RE: [Discuss-sudbury-model] RE: "setting limits"

From: Alan Klein <>
Date: Mon Oct 30 11:51:01 2006

Hi Scott David (et al),

I guess what makes the second alternative less desirable as a first choice
are two things:

1. It leaves out (or at least bypasses or postpones until the JC process
occurs) the human to human dialog and debate that typify healthy
communities, especially in the gray areas. For example, I may be jumping on
the couch and believing that I am well within the rules of the school, as I
have not thought out the long-term ramifications of wear and tear on the
couch. If you just write me up without talking to me first, I will continue
to jump, which may cause the couch to break. Also, I lose the opportunity to
be influenced by, and learn from, you as you let me know why you believe my
actions violate the school property rule.

2. This leads to the second - clogging the JC. It is certainly possible,
even likely, that I would be influenced by you and stop my behavior, thereby
eliminating the need for a JC complaint.

Remember, this is all predicated on Wendy's second option being used as an
avenue of first resort. If you (or others) have already discussed your
concerns with me and I continue the behavior, then certainly I see less
downside to simply writing a complaint, with no discussion.

~Alan Klein

-----Original Message-----
On 10/30/06, Alan Klein <> wrote:
> In reality, depending on context and history, I could see the staff member
> (or any member of the School Meeting) doing any of those things. I would
> hope that no one would do the second of the actions unless they had
> exhausted one and three, but it would be their choice, I suppose.

From: Scott David Gray
     What is wrong with Wendy's second alternative ("just keep going
about their business and file the complaint")? In our school (Sudbury
Valley) there are often staff and students alike, who feel that there
are times and places that it is important to let the school's judicial
processes handle something, and that one's own business at that moment
may be more pressing than stopping to cajole others in order to avoid
a complaint.
     Very often, School Meeting members here don't feel that asking
people to stop has *any* bearing at all on whether a complaint should
be filed. (Though, in sentencing, there may be a difference between
how people are sentenced for a complaint that reads "X was
roughhousing on a couch," "X was roughhousing on a couch and didn't
stop when asked," and "X was roughhousing on a couch and failed to
stop when asked.")
Received on Mon Oct 30 2006 - 11:50:51 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:15 EDT