Scott David Gray (email@example.com)
Sun, 05 Nov 2000 15:11:13 -0500
I think that you are right, that accepting the Sudbury model
of education requires a different perspective than accepting
the so-called traditional model does.
You suggest that in order to accept the Sudbury model, one
must start out accepting that humans are not inherently
flawed. I have a different take on it.
I feel that people are just good and competent enough to
manage their _own_ affairs. But I do not think that people
are trustworthy enough to be put in control of other people.
This is why I favor liberty -- not simply because I can trust
people to govern themselves, but because I _cannot_ trust any
person to govern someone else.
In other words, I accept a child's ability to know her/his own
needs as a given -- this does not mean that I think _any_
person is without flaws. My real fear of traditional school
is that it relies on the Utopian and unrealistic notion that a
third party (the teacher) is falwless enough that s/he can
know how a person other than him/herself should live. That
idea of social control is just plain scary.
--Scott David Gray reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.sudval.org/~sdg ============================================================ When I was in school, I cheated on my metaphysics exam: I looked into the soul of the boy sitting next to me.
-- Woody Allen ============================================================
Julianne Madrid wrote:
> I currently work in a public middle school and what > I've read about the model just makes so much sense. > It has been a process, however, to give up the > assumptions I have about schooling as a society. > > So, as I look to create a school, I have been sharing > with people around me the possibility I see in the SVS > model. The thing that seems to be the biggest hang up > for people is that children won't learn anything. I > know this was my initial thought when I first started > reading about the model, and it requires giving up > control. In my (fairly useless) education classes we > spend so much time talking about how to control a > classroom. Letting go is very scary for most people. > > I've been puzzled about what is at the root of this > assumption that children won't learn anything. It > seems to me that it stems from the fact that we think > people are inherently flawed. So then, getting people > to see the value in the SVS model would require them > accepting that humans aren't inherently flawed? Does > anyone have any comments on this? > > > > ===== > Julianne Madrid :) > "Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes." --Mahatma Gandhi > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. > http://shopping.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Nov 06 2000 - 09:05:37 EST