Your school. Yes YOURS. What would you do?

[faithsdaddy]

We've all being having a jolly old ruck and giving each other a virtual duffing up about school Vs Homeschooling Vs other ideas on a few other threads. Well, it's being fun- we've all pi**ed each other off, lives have been destroyed and we've all unfriended each other He he, I take it with a pinch of salt, but you know what I mean.

So... how about if we all say how we'd like school to be? Well... you in?

Me first (nah nah); 1 hour of PE every day, classes on meditation, nature appreciation, shorter day by at least a couple of hours, flexible learning in the afternoons, kids grouped by ability, minimal exams, 20 duvet days per year. I'm sure there's more, but that's all I can think of.

Sandra put up some cool ideas in the other fight, er sorry, I mean thread. Maybe you could repost them here?

What are your thoughts chaps and chapets? Come on, I promise to be on my bestest behavior if you play with me

[Elrond]

A school where I don't have to have a programming exam using pen and paper.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by ssandra

How I'd like to see an ideal school... From 4 till 12 (that's primary school in the Netherlands) they have daily activities that are focused on learning new things in fun ways. In different fun ways because not everybody learns the same.

Although groups would be put together more or less in age groups, how far along they are in a certain subject would matter more. No more bored people in class because they are already ahead, no more frustrated children who give up because they are slower to understand.

Lots and lots of playing. Social exercises related to age of course.

From 12 till 16, 17, 18 in the Netherlands now you already have to choose a level depending on a certain test you take when you are 12. It is possible to move between levels but it will cost you extra years.

I'd like to see between 12 and 14 2 years of exploring all different type of subjects, and going on with it on different levels. So if you like Math you get to explore that in more detail, while at the same time you do have to get some language and other classes as well. These classes should be designed to show what can be done with these subjects as well as teaching the basics.

At 14 when you have some idea where you are good at you go on to study in that direction. Not yet college or university, but highschool with a strong focus on that direction that you like. Although you need some basic skills in other area's, it is not necessary to go very deep into that. This will help people who are not into math be able to learn some basics of it while those who are interested get a deeper education in it.
It will also help those who are not good at math still get a good education at a higher level because they might be good at languages or something else.


Then at the age of 17 you choose which university you want to go, what you want to study. This last year you use to get up to speed on anything that you may not have studied in detail yet, but your university requires. At 18 you then go on to university.


That's my picture of a good school system.

Originally Posted by ssandra

My topics (besides those already thought like math, science, English (or whatever native language), etc:

Reading; have smaller reading groups where they can read about what they are interested in and then discuss it (Romance, Fantasy, SF, Non-Fiction etc) and once a year every group gets to pick one book for everyone to read and discuss. Depending on how many groups there are, it will be around once every 2 months to read something that is outside your own interest group.

Spiritual development: Everything from classes on meditation, lectures on different types of religions and spiritual beliefs, try out classes for yoga etc.

Personal development: Time organization, procrastination, taking care of yourself, NLP, healthy eating and living etc.

Cultures: Their own and others. Anything from famous painters, trips to museums, discussions on why something is considered "normal" etc.

Computer stuff: Learn how to use google , how to make a basic website using several programs (wordpress etc). how to use spreadsheets efficiently, critical thinking online, etc.

In math class for example for those who are not extremely interested in it (basic group) I wouldn't as much teach math (although it would be part of it) but for example how to read statistics.

In English class I wouldn't have people read Shakespeare (if they aren't interested that is), but work more on how to express thoughts clearly in writing. How to write good papers. How to express your opinion on paper. All the while using correct grammar of course . I'd work on expanding vocabulary in a way that is interesting and fun.

Probably more, but that is what I'm coming up with now...

Originally Posted by ssandra

For PE; I'd like to see weekly PE classes where every week (or for some sports several weeks maybe) an new sports is thought. Soccer, basketball, swimming, iceskating, ballet, etc.

It would be great if every day would start with 30 minutes of light aerobics and stretching and would end with the same.

