Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Encouragment.

From: Marc Kivel <>
Date: Wed Apr 6 09:25:00 2005

Hi, Jennifer.

One of the philosophical problems I have with the
Sudbury model is the treatment of adults (!) in the
community. While the conventional school model of
youth subordinate to adults is objectionable for a
number of moral and ethical reasons, I am concerned
that youth may not always fully appreciate the
ramifications of removing a staffer.

In my model, I have built in a safeguard to lessen the
need for dismissals in the form of a Warden Team for
each Staffer. The Team, consisting of a Trustee and
two current Learners appointed by the Weekly Meeting,
provides oversight and a feedback channel for the
community to the Staffer and acts as the Staffer's
advocate within the School community. In this manner,
issues should be identified and resolved BEFORE they
end up on the Agenda for a School Meeting.

The issue of accepting families who are not fully
supportive of the school's design to generate income
is the bane of all private schools. One alternative
is to make the school "for-profit." Another might be
to set a probation clause into full Assembly and
Meeting membership - perhaps full voting priveleges
are not extended until after a family/learner has been
enrolled for a probationary period? This should allow
the family/learner a chance to see if the school is a
good fit before they begin using the school's
democratic institutions to modify the school to fit
another vision.
And yes, Learning Differenced learners are becoming a
mainstay of private schools in the Dallas area - and
even among the private schools, some become preferred
because they cater to learning differenced learners
but being parochial they avoid the "stigma" of being
called "special schools for special kids"....

Too bad parents care more about labels than they do
about learning...

Received on Wed Apr 06 2005 - 09:24:33 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:11 EDT