In or Out?

“If change is to come, then, it will have to come from the outside. It will have to come from the margins.” ~ Wendell Berry

A few months ago, I wrote a couple posts on how I got into and out of conventional teaching. Today I want to extend those thoughts and focus on a question I think all who make education our career have to consider at some point. In the words of the classic song, Should I stay or should I go?

Deciding to leave my first full-time assignment was particularly anguishing in the following respect: the guilt I felt over all the young people I’d be leaving behind. Was it really so bad, was I really so selfish, that I could justify abandoning them in order to save myself? Couldn’t I make the best of it and do however much I was able for those who, unlike me, couldn’t opt out? Why couldn’t I stay in the system and work to reform it from the inside?

I’ve mentioned plenty of times how difficult it is to talk about education—how easily triggered we all can be, perhaps even more so than with those textbook topics-to-avoid, religion and politics. As conflict-averse as I am by nature, it’s especially tough for me to say what I really think when it comes to how young people are permitted to go about the business of learning. This post is no different, in that I have a number of friends and former students working in conventional schools. How can I speak my truth without insulting theirs?

For my truth is that conventional schooling, public and private alike, is inexcusably restrictive and inherently limiting (when not obviously harmful). Rooted in a deep distrust both of students and teachers, it assumes people won’t work hard enough or achieve the best results without accountability, by which is meant a system of rewards and punishments, carrots and sticks. This is authoritarian, factory schooling, where students aren’t allowed to learn—nor teachers allowed to teach—as they know best, but instead are pitted against each other, weighed down by curricula and other standardized nonsense.

In sum, the system works against people wanting and working to do good. It’s the system that’s to blame, not the people. And yet no amount of fair-mindedness can rid us of the following question:  What is this system if not the people who comprise it, who allow, support, and perpetuate it?

I am not blind to the good being done in conventional schools despite the many restrictions, nor am I ignoring the question of what’s to be done for children who don’t yet have a better option. And so the peace I’ve made with myself in this area is that, just as Sudbury schooling permits individuals to make their own choices, I strive to respect that everyone is choosing their battles as they see fit; I acknowledge there’s more than one front in helping people learn.

This, however, does not restrict me from criticizing an obsolete system and the distrustful paradigm on which it rests, or demanding that we stop settling for what we have and start creating something different, something better, now. It also doesn’t change my judgment of nearly twenty years ago, that as an entrenched system, the prevailing approach to education will never permit fundamental reform. As with Wendell Berry, I believe that “if change is to come…it will have to come from the outside.”

I also believe there’s a critical need for prototypes like Sudbury schooling, working demonstrations of what’s possible and desirable in education, what can and should be done. And yet I am not advocating that we simply replace the conventional system with a system of Sudbury schools. Why, in fact, do we need any monolithic, centralized system? What about decentralized, autonomous, local options, informally networked? What about publicly guaranteed access to any kind of school?

Obviously, these are questions no mere blog post is going to resolve. However, as I said above, we all have to make our own choices. And I think we all have to ask, to what extent are my choices limiting rather than opening up possibilities? To what extent are we compromising the well-being of children out of fear or assumptions that something better is beyond our capabilities? That is the one choice I can’t find my way to condone.



Filed under Sudbury

3 responses to “In or Out?

  1. The home schooling movement (Free Range Learning: Laura Grace Weldon) is flourishing based on many of your points, no doubt. HS is certainly an option for education just as the Sudbury model is. Peter Gray’s Free To Learn was an eye-opener, for me, to the Sudbury schooling system—which I agree with totally. However, in all these approaches the constant that sets them apart, and inso is limiting to a smaller percentage of the population, is the prerequisite of ‘understanding parents’. From in utero to age five the foundation of every child is built, and it is the elders in the child’s life that allow the child to thrive—or not. Even the parents who know they need help and send their child to Sudbury are perceptive beyond most other parents. This zero to five period is where I am most interested.

  2. Susie Steel

    Absolutely, these children need many advantages that are not afforded to the general population: “understanding parents”, and I would add “knowledgeable” and “present” and “aware” and “strong” and unfortunately “affluent” as homeschooling is expensive. This narrows down the opportunity for a less conventional or authoritative system to being available to the the middle classes, which can only strengthen the status quo surely? Having tried and tried to influence my own educational establishment from the inside, I finally decided to take the step outside and am now committed to changing things by starting a movement of awareness. In this case of Adverse Childhood Experiences, which I hope will influence many establishments in my area (not just educationalones) towards a kinder, more loving approach that puts the child at the centre. Once they have made that step, I am hoping that ideas such as a more child centred curriculum will follow. However, one step at a time.

  3. I want to respond to the point about homeschooling (or any alternative, I suppose) being expensive. Sudbury schools strive very hard to be as affordable as possible, with low tuition and, in many cases, financial assistance. “One step at a time,” indeed, especially when the playing field schools that don’t have to charge tuition,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s