[Oceans]

[spacecadetglow]

I wouldn't want to be in charge of designing a school because other people aren't me.

Ideally, though, I'd like to see a system where children are exposed to many different subjects early on. Then when they get older they can explore whatever subjects interest them most, and be allowed to pursue those topics as far as they want (under the guidance of a teacher or perhaps community leaders that are experts in their fields). I think every child should be taught English (or whatever their native language is) and verbal/written communication skills up until the college level.

I'd also like to see more focus on "real world" skills like finding a job, interview skills, resume writing, learning about insurance, signing a lease, etc. They do this a lot at the university level, but not so much in high school from what I've seen.

There are my nebulous ideas, which are already being done for the most part. But I repeat that I would not want to be in charge of designing a school or a curriculum all by myself, because I am not so narcissistic as to think what works for me will work for my students. Ideally, the schooling process itself should help kids to discover what works for them in their own learning.

[spacecadetglow]

...as a side note, this "assignment" could be better designed by requiring posters to do some research before brain-barfing their ideas into the thread. Not trying to crush anyone's creative spirit, but it's good to know what is actually going on in your world and to give credit where credit is due.

</tongue in cheek>

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

...as a side note, this "assignment" could be better designed by requiring posters to do some research before brain-barfing their ideas into the thread. Not trying to crush anyone's creative spirit, but it's good to know what is actually going on in your world and to give credit where credit is due.

</tongue in cheek>

Why? I think it is definitely needed if you are actually going to design a school or school system, but until then what is wrong with just being creative and throwing around some ideas?

[faithsdaddy]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

...as a side note, this "assignment" could be better designed by requiring posters to do some research before brain-barfing their ideas into the thread. Not trying to crush anyone's creative spirit, but it's good to know what is actually going on in your world and to give credit where credit is due.

</tongue in cheek>

I want to hear what people think, without imposing any kind of formal requirements on them. I'm interested in any and all ideas.

[spacecadetglow]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Why? I think it is definitely needed if you are actually going to design a school or school system, but until then what is wrong with just being creative and throwing around some ideas?

I don't know, because people could actually be learning something instead of just self-indulging their ideas?

This is why I said I was being tongue in cheek, though. Obviously no one is interested in that. There's no harm in being creative, but I think it's a good exercise to acknowledge where your "creativity" comes from in the first place. As in, your ideas are not original.

I'm just thinking like a teacher here though, not a forum poster.

[faithsdaddy]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

There's no harm in being creative, but I think it's a good exercise to acknowledge where your "creativity" comes from in the first place. As in, your ideas are not original.

Why would you need to do that? Being creative is it's own goal, not to justify or explain it in some way.

That reminds me of being told at school we need to know all the rules for learning French, so we can learn it properly- what actually happens is it gets in the way of learning, so we can't actually speak it, despite spending 5 years learning.

[spacecadetglow]

Originally Posted by faithsdaddy

Why would you need to do that? Being creative is it's own goal, not to justify or explain it in some way.

That reminds me of being told at school we need to know all the rules for learning French, so we can learn it properly- what actually happens is it gets in the way of learning, so we can't actually speak it, despite spending 5 years learning.

Ok well now we're veering a bit off topic. I'm all for creativity for its own sake, I'm an artist myself. I will continue to write songs and love every second of it, but I still find it incredibly interesting when I sing a riff that I'd heard before in another song. "Oh, that thing I just did with my voice, that came from singing that Adele song!" I dunno, I just find it fascinating.

I would never tell my students to write a paper describing their ideas for such and such without first requiring them to do research. Otherwise, they're not learning much besides how to articulate their ideas. Which is a good skill for sure, but why not combine it with learning something of the world, too.

[beast]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

I would never tell my students to write a paper describing their ideas for such and such without first requiring them to do research. Otherwise, they're not learning much besides how to articulate their ideas. Which is a good skill for sure, but why not combine it with learning something of the world, too.

