On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Joe Jackson wrote:
> Scott writes:
> > I'm forced to ask myself what could possibly be the
> > value of a diploma which is _not_ an endorsement of the
> > holder given at the end of an evaluation.
> An endorsement of the *intitution* and a statement of trust in the
> process by which the holder came to the completion of her time there.
I can't really picture anyone, who cares about whether or
not a person has a diploma, caring one way or another
whether a school that the person attended endorsed its own
methods. Presumably, any/every institution endorses itself
and its own methodology.
If you think that an internal accreditation of the school is
valuable, why not just do _that_ and call it accreditation,
rather than disguising it as a diploma?
-- --Scott David Gray reply to: email@example.com http://www.unseelie.org/ ============================================================ But this *long run* is a misleading guide to current affairs. *In the long run,* we are all dead.
-- John Maynard Keynes ============================================================
If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO firstname.lastname@example.org (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the following phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing "email@example.com" with the email address that you subscribed under:
unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model firstname.lastname@example.org
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 http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 19:39:48 EST