Re: DSM: The homeschool curriculum

From: Scott David Gray (
Date: Sat Dec 08 2001 - 11:32:29 EST

On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 wrote:

> Dear Scott,
> Thank you very much. You write:
> > But, insofar as the school itself does not start it's
> > relationship with a student with a plan for how any given
> > student will unfold -- that there is no "curriculum" which
> > limits or defines the type or sort of information which will
> > be pursued -- the term "school" sometimes misleads
> > people.
> Exactly, the "school" does well by declining to pursue a curriculum or an
> agenda for the child at the start of it's relationship with the child. It
> could do equally well by declining to pursue an agenda or curriculum at the
> end of it's relationship with the child. It could decline to pursue language
> and questions as to whether the child has "prepared themselves to become
> responsible members of the larger community". I would suggest that language
> more suited to the leaving and the ending might be "Thank you, thanks for
> coming".

Indeed, Bill, "thanks for coming, good luck in what you do"
_is_ basically what we do say when people leave. Some
people choose to seek a diploma -- some of whom leave on
receipt of a diploma and some of whom don't -- but the
_diploma_ is given with an eye to the question you mention.

In this, Bill, I agree; the diploma _is_ alien to the heart
of the school. Several students, holding to this position,
have left without seeking a diploma. And I think that an
ever-growing number of persons in our Assembly sense a
contradiction over the diploma. The SVS press has a
publication entitled "The Diploma Debate," in which this
argument is made and explored.

A glimpse at a defense for a diploma in this context: I
think that many who believe that it is OK for a Sudbury
school to offer a diploma, feel that the reason it is OK is
because the school neither endorses nor objects to the idea
of a student seeking a diploma; that letting people choose
whether or not to use the diploma procedure is no more
offensive than letting people choose whether or not to use
the photolab. I admit that I am not quite convinced by this
argument, but the position is not unreasonable.

> Warm Regards,
> Bill Richardson

--Scott David Gray
reply to:
An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called
an idea at all. 

-- Elbert Hubbard ============================================================


If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the following phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing "email@host.dom" with the email address that you subscribed under:

unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model email@host.dom

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 "dsm-digest"

This mailing list is archived at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 19:39:48 EST