I totally see your point here, and you know I love you like a sister, woman - but each of us has probably had at least a decade of experience in the school system, and often double that. I think that's plenty of "research" to let us start throwing ideas around!

Threads like these are good brainstorming opportunities, and I think a lot can come from them - though this particularly issue has been rehashed to death in the past few days/weeks.

[taylor]

I'd have a curriculum heavy on verbal and math, but do things like emphasize learning techniques and therefore raise standards. Advanced learning techniques like mnemonics, speed reading, SQ3R, shorthand notation, brain gym, meditation for focus, etc. This should all be like breathing to students and currently no one is doing it except for the occasional freak of nature pushed by their parents who graduates years early.

If this were standard from an early age you could shorten learning time dramatically and expand the curriculum.

I also would like more experiential classes like public speaking, social skills, science experiments, entrepreneurial endeavors, etc. Once the basics are covered, I'd also like to see more passion/curiosity based learning. Like a class where you have a mentor that keeps you on task, but more of a personal study session, where you decide the curriculum with your mentor. As they mature, students should have more and more control on the specifics of what they want to study.

[Andrew Gubb]

Summerhill school. A. S. Neill's Summerhill School

[taylor]

Also, I want to rant about No Child Left Behind.

This is the opposite of what should be done. Think of it like an investment. Why pour your resources into someone who doesn't care, parents don't care, and isn't very smart to begin with? Instead you should invest your resources in the most ambitious and brightest students because they are the one's that are going to innovate and be productive.

I think elitism and segregation would work the best. Find the students that have the most potential and put them together with the best teachers and the most well funded programs. There you will see amazing things happen.

I think with a smart mentorship program and resources you could help the advanced students reach their potential far easier and cheaper than it would take to bring up the below average student to a reasonable level, which has very little payoff to the world.

[spacecadetglow]

Originally Posted by beast

I totally see your point here, and you know I love you like a sister, woman - but each of us has probably had at least a decade of experience in the school system, and often double that. I think that's plenty of "research" to let us start throwing ideas around!

Threads like these are good brainstorming opportunities, and I think a lot can come from them - though this particularly issue has been rehashed to death in the past few days/weeks.

Well not really. I mean, were your teachers in high school asking you to read peer-reviewed papers published in journals? What about when you're writing on a specific topic that you may never have been introduced to before? There comes a time when research is absolutely necessary to avoid intellectual masturbation.

I don't bash brainstorming, that is the first step of the writing process. I think good things can come from it. I can even see some cases where I'd give an assignment that ONLY asks for my students' personal ideas, sure.

I wasn't totally serious with my original post...

[beast]

Sure, there comes a time when research in peer-reviewed articles becomes necessary, but I don't think this is the time. I'm really enjoying reading about everyone's visions, and I think good comes from it. Brainstormy threads like these are a terrific jumping off point.

More on-topic:

I worked at a community center which I think is pretty much perfect. I could sing its praises all day long. The problem is that it only really has stayed afloat for as long as it has because the founder has put a considerable amount of his own money into keeping the dream alive. Had he not come from a wealthy family, there is just no way that this place would continue to exist as I know it. You just can't get many grants when your mission is to encourage kids to drop out of school.

What I like about this place: small classes, one-on-one tutoring sessions, incredible levels of community involvement, kids design their own curriculum. It's just a really happy place to be. So for me, my main question wouldn't be "what would my ideal learning center look like?" because that place basically exists. My question would be "how can we make this a replicable model, given the incredible systematic barriers it faces?"

[Mounds]

Taylor, I nodded through your first post and cringed through your second post, lol! I have a feeling that if we did what you described in the first post, then what you describe in the second post wouldn't be necessary.

There comes a time when research is absolutely necessary to avoid intellectual masturbation.

The concept of school is so diverse that it's hard to imagine someone doesn't have something educated to say on the topic I've studied a raft of different things in my spare time that can easily relate to educating others and helping them develop. IOW, I don't think anyone is talking out of their ass, lol.

I put in my twelve years of public school and I do believe I have some suggestible improvements. It's not all up to the schools but if half of your childhood is spent sitting behind a desk, I'd like to see those be good years.

