then critical thinking and creativity will not be a problem. When you are raised to believe that critical thought is a sin, it is tough to climb out of that mindset.
    ACE perpetuates this problem, is therefore dangerous, and must be stopped!

  5. I was educated for a time using ACE, so I do have close connections with the program. I have since trained as a secondary school teacher, and am currently completing a masters thesis on Northern Irish politics, as well as teaching.

    In my capacity as a state school teacher of young people between the ages of 12-18, I have come across many distressing cases of both abuse and low educational standards. To anyone who knows, it is a non-debatable fact that the current public education system is in a state of decline on every level and is in need of urgent change.

    The university classroom was the first classroom I ever stepped into. I do not wish to boast, but throughout every part of my academic career, I have been complimented particularly for my critical thinking skills, creativity, writing ability and general intellectual interest.

    If one has had a bad experience with ACE, sympathy is in order. However I would warn against assuming that such an experience is the result of every encounter with ACE – many people are extremely thankful to ACE for enabling them to have the most positive educational experience of their lives. This includes children who have been the target of abuse in state schools – children who would otherwise have had to live out their formative years in the most damaging environment possible. It also includes children who have strong opinions and beliefs – children who would otherwise have had their individuality stifled to death by peer pressure.

    • You seem like an excellent and well-placed person to rebut the claims I make on this blog then. ACE: Full of lies, occasionally racist, academically unsound, full of propaganda. What do you say?

      Also, you seem to have slightly neglected my point that while there may or may not be abuse taking place within a national curriculum framework, the ACE system itself is abusive.

    • “it is a non-debatable fact that the current public education system is in a state of decline on every level”

      a non-debatable fact? That’s not the sort of comment I would expect from someone with critical thinking skills. It’s the kind of one-dimensional analysis you find in someone who has been taught to answer questions by rote.

      • Rodney, thank you for your comment. I would hug you, but you’re far away.

        dreamer8700, I would also point out that anecdote is not evidence. I don’t doubt your academic achievement. I know an ACE graduate who has gone on to a glittering academic career. I could also point to children from the worst, most desperately under-funded inner city comprehensives, who have achieved outstanding exam results and gone onto Oxbridge. Would you accept them as evidence that those inner city schools are good?

      • Your issue is not with me then. It was the OECD PISA report, among many others, that said it!

  6. Thanks for the David Willets link. I’d done the usual ‘my MP’ and so on after one of your podcasts, but hadn’t done that one.

  7. Presumably children are expected to answer the Biology question by stating that Charles Darwin ‘formulated the theory of evolution’.

    Which, of course, is plain wrong.

    It’s bad enough to give kids the answers, worse to give them wrong answers.

  8. I had the ACE curriculum from 1st through 8th grade, with a break for A Beka in 4th. I can’t even begin to tell you the ways that it has stunted my learning: from lack of a basic science knowledge to relying on rote memorization to pass tests. And yes, the other stuff, like the “Board of Education” makes me cringe even today (and it is been 25 years since I last was in an ACE classroom). I’m so glad you are posting this information in a readable, organized format. People need to know what their tax dollars are going toward and what fundamentalist kids are learning.

    • I’m so glad this is spreading. What’s even better, from a vanity point of view, is that it seems most of the coverage mentions me by name, and a substantial part of that links to this blog. I had more hits last week than in the entire rest of the history of this blog.

      • That’s cool with me. It’s nice to see a ripple when you’ve spent so long dragging the stone to the water’s edge.

        Keep up the good work!

      • A year or so ago, I went looking for reviews of ACE or other ex-ACErs out there and didn’t find much. I also found this blog by tracking back through the links in the yahoo story and I am glad I did. So, I glad you are here and that you are getting some press.

  9. I work in international admissions in the uk and recently offered a place to a student who has studied this curriculum based on the Naric guidelines. The ridiculous thing is that they don’t even assess a us high school diploma as being a level standard- students need 3ap tests as well. I willbe taking this up with Naric colleagues. Thanks for your info.

  10. I’ve been reading this blog for some time (after finding out about it on rationalwiki.org) and found it really interesting. I taught in a state school for a while and I know how difficult GCSEs and A-Levels are, whatever some people claim about continuously declining standards. I’ve just sent an e-mail to David Willetts and I really hope that we can get them to publicly withdraw support for this curriculum.

  11. Joe 'Blondie' Manco

    Reblogged this on A Blog With No Name and commented:
    Please check out/follow Jonny’s blog, it’s one of the best on the Internet. And spare a thought for the children whose education will be poisoned by this heinous system.

