Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Scientific SVS

From: Ann Ide <>
Date: Tue Jan 24 19:52:00 2006


I love what you wrote, here. It moved me. I think I'll share it with

Thank you,

Mark Ide
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Evan Hughes" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 10:06 PM
Subject: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Scientific SVS

> After having been in many philosophical discussions over the years
> about the Sudbury model, I have found one common direction in each case,
> and that is, the discussion quickly turns in to a debate about the meaning
> of life...
> SVS, is a school that allows children to grow in to who they are.
> Their genetic potential, if you wish a scientific term. Human potential is
> not measurable by science. It never has been.
> There are stories of grandmothers lifting cars off of children, people
> who survive diseases that are terminal, graduate school alumni that are
> poor as dirt and grade school drop outs that are rich as a sultan. Nazi
> prisoners that have found peace, and middle income families at war with
> one another. SVS is about the human spirit allowed to be made manifest in
> all it's wondrous forms.
> So the simple question becomes: Can you really measure life? Can you
> measure happiness?
> What is the point of school? Answer: To empower children (ultimately
> we can all agree on that one point, even in the traditional mindset of
> school.)
> OK. Empower children to do what? Answer: To.... ah..... live I
> guess.
> OK, so what is living?
> By the way, don't even think of trying the "living is contributing to
> society so we can measure what they have given to the culture" rap. If it
> where possible to measure that, then it would have to be true that women
> sat on their buts and did nothing to shape the world/cultures until the
> 1950's! NICE TRY...
> How can we possibly measure what it is that we are trying to
> accomplish, when it is not really possible to define.
> Behind all aspects of the Sudbury model must be trust in the innate
> wisdom that runs life. This innate wisdom is smarter then us, and as such,
> we are not qualified to judge it or measure it. To do so, would result in
> failure.
> I believe that scientifically studying Sudbury schools is only useful
> in marketing and one should be careful to use the results in any other
> way; to model, change or evaluate the effectiveness of a school for
> example.
> Trust, not judgment.
> Evan
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list
Received on Tue Jan 24 2006 - 19:51:07 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:14 EDT