As a future parent, I know I have a lot of swing in that respect. It could go a lot smoother if the school system was on board.

[beast]

I'm with ya, Mounds - re: taylor's two posts, and everything else you wrote.

[spacecadetglow]

Which is why I said, multiple times now, that I was being tongue in cheek. Obviously I don't want to turn this thread into a school assignment, but I do think if people are serious about effecting change in education, it's going to take more than just tossing around ideas. Like you said, let's look at ways to make a good model replicable and available for more people. I don't think it's off-base to encourage people who might be reading this thread who are interested in effecting change to do their homework first.

[Mounds]

Well, I think learning how to learn is a good start. If you know how to learn, that removes a lot of the mental blocks right there. I have four or five different techniques I use to learn. If one doesn't work, I try something else. Eventually, I get it.

I'll be teaching my children that early on.

[beast]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

Which is why I said, multiple times now, that I was being tongue in cheek. Obviously I don't want to turn this thread into a school assignment, but I do think if people are serious about effecting change in education, it's going to take more than just tossing around ideas. Like you said, let's look at ways to make a good model replicable and available for more people. I don't think it's off-base to encourage people who might be reading this thread who are interested in effecting change to do their homework first.

YOU CAN'T BE TONGUE AND CHEEK ON THE INTERNET SHUT UP.

[spacecadetglow]

No one's ever really "just kidding!"

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by Mounds

Well, I think learning how to learn is a good start. If you know how to learn, that removes a lot of the mental blocks right there. I have four or five different techniques I use to learn. If one doesn't work, I try something else. Eventually, I get it.

I'll be teaching my children that early on.

You have to be careful with that though... They tried to teach me as well how to learn, except that for me that never worked...

Simple example with math... I do math in terms of 5's. So if I ad 12 + 7 in my mind I'm adding first 10 + 5 and then 2 + 2. It's the longer way around but the only way I get it.
Since my teachers were too much about their method instead of helping me work with mine I never got what they were trying to say to me... I just didn't get it. And thought I was stupid for a very long time simply because they didn't know how to explain in a way that I understood...

[Mounds]

Originally Posted by ssandra

You have to be careful with that though... They tried to teach me as well how to learn, except that for me that never worked...

My vision would be to teach four or five different techniques. If one doesn't work, then move onto the next one.

The way I have now learned math is through mnemonics. It's a strange way of learning math but it works

[aelle]

I think the school I went to from age 9 to 14 was pretty awesome. The schoolmaster's theory was that kids lose their drive for learning if they have no passion, or if they can't explore their passions. But if you can focus on something you really like, it will give you energy rather than exhaust you and you can apply that energy to the rest of your schooling.
There were several programs:
- language focus, with several disciplies taught entirely in a foreign language and the possibility to pick up many more languages than the classic curriculum allows (that's what I did)
- intense curriculum in the morning (standard school day in France is 8 to 5) + intense music practice in the afternoons
- intense sports practice - a few of the gym teams made it to Olympic level, and the local soccer team placed its young recruits in that program

All those programs had a much heavier course load than the standard curriculum, but the students also had much better results overall than those who followed the standard curriculum.

I think the idea is really good, but the realization maybe not so much. The school must have been fantastic at its beginning, with only teachers and staff who truly believed in the concept and gave it all they had. But over time, as the school grew, they couldn't find enough new teachers that were really passionate - a lot of them were there because they were good enough.

That's how I got a litterature teacher who completely turned me off the classics. I had always wanted to study Latin and Ancient Greek, but I couldn't bear the idea of deliberately signing up for another class with that awful woman, so I gave up. What a pity.

So that's my idea. Believing in kids, believing that they can take on an ambitious course load if they are passionate about its heart. No unique curriculum, but ideally a tailor made program centered on the student's passion, or at least a choice of several options. And good teachers...

I realize that this would work well/best for gifted kids, and/or kids who study well in an academic manner. I was both, so I don't know what could be done for those who study differently.

