Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] sudbury/summerhill

From: mbi <mbi_at_joy.ocn.ne.jp>
Date: Tue Feb 25 17:20:01 2003

I don't think Neill's point was democracy, it was freedom. Freedom to play,
freedom to not learn what they didn't want to learn, freedom to govern
themselves, freedom from adult domination...

It sounds like SVS has taken the idea further, in terms of what can be
decided at school meetings, and freedom to learn in an unschooling way, but
didn't all of this come out of the original idea of Summerhill's of having
democratic meetings in the first place?

Frankly, I found Scott's reply rather arrogant!

Alison Miyake

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Klein" <alan_at_klein.net>
To: <discuss-sudbury-model_at_sudval.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] sudbury/summerhill

> I don't disagree with anything Scott says here. I would say however,
Scott,
> that you had the advantage of reading Summerhill AFTER you had been a part
> of SVS. For most of us old-timers, Summerhill was a glimpse into a new
> possibility and provided us with lots of guidance and vision as we forged
> our own philosophies.
>
> ~Alan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott David Gray" <sgray_at_sudval.org>
> > When I was 14, I read Summerhill, and I was stunned
> > (and frankly disappointed) by how undemocratic Summerhill
> > seemed to be in Neill's _own_ words. <snip>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list
> Discuss-sudbury-model_at_sudval.org
> http://www.sudval.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/discuss-sudbury-model
Received on Tue Feb 25 2003 - 17:19:01 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:05 EDT