Re: DSM: students rights

From: Ardeshir Mehta, N.D. (ardeshir@sympatico.ca)
Date: Wed Jan 23 2002 - 12:46:23 EST


Hello folks,

Re. the following from Travis:

> It is no piece of cake just
> because you "believe" in the philosophies to see your child at age 12 you
> cannot read. Keep in mind, this is not a judgment. I am simply posing a
> hypothetical scenario. While I am not a parent, and certainly cannot imagine
> what it is like, I acknowledge that it must be difficult at times to really
> buy into the philosophies 100%!
> Because, specifically, those philosophies very clearly postulate that
> even if a child cannot read at age 12, that it would be wrong for the school
> to intervene in any way.

I think that one has to keep a certain amount of perspective on
such things, and use one's common sense.

For suppose that instead the following statement had been made:

> ... those philosophies very clearly postulate that
> even if a child cannot TALK at age 12, that it would be wrong for
> the school to intervene in any way.

... or:

> ... those philosophies very clearly postulate that
> even if a child cannot WALK at age 12, that it would be wrong for
> the school to intervene in any way.

... then we would clearly say that such is NOT the philosophy of
the school. We all realise that as a normal thing, at age 12 people
walk and talk: and if they don't, then there's something going on
which stridently cries out for treatment.

The question is where to draw the line. Is a person who at age 12
cannot do non-Euclidean geometry "pathological"? Of course not.

I think the answer should be, not what the person CAN or
CANNOT do at any particular age, but whether the person
WANTS to do something but can't. If the 12-year-old WANTS to
read but can't, surely something needs to be done. If on the other
hand, he or she couldn’t care less, why bother? One can learn to
read at a later age: life is long!

But even here some common sense is required. If at age 12 someone
wants to do non-Euclidean geometry but can't, and as a result feels
awfully frustrated and if it takes the joy out of their lives, shouldn't
we try and calm them down, saying that it is still early days, and
that there's always time for non-Euclidean geometry later on in life?

And even with the 12-year-old who CAN'T (or doesn't WANT to)
read, one should also ask oneself: "What CAN they do?" and
"What does he WANT to do?" -- rather than the opposite.

Because suppose the young chap (or lassie) is great at painting, or
photography, or playing the violin, or driving go-carts and winning
every single race into which s/he enters: what does it matter, then,
that s/he can't or won't read? S/He could easily make a living doing
something which doesn't call for reading.

For it is every parent's wish, I am sure, that the kid will grow up
able to take care of himself/herself economically. If it begins to
appear that this may not be possible, then the parent starts to
worry. This, too, is natural, and only requires common sense to
figure out.

Best wishes,

Ardeshir <http://homepage.mac.com/ardeshir/AllMyFiles.html>.

===========

If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
majordomo@sudval.org (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 http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 19:39:49 EST