[LostMyMap]

I'm sure I can contribute more to this when I have time. But I just wanted to say about the below, that #4 can be a real *****, can't it.

Originally Posted by Oceans

[Michael Chui]

Heh. Late to the thread. That's what I get for not obsessively checking the forums anymore.

From Bruce Mau’s Incomplete Manifesto:

• Allow events to change you. You have to be willing to grow. Growth is different from something that happens to you. You produce it. You live it. The prerequisites for growth: the openness to experience events and the willingness to be changed by them.
• Forget about good. Good is a known quantity. Good is what we all agree on. Growth is not necessarily good. Growth is an exploration of unlit recesses that may or may not yield to our research. As long as you stick to good you’ll never have real growth.
• Process is more important than outcome. When the outcome drives the process we will only ever go to where we’ve already been. If process drives outcome we may not know where we’re going, but we will know we want to be there.
• Love your experiments (as you would an ugly child). Joy is the engine of growth. Exploit the liberty in casting your work as beautiful experiments, iterations, attempts, trials, and errors. Take the long view and allow yourself the fun of failure every day.
• Go deep. The deeper you go the more likely you will discover something of value.
• Capture accidents. The wrong answer is the right answer in search of a different question. Collect wrong answers as part of the process. Ask different questions.
• Study. A studio is a place of study. Use the necessity of production as an excuse to study. Everyone will benefit.
• Drift. Allow yourself to wander aimlessly. Explore adjacencies. Lack judgment. Postpone criticism.
• Begin anywhere. John Cage tells us that not knowing where to begin is a common form of paralysis. His advice: begin anywhere.
• Everyone is a leader. Growth happens. Whenever it does, allow it to emerge. Learn to follow when it makes sense. Let anyone lead.
• Harvest ideas. Edit applications. Ideas need a dynamic, fluid, generous environment to sustain life. Applications, on the other hand, benefit from critical rigor. Produce a high ratio of ideas to applications.
• Keep moving. The market and its operations have a tendency to reinforce success. Resist it. Allow failure and migration to be part of your practice.
• Slow down. Desynchronize from standard time frames and surprising opportunities may present themselves.
• Don’t be cool. Cool is conservative fear dressed in black. Free yourself from limits of this sort.
• Ask stupid questions. Growth is fueled by desire and innocence. Assess the answer, not the question. Imagine learning throughout your life at the rate of an infant.
• Collaborate. The space between people working together is filled with conflict, friction, strife, exhilaration, delight, and vast creative potential.
• ____________________. Intentionally left blank. Allow space for the ideas you haven’t had yet, and for the ideas of others.
• Stay up late. Strange things happen when you’ve gone too far, been up too long, worked too hard, and you’re separated from the rest of the world.
• Work the metaphor. Every object has the capacity to stand for something other than what is apparent. Work on what it stands for.
• Be careful to take risks. Time is genetic. Today is the child of yesterday and the parent of tomorrow. The work you produce today will create your future.
• Repeat yourself. If you like it, do it again. If you don’t like it, do it again.
• Make your own tools. Hybridize your tools in order to build unique things. Even simple tools that are your own can yield entirely new avenues of exploration. Remember, tools amplify our capacities, so even a small tool can make a big difference.
• Stand on someone’s shoulders. You can travel farther carried on the accomplishments of those who came before you. And the view is so much better.
• Avoid software. The problem with software is that everyone has it.
• Don’t clean your desk. You might find something in the morning that you can’t see tonight.
• Don’t enter awards competitions. Just don’t. It’s not good for you.
• Read only left-hand pages. Marshall McLuhan did this. By decreasing the amount of information, we leave room for what he called our "noodle."
• Make new words. Expand the lexicon. The new conditions demand a new way of thinking. The thinking demands new forms of expression. The expression generates new conditions.
• Think with your mind. Forget technology. Creativity is not device-dependent.
