@boomerang,
Hello again, boomerang.
And thank you for your warm welcome to this discussion . You are too kind.
I’m sorry it’s taken a bit longer to post here than I’d expected, but things rather got away from me yesterday.
I’m not sure, really, that the recollections of my involvement in the alternative school movement in the very late 1970s & the early 80s in Oz will have much relevance to your particular concerns with Mo’s future education alternatives (I confess I have only a hazy understanding of “charter schools”, etc), so this may just be a trip down memory lane for me and little more ...
The impetus for becoming involved in what was then called a “community school” was pretty much the result of my interest the alternative school movement in Oz at the time, which was particularly strong in Melbourne. Those were heady days, indeed!
Anyway, I became frustrated with the limitations (as I saw them) of mainstream schools & decided to explore further. Which lead me to the small (public, not private) community school & I stayed with for 6 years.
There were 10 teachers & 100 (senior high school age only) students. We didn’t have a “principal”, the idea was that all teachers shared all aspects of administration, so we took it in turns to act as school “coordinator”. (I always strenuously resisted the notion of having to take my turn, arguing that I’d make a lousy spokesperson for any organization, but philosophically that was not considered “correct”. Luckily, though, I never got to have to do it. Oh phew!
)
The students came from all walks of life, but initially, quite a high proportion of them came from “professional” families, who were looking for less restrictive or narrow education experiences for their kids. Some of their children simply did not “fit in” to mainstream schools, for a variety of reasons. These parents were very supportive of the philosophical goals of the school & many of them took part in the decision making process & volunteered their time to school activities.
The school was in the very heart of a busy thriving suburb, with easy access to trains & trams, library, town hall, shops, etc .... The idea was to get students out of classrooms, for much of their learning to occur out in the real world & for them to have a much bigger say in what they learned & how they learnt it. In other words, a curriculum which responded to
their needs and interests, rather than one imposed from “above”. With provisions for compulsory “3 R” requirements, too, of course. Though not nearly as regimented as those of mainstream schools at the time.
So the mornings of school days were devote to “3R” activities & the afternoons were "elective” time. When students chose from the selection of activities offered (on a monthly basis).
(this looks like becoming an epic-sized post. Sorry.) ...
Another important part of the school’s philosophy was that all members be part of the decision-making process. Which, though a worthy goal, sometimes drove a few of us quite mad. There were
endless meetings ... a staff meeting one night of every week, a meeting between staff & interested students every week after school, monthly community meeting which all members of the school community could participate in (compulsory for teachers, of course) ..... But, you definitely could not say that that every school member did not have the opportunity to have their say!
A number of students became particularly adept at arguing their cases, I can tell you!
Oh &
assessment! Very important.
The focus was on “process”. What each individual student had achieved in every unit of work they'd participated in.
Numerical assessment or competitive gradings?
Wash your mouth!
At the end of each unit the teacher would write their assessment of the students achievements & the students was required to do the same. You know, this worked amazingly well.
I hope you get the picture.
So what do I think about all of that
now, in the very sobering noughties?
Well first, it amazes me, comparing that experience with the extremely rigid & prescriptive education practices of today, that any government actually
let us run schools like that! It looks almost like some golden,
Camelot time, or something ....
Secondly, I doubt that the students who were educated in that school
suffered as a result of it. I see references to them quite often ... everything from one who became an expert on baking & bread, others who have gone into more fields, and yet others who went on top become musicians, etc ...
What I’m trying to say, is though I fully appreciate that we are living in entirely different cultural , political & economic times now, compared to then, I sincerely believe that there is no good reason for for the education process to have become such a downright restrictive & mind-mumbing experience for so many students. Say nothing of their teachers!
I question why the curriculum has become quite so prescribed & narrow. Whose interests does this actually serve? In my opinion, certainly not quite a number of seriously disengaged students I’ve come across, who are bored rigid & can see no relevance what-so-ever to their studies , apart from “meeting the requirements” imposed on them.
I question why teachers cannot, apparently, be trusted to adapt the existing syllabus requirements to address the needs &the interests of the children in their classrooms. One size does not fit all. I see little virtue in the assessment methods which the education authorities have, in their wisdom imposed on schools. Treating the students as “clients” & requiring teaches to rate their achievements on a scale of 1 to 10.
What does that achieve exactly?
How exactly does this offer any encouragement or hope a student, who may well have made real progress in her/his studies, then to find, according to the “official” assessment of achievement, is “below the expected standard for his/her age”? Not meeting the requirements.
And how does such an assessment impact on the relationship between a struggling student & his/her teacher/s? The teacher might be (in all honestly) telling that student that they have made real progress in their studies. Something to be really proud of. Yet that very same teacher is required to then report that that student is not up to the prescribed “standard” for their age group. Would you blame such a student for becoming discouraged & not responding to their teacher’s encouragement in the future? They might well question their teacher’s integrity.
I feel sorry for both teachers & their students in such circumstances.
Finally, I really question what these rigid standardized prescriptions from education authorities have to do, exactly, with
the process of education.
Education is meant to be an exciting, challenging, enjoyable experience, which at best,
empowers young people to be independent, to think for themselves ... It seems to me that, all too often, schools are required to do just the opposite.
Rant over.
Please don’t misunderstand. I am not suggesting that schools return the good ol days of the education revolution.
It’s more that the real, positive things we learnt from those original alternative education days appear to have been completely lost on the bean counters who control the education experience these days. And I am talking as much about what I see has happened in my own country as to what I read about in yours, boomerang.
hey I think Brats and Brussels sprouts sounds good for supper tonite.