11 ms·

Sudbury Valley Schools are the gold standard as far as I can tell from my research. (I spent a number of years as an education/students rights activist; built a

• ionforce 10y ago
  What if students (or whoever in a power sharing dynamic) are making decisions that are bad for them? How do you veto a bad decision?
  • GuiA 10y ago
    I've also worked a fair amount with "alternative" educational structures, albeit in a different country (France). In those kind of pedagogies (mostly Freinet for me), the adults ultimately do have a veto power. However, when you give kids responsibility, something funny happens - you find that they tend to become very reasonable, and you very rarely have to use veto power. More often than not, it's more renegotiation ("We can't do that today because of X, but what about tomorrow?") than true veto. And provided that you explain things clearly and don't disregard their intelligence, the kids typically agree readily. Teenagers can be a little more argumentative, but the group is actually very good at taking care of the teenager or two who like to say dumb things just to create a reaction (one of the many reasons why a lot of Freinet implementations like to start and end each day with a group "forum").
    • agmcleod 10y ago
      On a podcast, a father with a younger daughter kinda dislikes the amount of homework she has to do. Wants to let her have time to be a dumb kid. He tried not bossing her about her homework, told her it was up to her to try. He said she was really on top of it. Managed it quite well.
    • sandworm101 10y ago
      How do you deal with the students who outsmart teachers? A lack of rule sets would seem an open field for students to manipulate the adults in the room. One of my friend's daughters is vicious at this. At 14, for a "career and personal planning" project, she stated career her goal as "porn star" and somehow wrangled a skype interview with a 19yo "mentor" in the biz. She has no intention on following this path, but loves how it drives teachers up the wall. "If billy can want to be a soldier and kill people, then I should be allowed to pursue my dream too." She's a perfectly normal girl, but once she identifies an authority figure as weak she turns them into toys. Put her in a free environment and I'd expect resignation letters within the week.
      • kirushik 10y ago
        Doesn't that lady have a gift worth cultivating? I'm not joking, by the way — finding weak points and exploiting them can make you a good novelist, intelligence officer, crisis manager... I condole with her teachers, at the same very time.
      • jostylr 10y ago
        In Sudbury Schools, there are plenty of rules. If a student broke the rules, their would be a jury of their peers and a sentence to follow out. If she wanted to stay at the school, she would accept it all and acclimate. Sometimes it takes a few weeks, sometimes a few months. Someone who ignores our system of justice would be expelled. It happens. It all depends on whether she wants to be in this environment or not. Most people want to be, but not all. If she lasted long enough to understand that she could be heard by being her real self, then she would probably stay. But it can take a long time to get through the toxic layers some students have built up over the years.
        • sandworm101 10y ago
          >> Someone who ignores our system of justice would be expelled. It happens. I hope they don't read Lord of the Flies. I'm not sure that I would want a group of teens, especially peers, to judge me on anything. Didn't Trek TOS also cover this in the episode on the planet without adults?
  • jostylr 10y ago
    I work at Arts&Ideas Sudbury School in Baltimore, 8 years old at this point. I have been with them for two years. There is no veto. There is simply discussing the issue and revisiting it if necessary. While it is always possible that a disastrous decision will be made, anecdotally, it seems to be exceedingly rare. Students want the school to succeed. They want to be safe and respected. When you start from those places, bad decisions rarely happen if someone points out why they are bad. Of course, like any group, we may all think a decision is good when, in fact, it is bad. But if someone has a good view or argument, everyone listens. I have learned that democracy is not about voting. True democracy is listening and being heard. It is a bit like in Buddhism and how simply witnessing and acknowledging emotions will often lead the way to a good outcome. The absolute core of the school is accepting, without question, that each student is responsible for themselves. Once everyone really gets that, bad intentions melt away. It is important to have a strong environment for students to experience mutual respect. Starting a Sudbury School is very difficult. But once it starts, as long as a small percentage of new students is added at a time, they will acclimate to the environment and accept the idea of balancing the needs of the many with the needs of the one which is ultimately the balancing act that we all must struggle with. On many occasions, students have come to School Meeting with a rule that staff did not like. Sometimes during the discussion the staff have their minds changed. Other times, the student might change their mind. Still other times, the rule gets passed and the staff come to see that it is a perfectly good rule. We also have a jury-style system (Judicial Committee) for rules. It is a body that the staff turn over the responsibility of adjudicating rule breaking and sentence making to. When some students make a mess (no cure for that, I am afraid) and I feel angry, I go and write them up. My anger passes and by the next day, I am okay with whatever our JC comes up with. It is generally fair and equitable. Students almost always plead guilty if they did it, but if they did not do it, they will certainly say so. And we all get to suggest a sentence, but the members of JC decide on what it will be. They debate thoughtfully and generally rule wisely. I have seen plaintiffs ask to drop a case while defendants ask to keep it. They want to admit to wrong doing and move past it. There is no shame, just lessons to be learned. It is the most humane and fun environment I have ever been in. Students learn how to be part of a community, how to accept responsibility for themselves, and how to learn. They may or may not learn academics; it is their choice. Academics, it turns out, is rather easy to acquire for children coming from a place of empowerment and respect. To grow up accepted is a powerful foundation to accomplish anything.