• Organization = Liberty. Real innovation in design, or any other field, happens in context. That context is usually some form of cooperatively managed enterprise. Frank Gehry, for instance, is only able to realize Bilbao because his studio can deliver it on budget. The myth of a split between "creatives" and "suits" is what Leonard Cohen calls a ‘charming artifact of the past.’
• Don’t borrow money. Once again, Frank Gehry’s advice. By maintaining financial control, we maintain creative control. It’s not exactly rocket science, but it’s surprising how hard it is to maintain this discipline, and how many have failed.
• Listen carefully. Every collaborator who enters our orbit brings with him or her a world more strange and complex than any we could ever hope to imagine. By listening to the details and the subtlety of their needs, desires, or ambitions, we fold their world onto our own. Neither party will ever be the same.
• Take field trips. The bandwidth of the world is greater than that of your TV set, or the Internet, or even a totally immersive, interactive, dynamically rendered, object-oriented, real-time, computer graphic–simulated environment.
• Make mistakes faster. This isn’t my idea — I borrowed it. I think it belongs to Andy Grove.
• Imitate. Don’t be shy about it. Try to get as close as you can. You’ll never get all the way, and the separation might be truly remarkable. We have only to look to Richard Hamilton and his version of Marcel Duchamp’s large glass to see how rich, discredited, and underused imitation is as a technique.
• Scat. When you forget the words, do what Ella did: make up something else … but not words.
• Break it, stretch it, bend it, crush it, crack it, fold it.
• Explore the other edge. Great liberty exists when we avoid trying to run with the technological pack. We can’t find the leading edge because it’s trampled underfoot. Try using old-tech equipment made obsolete by an economic cycle but still rich with potential.
• Coffee breaks, cab rides, green rooms. Real growth often happens outside of where we intend it to, in the interstitial spaces — what Dr. Seuss calls "the waiting place." Hans Ulrich Obrist once organized a science and art conference with all of the infrastructure of a conference — the parties, chats, lunches, airport arrivals — but with no actual conference. Apparently it was hugely successful and spawned many ongoing collaborations.
• Avoid fields. Jump fences. Disciplinary boundaries and regulatory regimes are attempts to control the wilding of creative life. They are often understandable efforts to order what are manifold, complex, evolutionary processes. Our job is to jump the fences and cross the fields.
• Laugh. People visiting the studio often comment on how much we laugh. Since I’ve become aware of this, I use it as a barometer of how comfortably we are expressing ourselves.
• Remember. Growth is only possible as a product of history. Without memory, innovation is merely novelty. History gives growth a direction. But a memory is never perfect. Every memory is a degraded or composite image of a previous moment or event. That’s what makes us aware of its quality as a past and not a present. It means that every memory is new, a partial construct different from its source, and, as such, a potential for growth itself.
• Power to the people. Play can only happen when people feel they have control over their lives. We can’t be free agents if we’re not free.

Taken for a school, some of these are better as recommendations to different combinations of the administrators, teachers, and students.

I think that seeing how often kids laugh in class is a good barometer for a teacher's success. I think that it should be noticed how often your kids come up with neologisms or repeating themselves as signs of how they're doing.

[Ilikeindowem]

Schools focus on too much PC learning, and generally reflect the attitudes of civil servants in government education departments.

My school curriculum would be thus:

Elementary/primary level - Three Rs, some PE, social skills lessons
Secondary level - More advanced three Rs, some PE, advanced social skills lessons, foreign languages and basic philosophy

A year prior to university level, students then branch into whatever studies they wish, whether sciences, maths, medicine, etc.

School to me should just teach students the rudiments of how to live in the world, hence my emphasis on reading, writing, arithmetic, social skills and even philosophy. IMO, lessons in philosophy would teach students how to think and formulate perceptions of the world around them. I wouldn't have religious education per se, but only teaching students the basics of modern world religions.

[faithsdaddy]

Originally Posted by Ilikeindowem

Schools focus on too much PC learning, and generally reflect the attitudes of civil servants in government education departments.

Can you elaborate on this please? I'm not sure what you mean.