Rick Stansberger (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:55:55 -0700
Robert Swanson wrote:
> Absolutely (see Bruce's statement below), Sudbury is such a different
> paradigm that this round peg won't fit into the square hole of public or
> institutional education.
I respecfully disagree. The only thing that makes public education public
education is its source of funding: the public pays for it through taxes.
Everything else is just a question of method. For instance, you can have public
schools that aren't compulsory. You can have public Waldorf or Montessori
schools. Why not? The notion of freedom is antithetical to the current factory
model (which you can find in both public and private schools), but you can have
freedom in a publicly funded institution. Look at recreation centers.
Tax-funded sudschools are possible. It would just take incredible restraint on
the part of legislators raising the money and bureaucrats doling it out. They
would have to lay off notions like "accountability," and trust the parents,
students and staff to run the individual buildings. A highly unlikely situation,
I admit, but theoretically possible.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Nov 12 2000 - 19:48:15 EST