Thanks to the several people who posted comments in response to my introductory entry. It seems that my idea of an "educational rights movement" has some appeal, though of course it also raises questions. Let's explore the possibilities together.
For me, the notion of an "educational rights movement" arose from my research on the social movements of the 1960s that gave rise to the free school and homeschooling movements. It is quite clear that the activism of that era was largely inspired by the vision and courage of African-Americans' struggle for legal and social equality --the civil rights movement. I was particularly struck by a statement of Vincent Harding, a theologian who worked with Dr. King and recounted the struggle in his book Hope and History. He said that the civil rights movement should not be understood as simply an effort to gain rights for black people, that in a larger sense it was "a powerful outcropping of the continuing struggle for the expansion of democracy in the United States" and "for the freeing of all of our spirits." This is why it moved so many young people, black, white, and every other color, in the 1960s, and this is essentially what I believe the diverse movements for educational alternatives are about--the expansion of democracy and the freeing of our spirits.
Whether one supports "free" or "democratic" schools, Montessori or Waldorf models, homeschooling, charter schools, progressive ideals in public education, or other alternatives, I think we share these core values: democracy, and freedom of the human spirit. The differences in our teaching styles, classroom design (or lack thereof), choice of educational heroes, and so on are superficial in the context of these fundamental goals. The key question is what we mean by "democracy" and what we mean by "the freeing of our spirits."
For me, democracy means more than personal liberty. It involves a commitment to social responsibility, to collaborative community decision making. Sometimes such cooperation means that we willingly yield some of our personal preferences in order to serve a common good that ultimately serves us as well. (This is the Deweyan/progressive response to standard conservative notions of "liberty" and the "free market.") In his comments on this blog, "CZALE" (who I think is my friend Coop, am I right?), emphasizes liberty as an antidote to overly concentrated power, and while I agree that in many contexts, such as the founding fathers' rebellion against colonial domination, liberty is a "key" value, I think that a holistic understanding of democracy recognizes common purposes and social endeavors in balance with personal autonomy.
As for "the freeing of our spirits," I think this points to the mysterious, active, creative source of human consciousness and experience. Something stirs within each human soul, which cannot be explained by biological, social or psychological categories alone. Many people have definite ideas about what this source is (e.g. Rudolf Steiner's complex and esoteric cosmology), but I don't. I think it's enough to acknowledge that something spiritual, something mysterious, animates our lives, and that a truly good society, and a truly good education, respects this mystery enough to support children and youths to discover and express their own deepest true selves. Although an unschooler does this one way and a Waldorf educator in an entirely different way, can we not agree that their goals are similar, and that they can be allies in a broader movement for human liberation?
So this is the basis for my idea of "educational rights." Ruth's comments (hi Ruth--I'm glad you're connected!) show us that there are still a lot of questions to work out, and I'm interested in people's thoughts.
Finally, I want to thank Jason for his comments. All of his ideas for expanding the movement are important to pursue. Some of us are working to bring the idea of non-authoritarian education to the attention of Bioneers and other "cultural creatives" who have brilliant holistic solutions to many cultural problems but who often seem absolutely clueless about holistic educational alternatives. This could be an ongoing topic of this blog, so please share your thoughts about this issue, too.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Hey Ron...you are correct..."czale" is your friend Coop, who loves any discussion about democracy and freeing our spirits.
I agree with you that democracy involves common purposes and social endeavors in balance with personal autonomy, but I am convinced that its foundation is in the individual's ability to listen and choose to join in these purposes and endeavors. I see democracy as a process, an ongoing never ending process, of working yet again to some sort of consensus, whether of a majority or of all participants.
Common social purpose needs to be compelling enough to freely gain buy in from the individual and not to compell it, even if the majority is in agreement that this is for the individual's own good.
So Ron, what would be an example, in a learning (what you call "educational" setting), of an individual willingly yielding some of their personal preferences in order to serve a common good?
I think you're "rights-on" with the education idea. Although Dostoevsky and perhaps others expressed it earlier, Steiner took up the liberty-equality-brotherhood ideal of the French Revolution and made some sense of it. Rights are political, and that's where equality applies. Liberty is cultural, and educational content and goals belong there. Brotherhood, or solidarity, is economic: that should be focused on meeting our needs.
I find I get some clarity out of these distinctions, and perhaps it will help in your campaign. Especially the connection of liberty to that mysterious something that human beings have, and which education should respect and not impose on, but clear the way.
Thanks, Ron. I got around to starting my blog. Education isn't the only focus, but it's critical to the things I'm thinking about there. (sacredawe.wordpress.com)
I went to school for many years in very controlling environments and given few options to make my own choices about what to learn or how to spend my time. Because of this I have a tendency to overcompensate, emphasising the importance of personal autonomy in education, but I've come to see that liberty, though very important, is not the highest value. I'm critical of the Sudbury Valley model as it seems to unnaturally emphasise the freedom of the individual, with little acknowledgement that the individual is always in relationship with others (influncing and being influenced by others is a part of life.) There is so much value in giving up some freedom to collaborate with a group, but it's understandable that people who have experienced one extreme might be highly critical about giving up any autonomy at all. But, as Nat Needle said a few weeks ago, most of us don't need that much freedom, and those who do could be considered spoiled. We do need, as you say, to respect the mystery, to help young people discover themselves -- which, I think, happen in community more than in isolation. Other values -- setting goals, learning to live together, finding purpose, working together to accomplish something remarkable -- are as important as liberty. The biggest issue may not be lack of liberty, but a lack of trust and respect. Where people feel trusted and respected, giving up a bit of personal autonomy is no big deal.
WOW! I am in awe and so charged to find this blog. I'm beginning my senior research project for a BA at Cal State Monterey Bay on holistic edu. I'll be entering grad school soon to become a teacher--the conventional way, but I intend to follow the alternative pathway in teaching. I homeschooled my children for a few years back in the early 90s, educating myself in many of the ideologies and can't wait to get back into it all.
I have been trying to find like-minded people in my area to no avail-- yet. I'm almost done reading your book, Ron, What Are Schools For, have already read many of your articles and your book with Riane Eisler, Educating for a Culture of Peace. I'm a huge fan.
I'm just a novice in this whole endeavor, but plan to work toward greater expertise.
Please excuse my effusion/exuberance.
I find it absurd that any ideas about democracy, social justice and education ignore the contribution to social justice that children continually make. In my 25 years in the profession and always on the side of children's rights I have met but a small handful of people who have serioulsy considered this. I do not find it here either.
If a child is not recognized for their contribtution to society than they will have to work at social justice. Most likely they will make the mistake of most people and as evidenced so far on this blog that somehow the cause can be reasoned into existence.
All the reasoning does is point to the isolation that most people feel. Social justice is a natural state and children who have been recongnized in their contribution, without making a big deal out of it, express it as a matter of course.
Post a Comment