Re: DSM: Sharing the SVS model


Rick Stansberger (rickstan@zianet.com)
Sun, 12 Nov 2000 20:43:15 -0700


I mean what's the difference between "human development" and "the evolution of
developing human potential"? they sound the same to me, but you have them listed
as points 2 and 3 respectively.

Rick

Robert Swanson wrote:

> on 11/11/00 2:39 PM, Rick Stansberger at rickstan@zianet.com wrote:
>
> > What's the difference between 2) and 3)?
> > Rick
>
> Learning, as presented in public school, emphasizes intellect. Because other
> aspects of development are not reinforced adaquately, development is largely
> left at the three to four year level. Essentially, this is non-development.
> The Sudbury difference is that it allows development through play,
> exploration, communication, sexuality, self-determination, friendship,
> joy...
>
> robert
>
> > Robert Swanson wrote:
> >
> >> I'd like to suggest three paradigms:
> >> 1) School is about learning (public school)
> >> 2) School is about human development (SVS)
> >> 3) School is about the evolution of developing human potential (wisdom
> >> school)
> >>
> >> The idea of learning THINGS is so big in our society it seems to cast a
> >> shadow over human development. We put as a second consideration the
> >> character development of an individual.
> >>
> >> Dr. Melvin Morse (who writes about NDE's of children) said school emphasizes
> >> the left side of the brain. It does so by emphasizing verbal activity. Words
> >> keep us busy accessing the past and future. On the other hand, the right
> >> lobe of the brain is timeless and nonverbal. Its communication is focused on
> >> feelings, intuition and depth perception. Right lobe communication
> >> references the broader environment.
> >>
> >> When we get out of the intellect, it is not a question discerning this one
> >> thing is right and that one thing is wrong and here we sit. Rather, feelings
> >> are concerned with how much happier do we want to evolve right now. Life is
> >> a continuum of creativity and choice.
> >>
> >> robert
> >>
> >> on 11/9/00 10:07 AM, Julianne Madrid at huli_madrid@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> Kathleen,
> >>> I really appreciate what you wrote. I think the
> >>> Sudbury Model does go beyond right and wrong (from my
> >>> limited knowledge). I think it's important to create
> >>> something without it having to be because something
> >>> else is bad. Why would we want to create a school in
> >>> reaction to the system we have now? Isn't that just
> >>> called school reform? I think the SVS model is a
> >>> whole new paradigm and the questions you ask are
> >>> important. I understand the tendency to attack the
> >>> system, because I'm confronted by it everyday in my
> >>> job in a public school. I also realize that it isn't
> >>> useful to do so. It's more useful for me to focus on
> >>> creating something that does work for people.
> >>> Julianne Madrid
> >>>
> >>> --- Avenfeliz1@aol.com wrote:
> >>>> Rick,
> >>>> I'm not into the attack and defend mode. So I'll
> >>>> answer you and not the
> >>>> previous post.
> >>>> I make no defense of my profession. I don't think
> >>>> that she's right. I don't
> >>>> think that she's wrong. I don't think I'm right. I
> >>>> don't think I'm wrong.
> >>>> What if the Sudbury Model goes beyond right or
> >>>> wrong? What if it goes beyond
> >>>> attack and defend? What if you can't free the
> >>>> children without a new method
> >>>> that goes beyond right or wrong? I think the
> >>>> Sudbury model is taking a bad
> >>>> rap here. It's not about attack and defend. And
> >>>> it's not about trashing
> >>>> other people's decisions. I could come back and
> >>>> defend my position. I could
> >>>> attack in kind. But I won't.
> >>>> I will say this: I believe in my bones that the
> >>>> children I work with are not
> >>>> free, even in my classes. What I do think (I admit,
> >>>> I don't really "know" a
> >>>> lot.) that I love the people I spend my days with.
> >>>> I respect them. I don't
> >>>> care for the public school system. I never have.
> >>>> Generally, I find it quite
> >>>> oppressive. I wish the Sudbury Model was the norm.
> >>>> But it's not. ( I
> >>>> prefer the Sudbury Model for my son.) And because
> >>>> it's not, not every child
> >>>> or teacher can go there. And because we're not all
> >>>> able to do this, are we
> >>>> to give up, sit back and whine that we're not free?
> >>>> I prefer not to do
> >>>> that.
> >>>>
> >>>> And when you give up the attack and defend model,
> >>>> what's left?
> >>>> Maybe just a more interesting set of questions,
> >>>> like:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. Does, in fact, the Sudbury Model call forth a
> >>>> new method qualitatively
> >>>> different
> >>>> than attack and defend?
> >>>> 2. Why, after thirty years are Sudbury schools so
> >>>> hard to do, given that
> >>>> other educational models are so patently invasive
> >>>> and destructive?
> >>>> 3. Are children or anyone ever really damaged?
> >>>> 4. If they are damaged, what is the
> >>>> characterization of such damage?
> >>>> 5. If Sudbury Valley schools can institutionalize
> >>>> respect for children, and
> >>>> such respect is the sufficient condition for the
> >>>> freedom of children, can
> >>>> others ,knowing this, offer respect on their own in
> >>>> institutions other than
> >>>> this model?
> >>>> 6. Basically, was there not both kindness and
> >>>> goodness, among slaves, even
> >>>> in the plantation system?
> >>>> Kathleen Richardson
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> =====
> >>> 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/
> >>>
> >
> > --
> > "Weirdness abounds and shatters our illusion of order. Heh-heh. All the
> > dust is being blown out from under the carpet. Wonderful stuff!"
> >
> > Wanda Hamilton-Quinn
> >
> >

--
"Weirdness abounds and shatters our illusion of order.  Heh-heh.  All the
dust is being blown out from under the carpet. Wonderful stuff!"

Wanda Hamilton-Quinn



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Nov 13 2000 - 10:57:34 EST