Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:53:17 EST
In a message dated 1/31/01 1:18:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
<< I'm thinking there would probably have to be some sort of certification for
explorations outside of the school. The safety issues would be different.
Instead of knowing about the dangers of the pond or bugs, the kids would
be aware of gang members and crime. Things that we all have to be aware of
I'm curious as to how this could work?
Do some schools actually certify people for explorations outside of school?
It seems an unreasonable for schools to be making decisions, on a case by
case basis, as to who is qualified to look after themselves in the world.
At Fairhaven, where we had woods and streams, and icy winters, we didn't
"certify" people to explore them, (on or off campus.) Instead, we made every
effort to be forthright with potential students and their parents about these
and other possible areas of concern.
I think you are right in that there would have to be a great deal of
awareness of the safety concerns particular to an urban setting. Admissions
interviewers would be wise to discuss ome of these in detail with potential
enrollees. My experience is that kids who grow up in cities acquire
street-smarts very early in life, as they are relevant to their survival,
just as kids from any background learn the rules of safety that are relevant
Ultimately, parents need to decide if they think their children can be
responsible for their own well-being, before sending them to any Sudbury
school. For some, this means trusting their children to respect their (the
parents') rules and limits. For others it means trusting the child will make
good decisions on his or her own.
I'm starting to get distracted here. (I have JC in two minutes.) I hope
this is clear.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:16:32 EST