Upon rereading I can see that I prefaced my statement pretty clearly by
stating that it is my belief; since beliefs are by definition subjective,
I'm wondering what in the name of Heraclitus lead you to post.
Second point is that I find the idea that subjectivity per se lessens the
meaning held within a statement or idea to be a kinda science-worship wierd,
you know. Especially in light of the fact that if we had the Moderator
enable the subjectivity filter on this list, all that would be left would be
the binary crickets chirping.
Seriously, maybe rethink that one, Liz? - if education was a science, there
would be no discussion about what is the best environment for our children.
It would be obvious and provable. The reality is that all discussions about
education are subjective, and any attempt by someone to inject "objectivity"
into the conversation should set off everyone's bullshit meters instantly!
Regarding the lack of success in understanding my paragraph, I would think
we could all agree that *meaning* is in the eye of the beholder: I have a
set of experiences that leads me to think that hard boundaries set by their
peers give students a better opportunity to take responsibilites than
curative measures. Period. Nobody said nothin' about no "therapists", just
Now that's what I think, and I'm sorry if I hit some kind of mental-health
occuption nerve! :) But I have a couple of questions for you:
Given that I think conventional schools use therapeutic measures on troubled
students, and that I don't think that's the best thing for students, can you
explain specifically how this idea "cheapens" the Sudbury model of
education, and furthermore how any one person's opinions "cheapen" the
model? What does the word "cheapen" mean to you?
Second, to which "systems and methods" are you referring that are of limited
value to children? Therapeutic systems and methods? Counseling?
> > culture. Having
> > said that, I believe the hard boundaries that an experienced SM school
> > culture uses to protect the school and individuals in it offer a far
> > *better* chance for destructive individuals to come to take
> > responsibility
> > for themselves than cultures that feed them with therapeutic or
> > quasi-therapeutic measures.
> This is just so subjective as to be meaningless.
> All kids are different and all therapists are different. To make
> generalisations like the one above cheapens the value of Sudbury
> schools. Systems or methods are only of limited value in the lives of
> Of course there are some pretty awful excuses for people practicing as
> therapists, but you know what they say, counterfeit coins are only
> accepted because real gold exists.
> If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
> firstname.lastname@example.org with the following phrase in the BODY (not the
> subject) of the message:
> unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model [the-subscribed-email]
> If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent
> is too much,
> you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
> This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
email@example.com with the following phrase in the BODY (not the
subject) of the message:
unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model [the-subscribed-email]
If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too much,
you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:24:29 EST