• futuravenir 10y ago
  Are you familiar with Agile Learning Centers? I'd love to hear your thoughts on these. http://agilelearningcenters.org http://agilelearningcenters.org
• specialist 10y ago
  Thanks for the link, thanks for your efforts. I'll definitely read up on sudval.org. "They are fully democratic and focus on producing empowered self directed citizens..." Word. I've run democratic teams. The empowerment is real. I can't explain it; it feels like magic. Those experiences have transmuted me into a full throated advocate for democracy. Democracy, in its multitude of forms, is very much a technology. Just like arabic numerals, management, offset type, etc. "No grades or grade levels..." I'm hoping your sudval.org link says something about achievement models for education, as an alternative to testing regimes and grades. My son is an Eagle Scout. He wasn't a very good K-12 student, but he rocked the Scouts. That achievement is largely self-directed, but also structured with concrete outcomes. With plenty of mentoring both up and down. I wonder why learning can't be more like that?
  • colejohnson66 10y ago
    > I wonder why learning can't be more like that? Money. There isn't enough of it. America would rather spend it on other "more important" things.
    • ende 10y ago
      Funding is not the silver bullet to a better education system that many would like it to be. Misguided reliance on systemstic top-down reform, conflicting interests of education providers and their agents, and the immovable inertia of traditional institutions are far greater enemies to the unrealized potential of new educational paradigms. Among the multiple dimensions of human experience that technology is currently disrupting and reinventing, education should be at the forefront. Instead it is held hostage by the special interests of the current education system, which are reinforced by their entrenchment within the state. Much must change before a new system can be realized. The problem is not that we aren't buying enough education; it's that we're being sold a counterfeit.
    • ef4 10y ago
      That's simply not true. Per student spending in the US is among the highest in the world. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp We just blow it on administration-heavy bureaucracies and demonstrably failed methods.
• superobserver 10y ago
  This is really cool. It reminds me of what happened to me when I turned 15 and my family was first able to afford a computer and an internet connection. I basically started teaching myself all kinds of stuff (e.g., physics, mathematics, philosophy, etc.). Self-directed learning can take you really far, but it isn't right for everyone: mostly individuals who can truly direct themselves and have the kinds of interests that are condusive to broad understanding and knowledge. The problem I had with the educational system in my time (about 20 years ago) is computer knowledge wasn't taken seriously, so I missed out on having some guidance to push me towards my ultimate interest - electronics, computers, programming, things in tech. Of course, I still like knowing about a lot of other things, but school really doesn't grab your interests. Ideally, it should be setup so students can capitalize on areas of interest. On second thought, if computer and tech knowledge had been made available to me early on, I probably wouldn't have had the life course in the educational system that I did. Depressing to think about. Best of luck and I hope it is legitimately successful for the students.
  • technomancy 10y ago
    > Self-directed learning can take you really far, but it isn't right for everyone: mostly individuals who can truly direct themselves and have the kinds of interests that are condusive to broad understanding and knowledge. I agree with the sentiment here, but I wonder if it wouldn't be more accurate to say it would be for everyone, except that some people have already had their natural driven curiosity ground out of them by sour experiences at school or poor home life prior to getting the change to try this.
    • superobserver 10y ago
      >some people have already had their natural driven curiosity ground out of them by sour experiences at school or poor home life prior to getting the change to try this. Somehow I find that extraordinarily unlikely, but I suppose it is possible. From my experience and what I've seen in other people, it's never that the curiosity in them gets pounded out of them, rather it is that they're not ideally granted the opportunities to capitalize on their curiosities.
  • 10y ago
• hunter_n 10y ago
  Reminds me of an experimental school my grandparents had started in Australia around the Second World War. Unstructured lessons in nature and student involvement in decision making. Sadly it had to close due to lack of funding at the end of the war. There is a short documentary made before closing showing the student parliament and school life - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg7TJ2WRndM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg7TJ2WRndM
• mordant 10y ago
  >They are fully democratic and focus on producing empowered self directed citizens who understand how to share limited resources and cooperate. The more pertinent question is whether the citizens they produce can read and write, know how to multiply and divide, can name the parts of speech, and have at least a passing notion of the history and culture of their respective countries, regions, and locales. Somehow, I doubt it.
  • barry-cotter 10y ago
    > The more pertinent question is whether the citizens they produce can read and write, know how to multiply and divide, can name the parts of speech, and have at least a passing notion of the history and culture of their respective countries, regions, and locales. They learn how to read and write. Children are learning machines. They figure out how to do things that are a lot more complicated than learning how to read and write using an alphabet in a culture saturated with writing. A guy I know here in Shanghai has a Taiwanese mother and an American father. He went to American schools all the way through his education. He can read Chinese perfectly, and write when he's using a phone or computer though his handwriting is quite limited. Another guy I know whose parents speak German to him grew up in Ireland and was educated through English. His spelling and grammar when writing in German is not great but he has never studied German other than as a foreign language for an easy grade, nor has he ever lived in a German speaking country. John Taylor Gatto has written that he can teach a 9 year old to read in 40 contact hours. People learn to perform quite complicated mathematical operations in the course of their lives, through experience. If you're interested in this there's a lot of research on unschooled children. Street children who buy and sell things learn all the mathematical skills they need in their lives, which is most of what most people need. Knowing the parts of speech is almost perfectly useless. It has no effect on how well one writes, not even for people who are writing in a language they learned after adolescence. The only things that research shows improving writing are practice and critique. People learn about their culture by living in it. Ditto for their history. As someone with way above average historical knowledge I can also say that history education through at least middle school is worthless. It's pre digested pap with no acknowledgment of nuance or shades of gray.
    • 10y ago
• yitchelle 10y ago
  Does the schools have an entrance examination to see if their teaching methods would be suitable, and therefore, have a better chance of success? Don't get me wrong, entrance exams for the right reasons are good because it allows for a good fit between student and school. Of course, this assuming that there are more than one style of schooling available.