    • Joe 'Blondie' Manco

      Jonny, I’ve tried reblogging this and then Pressing it, so if you’re getting a bunch of notifications from me that’s why. Both times however it has made my homepage disappear. I’ll let it go for a while but may have to delete the post if it keeps stuffing up. Sorry about that.

  12. I think the statement above made by the owner of this blog that ‘anecdote is not evidence’ articulates perfectly my problems with the whole attitude portrayed here. Many of the entries I have read are unfortunately anecdotal, recording the personal experiences of people who were involved with ACE as young people and who now feel, with hindsight, that it had a negative impact on them. While such accounts are valuable to a degree, evidence is essential in evaluating a curriculum. I have the utmost respect for NARIC as a government organisation, that they conscientiously and thoroughly examined the ICCE with an objective eye, and took into account every aspect of the whole system. With NARIC, one is dealing with professional and capable individuals who have only educational quality and standards in view. It may be more appropriate for those of us who have not that trained professional background to restrain from criticizing so roundly an agency who awarded the ICCE national recognition only after extensive research.

    Also I would warn against saying that the ICCE is ACE. This is simply untrue. The ICCE is the ACE curriculum plus much more – it fills in the gaps that an ACE-only education may leave. This means that the European experience of the ICCE can be at times rather different to the American experience of ACE.

    • First up, re: the OECD PISA report. It’s interesting. It does not make it a “non-debatable fact” that British schools are intolerably bad. Even the makers of the report would not argue that. An academic response would be to look at the metrics they used for comparison. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology? Are British schools terrible, or are the other countries just even better? Are there other ways of measuring student learning that this report did not consider?

      Second, the countries that are outperforming Britain: Are they using curricula that are in any way like ACE? No. So this is not a defence of ACE.

      I post the stories of ACE graduates here because they are interesting. You are welcome to write one. In fact, I would love you to write one. So far, no one has said anything positive about ACE in a post, and it would be great to have some balance. Consider this a standing invitation; my email address is on the About page.

      I agree that evidence is essential. That’s why, contrary to what you say, I’ve tried not to be anecdotal – the quotations from the PACEs are simply factual reporting on the content. I’ve considered one academic journal article (Fleming and Hunt), and I will be considering two more (David Berliner, and Speck and Prideaux). All three are overwhelmingly negative. If you can find me an academic with good things to say about ACE, I would gladly cover them (I’m aware of Jacqui Baumgardt and I’ll talk about that at some point).

      Naric has not published its report on ICCE. They have not given any clear information on what methodology was used, or how they reached their conclusions. They are a professional body, and there may be things about ICCE I haven’t considered, but from my perspective it is impossible to believe the ICCE can be considered anything close to academically rigorous. Lets face it, though, we’re both coming at this with some bias. I’m aware of my bias, though, and looking at ways to minimise it so that my research findings are valid.

      I’m well aware of ICCE – and, frankly, sticking a few history essays and science projects on top of an ACE curriculum and calling it valid is like sticking a carbon fibre wing on an Austin Metro and expecting to win the Formula 1 world championship.

      • My aim in referring to the low standard of the British school system is only to point out that no curriculum is going to be perfect. We need to be aware of applying unrealistic expectations when dealing with ACE or any other curriculum – lets treat all with an equal amount of realism. Your heavy-handed, one-sided criticism of ACE causes suspicion immediately and makes me wonder what your ultimate intentions really are. Even facts can be carefully chosen; what facts concerning ACE are you leaving out? Are your ‘extracts’ chosen at random, or are they carefully selected to prove one of your many negative points? Why, out of the entire ACE curriculum, which spans from pre-school to college preparation, does the one PACE about the Lough Ness monster have to be rehashed again and again on websites across the Internet?

        Christian education as a whole has received very little academic evaluation. Given the general liberal, left-wing trend in universities since the 1960s and earlier, I would expect most journal articles to be negative, especially since they examine ACE from a sociological perspective and not from a practical educational perspective.

        I restate my point about the ICCE; it is more than ‘just PACES’.

      • If you feel ACE is unfairly represented here, I invite you to write a piece providing balance. That offer is open. You can’t complain about a lack of balance when I’m giving you (and anyone else who wants to) the chance to supply it.

        This blog does not pretend to be neutral. For two years, I was an avowed supporter of ACE. In the last 13 years, the more I’ve learned about education, and the more I’ve looked at ACE, I’ve realised that ACE is the antithesis of what I believe education should be. This is a campaign blog, and I make no apologies. The posts are about the reasons why I believe ACE is unacceptable.

