Re: DSM: the bad sides of Sudbury Schools

Sam Senteney (
Sat, 21 Aug 1999 15:50:52 -0700

>So, what are the three worst things about Sudbury Schools?

These are my perceptions only...

1. There are not enough of them to seriously threaten the "classroom"

 Even though some people feel in their hearts that these schools are best
for their children, they can't overcome the feeling that if this were such
a good idea more people would be doing it. It takes a leap of faith that
some cannot make.

2. Resources.

Being tuition driven has obvious disadvantages for smaller schools. There
are many simple things that our students would like that are not within
reach because of money, staff, space, more students, or whatever. We many
times seem far too isolated. Growth would positively impact this.

3. The attraction of the school for parents of damaged children.

We get far too many kids who can't function anywhere else, and parents
expect us to accomodate them. We usually find this out far too late. When
the student can't or won't play by community rules and are asked to leave,
the school is the problem not the behavior of the student. For those
students who do cope and begin to heal, the parents will see the
improvement and then yank the child back to the "real" schools now that
they are better. Either way it is disruptive to our school community - not
to mention what happens to the child.

Those are my three worst things...
Sam from Sacval

At 08:48 PM 8/21/99 +0200, you wrote:
>Some people who have read my German translation of some texts about
>Sudbury Schools ( say that they are
>fascinated by this type of schools, but that they hardly can imagine
>that there were no bad sides.
>So, what are the three worst things about Sudbury Schools?
>Martin Wilke

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Dec 23 1999 - 09:01:58 EST