Re: Sheep (Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] tv and thinking)

From: Tay Arrow Sherman <tay_at_anatomyofhope.net>
Date: Thu Dec 8 15:24:00 2005

Word. The Sudbury model lines up with me politically in terms of the
fact that it is a framework of resources that can be used freely by its
participants as they see fit. Depending on how you look at this, it can
be considered either a liberal value or a conservative one, either a
big government value or a small government value... and equally rightly
so.

It's a delight to find a common ground that transcends the highly
binary political spectrum we've developed in the United States.

  I've befriended so many people, otherwise my political opposites,
because we both believed in either the Sudbury model or at least had a
common ground of preferring home-, free-, or un-schooling over public,
parochial, or traditional private schooling. It's a real eye-opener,
especially if you live in the kind of political vacuum where almost
everyone you know agrees with you and the one person who you know
personally who doesn't agree with you is somehow easy to discredit
without examination. It's kind of like doing a study abroad, to leave
that vacuum. :)

Respect for the ideas of others pretty much needs to be absolute... and
needs to include a lot of sentences like "I totally disagree, can you
please explain how it's possible that anyone would really think that?"
It's at the moment when you find the other person's ideas the most
shocking and/or incomprehensible that the flag goes up letting you know
there's something to be learned and you had better give it a go!

I read somewhere, when I was attending SVS, about a psychological
exercise where you remove absolute verbs like "is" and "are" from your
vocabulary for a day, replacing them with subjective words such as
"appears" and "seems". Like:

The carpet is red.
The carpet looks red to me.

Because really, it's the light and your eyes that make the red colour
happen. Likewise, it's the light and your eyes that make openness and
freedom seem like they could ever belong to any particular institution.

Regards,
Tay

On 8 Dec, 2005, at 12.33, Woty wrote:

>
> On Dec 8, 2005, at 8:22, Jesse Gallagher wrote:
>
>> My apologies to any who were offended by my naked contempt for the
>> current occupants of the White House.
>
> That's not what offended me.
>
>>
>> It honestly never occurred to me that supporters of choice-based,
>> non-coercive, participatory democratic schooling would also support
>> George W. Bush and his administration.
>
> This is what bothered me. I think it shows a very deep misconception
> about the model.
>
> Sudbury schools have students from all over the political spectrum. A
> staff member who believed that all Republican students are brainwashed
> morons and that if they were *really* free then they'd come to agree
> with the staff member is not really capable of acting respectfully or
> taking the attitude a staff member needs to take. It's not acceptable
> at all for staff members to have educational agendas for the students,
> and it is not acceptable for a staff member to have ongoing personal
> contempt for students who are upstanding members of the school
> community.
>
> Contempt for their views is another matter. It's entirely possible to
> regard a student's views as reprehensible without dehumanizing the
> student or taking it upon oneself to change the school environment
> such that the student comes to agree with one's preferred viewpoint.
>
> ~Woty
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list
> Discuss-sudbury-model_at_sudval.org
> http://www.sudval.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/discuss-sudbury-model
>
>
-Tay

---------------------------------------------------

http://www.tayarrowsherman.com/
http://www.olio-academy.com/

---------------------------------------------------
Received on Thu Dec 08 2005 - 15:23:53 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:13 EDT