        The “no curriculum is perfect” smokescreen is blown up all the time by ACE supporters. Yes, that’s true. But not all curricula are so specifically designed to limit the scope of children’s thought. Not all curricula send mixed messages about race (putting it kindly). Not all of them teach lies as fact. Not all of them features such poorly designed methods of assessment. Not all of them butcher science so badly.

        Those things make ACE unacceptable. We are not comparing like with like, when we compare the National Curriculum and ACE. ACE is an immoral system of education. The National Curriculum is merely a flawed one.

        When I go back to university, I will have to be neutral. I will have to write with balance, and confront my own biases to make my research valid. This blog is not university. I can write what I like here.

      • dreamer9700, since when is teaching falsehoods to children acceptable? ACE is teaching children that scientific discoveries are not true, and mythology is presented as fact. This is not an isolated incident. The fact one merely has to memorize for a test, sans critical thought, is also problematic. Here are some samples from ACE curriculum: http://rockinhsmom5.blogspot.com/2009/12/ace-pace-samples.html

  13. Just wanted to say thanks for this blog and the issues it raises. To avoid the danger of this being a secular vs. religious debate I’d like to speak up for those Christians who are unhappy about such fundamentalist teaching, which constricts freedom of thought as much as it tries to distort truth to create an oversimplified reality. Someone mentioned that more liberal Christians don’t speak up so much, and the reason I think is that we don’t like the almost inevitable conflict or the message that conflict sends to non-Christians. Yet still, here I am, because I think this debate is a very important one. Hope to stick around and see where it goes.

    • Thank you so much. I am really glad to have liberal Christians’ support on this. Although the tone of my blog gets fairly strident at times, I am at pains to make it clear that this is not a war on Christianity as a whole.

  14. I’d like to echo poiemapoetry here. While not exactly a Christian, I am certainly a bible-believer and a home-educator. We don’t teach science like this, we wouldn’t want our children taught like this. As two parents who have science degrees, we both feel that science is inadequately taught at all levels, but I see what you are describing as _even worse_ than the shoddy standard of science teaching in the mainstream.
    Critical thinking is an absolute necessity in the confusing time we live in. Nothing offers a guarantee that our children will grow up to believe as we do, but there is so much misinformation and disinformation bombarding us in our daily lives that to fail to provide our children with the tools to think critically is, to us, utter negligence.

  15. Will consider invitation.

    You said ‘We are not comparing like with like, when we compare the National Curriculum and ACE. ACE is an immoral system of education. The National Curriculum is merely a flawed one.’

    My initial reaction was to laugh, my second was to feel sorry for you. You must really have had a very bad experience with ACE to make such a statement, and unfortunately such extreme statements ( ACE is immoral) won’t be too effective with the people who matter. Futhermore, I have desisted from getting involved in a religious or a political debate here as I feel it would have very little worth, but I feel to say that really ACE provides individuals of strong Christian faith to fulfill their responsibility as parents to educate their children. This is one of the benefits of living in a free, democratic country. Essentially, if parents decide that ACE is the way the way they want to educate their children, that should be respected.

    • I am interested to know, dreamer8700, how far you would be willing to take pluralism you just espoused: “This is one of the benefits of living in a free, democratic country. Essentially, if parents decide that ACE is the way the way they want to educate their children, that should be respected.” If parents decided that they wanted to teach their children racism, because it was what they believed, or (I’m sorry to use this example, given Godwin’s Law) anti-semitic views and Holocaust denial, or, for example, that Christianity is evil, would this be equally their right? I’m not sure, personally, how far I am willing to take pluralism, or how far an LEA would consider a parent teaching these views to be causing their child “to receive efficient full-time education suitable—to his age, ability and aptitude”, according to the 1996 Education Act, given that Oxford City Council expands on suitability as: “A suitable education is one that equips a child for life within the community of which s/he is a member (rather than the way of life in the country as a whole) without limiting the child’s options to adopt some other way of life in later years.” I would also be interested in learning from anyone whether there have ever been cases of legal proceedings which illuminate what parents are actually allowed to teach their children.

  16. I can see how ACE stifles intellectual honesty and scientific curiosity, even now since I’ve so called come out of the closet, I have been rejuvenated with learning about science. I find the discovery of the higgs boson extremely fascinating.

  17. The ACE school I attended in California has just asked for alumni statements in order to get state accreditation, which made me critically think about the way the curriculum helped/hindered me/others. It’s precisely my academic success later in life (which I see people are presenting as evidence for ACE’s success) that has pointed out these shortcomings.

