RE: DSM: Interest increasing?


Joe Jackson (shoeless@jazztbone.com)
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 18:01:23 -0500


> My preference is to use the term "democratic schools", as this covers a
> broader range of schools. The key point for me is that the
> participants have
> full authority to run the school. The Highland School (which I helped to
> found in 1981) is one school which does not use the Sudbury
> "label" because
> we started the school before we had heard about SVS.
>
> ~Alan Klein

I have no debate with that, and I don't begrudge schools who are in the
noble business of giving students real control over their schooling.

However I would ask, is Summerhill then not a democratic school insofar as
the students don't have full authority to run the school?

-Joe

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Connie Shaw <ordinary_person@email.msn.com>
> >
> > By this definition, we are a Sudbury school. I was taking care
> not to use
> > that label, because my previous interactions with staff at a Sudbury
> school
> > I visited, and with a founders group in California led me to
> believe that
> > the model included the forms of governance.
> >
> > So, my question now is, is it helpful to use the label? I'd be
> interested
> to
> > hear what people on this list have to say about this. In
> talking to people
> > about the Living School, I find that when I mention Sudbury, very few
> people
> > have heard of it. For those that have, it does offer a good reference
> point
> > for what we're about. For those who haven't, there is the
> possibility that
> > they will look at the SVS website and learn more.
> >
> > Does anyone know why the schools that Joe mentions that apparently *are*
> > Sudbury schools by his definition (New School and Tutorial
> School), choose
> > not to use the label?
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:15:52 EST