Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Re: Desperadoes

From: Hughes <>
Date: Sat Apr 29 09:13:00 2006

I went to an extremely structured religious private high school. We always
had a few students in each class whose families had private school-hopped.
Parents were seeking some place, any place, that would help them with their
teenager's behavior problems. I think that it is normal to have a mixture
of reasons for trying a school. Desperados most assuredly have very good
reasons for being in their state of mind. I met this pediatrician once who
said to me that he had never seen a child with ADHD, but he had seen plenty
of parents who needed to be tranquilized. The profound acceptance that I
have seen offered to the students at SVS over the years while students "work
it out" is inspiring, both from the staff and the student body. Freedom is
a daunting responsibility. The power that it evokes from the students at
SVS is hard to adequately put into words. Where there is power being
unleashed, especially with the awesome energy of teenagers, there are going
to be bumps and slides.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynanne Fowle" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Re: Desperadoes

> I'm starting a democratic school in North Carolina, but have spent the
> last
> 3 years running a charter high school in which we had many "desperados."
> But like any other classification of children, desperados came in many
> sizes
> and shapes, and we were able to "save" many more of them than we let go.
> For
> students who have been damaged by the public school system, especially
> those
> that came to us in their teens with plenty of bad experiences behind them,
> it sometimes takes a long time for them to "deschool" and find value in
> the
> educational environment.
> In many cases, the SVS model would have been very beneficial for them
> because it allows them the freedom to chart their own course -- in many
> cases for the first time. The charter school environment, although better
> than traditional schools for children who can't cope with the intense
> structure, still wasn't perfect because the state requires tons of
> coursework before they will certify a diploma. Many of my kids needed to
> have positive experiences and find their niche before they could
> concentrate
> on "schoolwork" and a career focus, and we barely had time to make that
> happen.
> But, in my experience, if your staff is compassionate and your school is
> centered around the primary value of personal respect, it won't matter if
> you are a small school or a big school, because even desperado children
> are
> children and are usually just looking for an environment where people take
> them seriously and they can have some control over their lives. If you
> stay
> true to your mission and not waver once you open the doors (and
> continuously
> reinforce your values through your school meetings and communication with
> parents/community), you will be successful regardless of who attends.
> It is also my experience that the parents are usually more of a problem
> than
> their children in some of these "desperado" cases, because their own
> experience has been more traditional, but you can be very firm with them
> about what your school does and does not do and then just let the children
> "deschool" at their own pace and find their own way. The other issue we
> ran
> into was board members who wanted to change the charter school's mission
> because they thought we were TOO compassionate and TOO respectful of our
> students, but that's another story entirely! :)
> Thanks,
> Lynanne Fowle
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [] On Behalf Of Richard
> Berlin
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 1:57 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Re: Desperadoes
> Wasn't there a conflagration, early in the history of Sudbury Valley,
> caused in part by a significant number of students who enrolled
> expecting something closer to anarchy than democracy? I don't see how
> it can be wrong to admit that the Sudbury culture can be spoiled by an
> excess of individuals who enroll without due consideration about
> whether they are able to commit to the basic tenets. Neither does it
> seem wrong to point out that a fledgling school is both (a) more
> susceptible to this harm than a large, stable school, and (b) less
> likely to make the hard choice of enrolling only students/families who
> can make the requisite commitment to the model.
> And it is fair to label it as "failure" if a student leaves after a
> couple of years? The pattern--of individuals who are severely damaged
> by other schools coming to a Sudbury school and staying only a short
> time--is certainly not something that is isolated to Cedarwood. E.g.
> the concluding paragraph to Daniel Greenberg's essay on "Why Sudbury
> Valley School Doesn't Work For Everyone: Real Learning Disabilities"
> seems to describe exactly the same thing:
>> Let me conclude by addressing the question of why Sudbury Valley isn't
>> for everyone. The answer is that Sudbury Valley is for everybody in a
>> stable, self-sustaining, post-industrial society where everyone is on
>> board. It's not a special kind of school for special kids. It's really
>> a place where people in their natural state can flourish. But because
>> there are so many real disabilities that exist during this transition
>> period in history, the full benefits of the school are basically
>> available only to mavericks, to those who haven't sustained a lot of
>> damage that's made them incapable of living in their evolutionary
>> natural state. To be sure, a lot of people who have sustained some
>> damage, if they stick it out, seem to get considerable benefit from
>> being here. That's more than a little consolation. In a sense, they
>> get a glimpse of the Promised Land, like Moses on the top of Mount
>> Nebo, just before he died. He looked at the Promised Land and then he
>> died. They get a view of what the school is about, and then they move
>> on. We often hear that from former students, even those who have been
>> here a very short time. It's our hope that as these benefits become
>> more widely recognized and accepted, the whole culture will adapt, and
>> the disabilities and damages will fade away.
> -- Rich
> On Apr 28, 2006, at 5:06 PM, Tay Arrow Sherman wrote:
>> Hi, Stuart--
>> I'm saddened to think that someone on this list would encourage anyone
>> from turning away or avoiding students such as myself from schools
>> such as the one it took me more than ten years to convince anyone I
>> needed. No wonder your "desperadoes" left and failed... I'd be
>> uncomfortable at best with any organisation that regarded me as a
>> "problem" due to circumstances in my life over which I had no control.
>> Cheers,
>> Tay Arrow Sherman, SVS alum, desperado class of 1996
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> . | "But there must be a way | .
> (i) | To have our children say: | (%)
> CC @ 33 | | CC @ 33
> (e) (:) | 'There are so many colors in a rainbow | (?) (})
> ` \ ' | So many colors in the morning sun | ` \ '
> | | So many colors in a flower | |
> \ | / | And I see every one.'" | \ | /
> \|/ | | \|/
> ~~~~~ | -- Harry Chapin, "Flowers are Red" | ~~~~~
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/326 - Release Date: 4/27/2006
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/326 - Release Date: 4/27/2006
Received on Sat Apr 29 2006 - 09:12:42 EDT

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