Advertisement
The Edutopia Poll
by Sara Bernard
The free-school movement, having gotten its foothold in the United States in the 1960s and '70s, is enjoying a recent upsurge in popularity. Based on the premise that children learn better if they are self-directed rather than forced to complete assignments, free schools allow students to design their own curricula and daily schedule, have equal status with the staff when it comes to making decisions, and typically take no tests and receive no grades.
Proponents of this method say that real learning happens when students take complete ownership of their education, and that a nurtured sense of curiosity and independence will take them to great heights. Others, however, contend that free schools will work only for highly motivated, privileged students, and may not even work for them -- schools, these critics say, need to have structure, rigor, and assessment capabilities. What do you think about the laissez-faire method of education? We're interested in your opinion.
Bryan Wilkins wrote: "Oh
Submitted by Rebecca Aguilar (not verified) on December 2, 2006 - 18:43.
Bryan Wilkins wrote: "Oh boy! Here it comes again. "Feel good" education has failed badly in the past and will continue to do so–just as it has so recently."
RECENT reforms have included high stakes testing, adequate yearly progress, curriculum control, everything that make education deplorable. This has come at a high cost to true learning.
And, I don't believe the free-school concept qualifies as "feel good" education. The self-direction that is nurtured in this type environment actually has students seeking out more challenging learning activities and tasks.
I am the product of a
Submitted by Michael Mahony (not verified) on November 29, 2006 - 18:55.
I am the product of a "progressive school" (following the John Dewey model). While the curriculum was not designed by the students, the students had a great deal of responsibility for their own learning. Faculty members provided guidence as well as instruction. Students were respected as individuals and their needs and ideas were listened to. Parents completed the tripartate culture that was the school.
Curriculum and the culture it represents that is "handed down" to students seems to foster a passive consumer citizens.
Now, as an educator, I see a tremendous amount of energy devoted to a power struggle between students and anyone in authority (as teachers we play our part). I recognize that no one answer suits all students, but teaching them autonomy and granting them responsibility for an increasing share of their own education would , I beleive, go a long way to making active citizens.
The unfortunate thing is that the alternative schooling is only available as private schooling, leaving the vast majority of children out of the opportunity to develop as autonomous citizens.
I like the second choice
Submitted by Norm Bossert (not verified) on November 29, 2006 - 16:51.
I like the second choice best, but I didn't like the negative comment in it that most students would choose to do nothing. I don't believe that. I believe that the State and School Board in which I work have the expectation that professional educators are responsible for the learning of the students entrusted to us. It is our job to be certain that the public is getting their money's worth fom one and all.
I agree that Free Schools
Submitted by Elizabeth (not verified) on November 29, 2006 - 22:55.
I agree that Free Schools may be too radical. I agree with the fact that students learn better when they want to, but they still learn even when they don't really want to, and with good teachers you can motivate your students to want to learn, or at least try. None of us get to do everything we want to when we want to do it and one big lesson of school is self discipline. I saw that someone else wrote this, and I'm going to repeat it... Finding the middle ground usually does work the best for the majority of situations. So maybe a few people could thrive and excel in such an environment, but I think the average person needs a little more structure.
Why do we assume that older
Submitted by Chuck Fellows (not verified) on November 29, 2006 - 22:07.
Why do we assume that older humans must provide a rigid structures to younger humans?
Why?
Just a question to jolt your thinking. Before we dismiss the child's participation in the development of a future we must reflect on the assumptions supporting our positions.
It appears that every time Alfie Kohn does this he ends up discovering that most of what we believe about educational processes is based on myth! We believe in our current practice to quell our personal fears, not to promote the natural ability to learn.
Free schools might be the catalyst needed to open our minds.
I attend free school and have ever since I graduated college forty years ago. To paraphrase Paul Simon, 'Still learnin' after all these years!'
Oh boy! Here it comes
Submitted by Bryan Wilkins (not verified) on November 29, 2006 - 22:04.
Oh boy! Here it comes again. "Feel good" education has failed badly in the past and will continue to do so--just as it has so recently. One of the reasons for the entrance of the federal government into education. This "free" movement is for lazy teachers and administrators without the will to come to grips with a failing education system. If you do not have to evalute how students are doing, then one can pretend the students are all "excelling". But in truth, no one has a clear idea under a "free" system what the student are learning or to what level. Students need and should have structure and guidence and evaluation of how they are doing. That's how life is. That's how the system in general works.
This was published in the
Submitted by Jerry Mintz (not verified) on November 30, 2006 - 05:59.
This was published in the New York Times today concerning their article last Sunday on unschooling:
To the Editor:
The "unschooling" phenomenon is simply based on a belief that people are natural learners. Unfortunately, the mainstream public school system seems to be based on the opposite premise, that children need to be forced to learn, with forced curriculum, homework and No Child Left Behind standards.
Modern brain research has found that when people are forced to learn things they are not interested in, it tends to extinguish the natural ability and drive to learn. Thus, this second paradigm becomes self-fulfilling.
Since the public school system was created barely 175 years ago, there have always been people who believed that children are natural learners.
I believe that people are indeed natural learners and that unschooling, democratic education and learner-centered education are here to stay and are crucial to our survival in the new millennium.
Jerry Mintz
Director, Alternative Education Resource Organization
Roslyn Heights, N.Y., Nov. 26, 2006
Some children should be
Submitted by Ginger TPLC (not verified) on December 4, 2006 - 06:25.
Some children should be allowed this opportunity. SOME children NEED this type of learning because they are motivated enough and they do have good support at home to get better-than-traditional learning done. Traditional schooling is stifling for these students; they quickly learn--as soon as 2nd grade--how to underachieve and entertain themselves, much to the detriment of the traditional classroom setting and their own self-worth. These students get in trouble frequently and receive an onslaught of "your weird and bad" messages. Of course we then see so many bright people drop out of school mentally by middle school, develop skills gaps, and end up dropping out of school altogehter.
I don't see free school as merely "feel good" unless we're considering that having some say in your destiny lets you feel good about academics, progress, and growth in a somewhat traditional sense. I see these opportunities as being essential for some students and each state and major metro area should have this available for those students/parents.
Somewhat. There are so many
Submitted by Charles Rudiger (not verified) on November 30, 2006 - 21:42.
Somewhat. There are so many variables at work here; age, grade level, maturity, gender, appropriately trained/developed faculty and staff, and a near myriad of other factors. Further, no matter how you feel about testing, Carnegie Units, etc., the pendulum has swung in favor of axtensive and rigorous testing, assessment, accountability--whatever. BTW--the British had a free school movement after WWII; I believe a movie was made about it; I recollect that it was a comedy.
Free schools could only work
Submitted by Debbie Perry (not verified) on November 30, 2006 - 15:26.
Free schools could only work if the curriculum and assessment were data driven. Success has been proven to be achieved when the student is actively involved in the management of their skill-based assessments on a continuous basis. Data, Data, Data... This is how the real world of work is driven in the U.S. as well as within the world economic structure.
Post new comment