    I found that ACE helped me with test taking, memorization, answering to please the grader, and sitting silently for 7 hours straight. It hindered me by not teaching me long-term retention, critical thinking, literary/historical/contextual analysis, participation in discussions, essay composition, and unbiased presentation.

    If students only complete lower-level college courses (an Associate’s degree here), they’ll shine because grades are based primarily on tests. For upper-level learning (Bachelor’s degree and further), tests are almost nonexistent, giving way to critical analysis that ACE completely fails to prepare you for. (And indeed seems to condemn.)

  18. The ace education system gave my brother the opportunity to learn as a child with A.D.D this was the only way that he could learn basic things which were so blatantly ignored in him before in a public school. granted it isnt as rigorous as most educational programs but it has it merits. i would also like to point out that physical abuse is something that occurs where ever there is a teacher who thinks that’s the best way of disciplining a child.

    • Thanks for your comment, tatenda. Interesting to hear.
      I’m sorry to hear the public schools near you had poor provision for ADD students, but I don’t think ACE is the only option – or even a good one. Lots of ADD students struggle with ACE’s requirement to sit still and concentrate on reading comprehension exercises for long periods. There are other forms of home schooling, or just schools with better facilities for ADHD students, which would provide better provision. And even if the method of ACE’s implementation suited your brother, that still doesn’t justify the lies, indoctrination, and propaganda within the system.

      As for physical abuse: Perhaps, but most schools respect the law on this matter, where as my ACE school didn’t. Also, the corporal punishment aspect was originally mandated (or at least strongly recommended, with clear instructions) by ACE head office for use in all ACE schools. The abuse wasn’t coming from the individual teachers. It was coming from the system.

  19. I understand what you’re saying. For the past 2 years I had done my 9th and 10th year education on ACE. All it did was waste my time and cause me to fall behind academically. When I had moved back to private school at the beginning of the year, I had realized that the 70-100%’s I had gotten meant absolutely nothing if it meant I had to struggle though my 11th year.

    ACE was nothing but a waste of money and paper on my behalf and any other ACE student’s. Convention isn’t even worth it in September.

  20. ACE is simply a curriculum that interleaves Biblical quotes, sometimes in excess, and forgets itself when it comes to providing factual information to which the student and jointly the parent overseeing this, have to delve deep into a good stockpile of books to garner the essentials to fully understand whatever concept they are studying. ACE provides a pile of bones with tidbits of meat, even when used in a soup you REALLY need to find a hell of a lot of complementary ingredients to make it very nutritional!!!!!

  21. Education in it’s conception was for one reason, morality. We were taught to read so that we could read the Holy Bible. Now, “education” has thrown out its original intent and puts pure idolatry into “higher learning”. Our society is in ruins because of it. I personally think that a world that has morals is much better off than a world with a doctorate.
    p.s. You spelled three words incorrectly.

    • To seriously?,

      Your assertion of misspelled words is absurd. The words you believe are misspelled are correctly spelled if one is not in the United States. Memorise is correct in the U.K., as are recognise and rigour. These are different, of course, in the United States, where we change the “s” to “z” and drop the “u”. I am not certain about the word “defense”, as Jonny spelled with a “c”.

      This snarky assertion does not change the fact that the A.C.E. education is sub-par, and that smacking and stifling children is the norm. Your moral superiority is lacking, My Friend.

    • You’ve spelled it’s incorrectly. It’s = contraction for it is or it has. Its (no apostrophe) = belonging to it. If you think the world should get its morals from the bible, then the world would be in an even worse state than it is. It is thanks to THINKING people who challenged the bible that human rights have become more common in some parts of the world.

  22. Egypt is located in the continent of……..
    Facepalm.

  1. Pingback: Profs, Pints, Christian Education And UK Government, The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe And Other News | Token Skeptic

  2. Pingback: Here Be Monsters! | DaveD's Blog

  3. Pingback: Loch Ness Monster ... proof evolution doesn't happen?

  4. Pingback: The National Academic Recognition Information Centre rubber stamps International Certificate of Christian Education | eChurch Blog

  5. Pingback: Bookmarks for June 27th through June 29th : Extenuating Circumstances

  6. Pingback: What England’s creationist schools are teaching » Godlessness in Theory

  7. Pingback: Fundamentalism I: Religion and creationism in UK schools « Why Evolution Is True

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,645 other followers

%d bloggers like this: