Marko Koskinen (marko@vapaus.net)
Fri, 23 Mar 2001 22:49:56 -0500
Joe wrote:
> Am I concerned that the casual newcomer will read your list of norms and
> assume that those are community norms encountered in the Sudbury model?
> Yes. Do I think that your list of norms was designed to paint "norms" per
> se in a negative light? Certainly. So do I think your biased list of norms
> provides a reasonable premise on which to base a discussion of community
> rulemaking? No way. For every silly norm you post I can post ten that you
> and I rely on to survive and thrive.
That's why I didn't say that people should fight against norms, but to
fight against _irrational_ norms. I explained this more precisely in my
previous post so I wont write about it more here.
> But none of this means your conversations are out of place, it just means
> that folks have to first agree with your premises and assertions about the
> model as it exists now before they can even begin to consider your
> alternatives, and I for one feel like I have questioned many of your
> assertions about the model without hearing any responses from you. I know
> you're probably busy up there, but I can't follow your "chain of deduction"
> if the first link is broken...
I'm sorry that you couldn't follow my reasoning but I've just felt that
you've totally misunderstood what I've been saying and because some
other people have also misunderstood I've tried to explain more rather
that tell again and again "I think you've misunderstood here...". I just
find it too frustrating. I'm also trying to figure out what's the best
alternative for us in Finland and my mind keeps changing every now and
then. That's why I think it's better not to argue very heavily against
me but rather argue for the things that you think are better. I don't
know if people have really much argued against me, but it feels like it.
> > If so, I'm very puzzled that what people here (IYO)
> > _should_ be discussing... And I still argue that what I've proposed all
> > can be implemented in a Sudbury Model School without braking the
> > underlying philosophy, unless people see democratic decision making and
> > the JC as essential parts of a Sudbury Model School.
>
> Either:
>
> 1) you and I disagree as to what "democratic decision-making" means, OR
>
> 2) I *do* see democratic decision-making as an essential component of the
> Sudbury Model.
>
> I see "democratic decision-making" loosely defined as a process in which the
> majority makes decisions. Hopefully that majority is a unanimous majority,
> but lack of unanimity does not exclude a decision-making process from being
> described as democratic, in my view.
>
> How do you define "democratic decision-making"?
Pretty much the same way as you do. I've just misunderstood the Sudbury
Model. I haven't really thought that democratic decision making would be
cruisal in it. Because if it is, I think that's a clear agenda, to teach
democratic decision making. And because I believe that it's a common
agreement that Sudbury Model doesn't have an agenda, then there's a
conflict. I was kind of thinking that the idea of Sudbury Model was
about equality and freedom of children. Well, it seems it isn't. I guess
the homepage actually states it clearly: "an education at Sudbury Valley
is also an education in hands-on democracy".
But I guess we cannot really say what is a Sudbury Model school and what
is not, because there is no such authority who can say that except maybe
Sudbury Valley School Meeting or the Assembly. That's because the SM has
the power to change the way the school operates. This is stated clearly
in the by-laws of the Sudbury Valley School Inc. as follows:
"...maintains a flexible structure which, while being free to adhere to
valid traditional forms, will be also free to create new ones." (Article
II, Purposes).
If there is some higher power than the corporate by-laws, then I'd like
to hear about that. And according to the by-laws, everything I've
suggested, can be included in a Sudbury Model, or even in the Sudbury
Valley School. So I guess that's the end of that discussion...
A totally different question is wheter what I've suggested is rational
or not.
Marko
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:17:17 EST