Anarchist Schools

[Fawkes]

What would schools look like in an anarchist society?

[Whitten]

www.google.com (http://www.google.com)

scarry thought, huh

[Enragé]

err

same as they do now just with a different programme and with less stupid rules

[Fawkes]

Yeah but doesn't the teacher generally represent an authority figure, as do the administrators.

[Enragé]

Originally posted by Freedom for [email protected] 01, 2006 11:20 pm
Yeah but doesn't the teacher generally represent an authority figure, as do the administrators.
not necessarily

at my school, i communicate with alot of teachers without seeing them as an authority figure, most often we're on the same level really. Oh and this is kind of hard to explain in english, but in most languages (not including english) you have a difference between "you" as in talking politely to an authority figure, older person (which is "u" in dutch) and "you" as in talking to an equal (which is "je" or "jij" in dutch), and like the vast majority of teachers dont have a problem at all with me adressing them with "je" or "jij".

Certainly, there still are many teachers who really do present themselves authoritarian-ish, but we'll just root that out.

Same goes for administrators, those that would be needed post revolution that is.


Oh and if you mean like he can expel you from the classroom, well, if you impeed with others who are trying to learn stuff, then whats wrong with throwing you out?

[Fawkes]

Yeah, my school is kind of like that also, but I go to a charter school not a normal one.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Freedom for [email protected] 01, 2006 05:17 pm
What would schools look like in an anarchist society?
http://www.social-ecology.org/harbinger/vo.../education.html (http://www.social-ecology.org/harbinger/vol2no1/education.html)
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=1994

[Fawkes]

^^^ Thanks ^^^

Edit: P.S., I like your sig quote.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2006 11:57 pm
same as they do now just with a different programme and with less stupid rules
Every area would perhaps be different when it came to education depending on how they decided to educate children, but we are talking about children who require continous attention and care. 4 - 9 year olds perhaps - maybe older - would probably be educated in the same kind of way children in Stiener schools were taught.

Children above those ages,11 onwards would hopefully be encouraged to organise their own education and given the freedom to organise themselves how they choose. Once you are able to read, write and count then what you choose to do with your "education" etc shoudl be entirely up to you.

Also remember that society would be organised in such a way that the ability to realise ones dreams would not be constrained by monetary issues. Things such as film making or travelling would be easy to do.

Ones life should be full of experience and adventure and children should be encouraged to understand that, their world around them and be given the independence and tools to realise their own freedom.

[Fawkes]

^^^ That'd be a kickass school.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Freedom for [email protected] 02, 2006 01:15 am
^^^ That'd be a kickass school.
It's important to get out of the habit of calling them schools. Schools are a bourgeois construct designed to create leaders and followers and they specifically stifle independence and dissent.

We don't want our kids to be reminded of that everytime they get together to teach each other and learn about their lives.

[JazzRemington]

There's a type of schooling called "modern school," where the operations are run by a combination of teachers, students, and parents. I suggest checking it out.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension+December 01, 2006 07:17 pm--> (The Anarchist Tension @ December 01, 2006 07:17 pm)
Freedom for [email protected] 02, 2006 01:15 am
^^^ That'd be a kickass school.
It's important to get out of the habit of calling them schools. Schools are a bourgeois construct designed to create leaders and followers and they specifically stifle independence and dissent.

We don't want our kids to be reminded of that everytime they get together to teach each other and learn about their lives. [/b]
That's right. Schools would become popular laboratories of liberation!

[The Feral Underclass]

I hope not. That would be weird.

[which doctor]

Look who's talking, weirdo.

[Sir_No_Sir]

Originally posted by NewKindOfSoldier+December 01, 2006 11:27 pm--> (NewKindOfSoldier @ December 01, 2006 11:27 pm)
Freedom for [email protected] 01, 2006 11:20 pm
Yeah but doesn't the teacher generally represent an authority figure, as do the administrators.
not necessarily

at my school, i communicate with alot of teachers without seeing them as an authority figure, most often we're on the same level really. Oh and this is kind of hard to explain in english, but in most languages (not including english) you have a difference between "you" as in talking politely to an authority figure, older person (which is "u" in dutch) and "you" as in talking to an equal (which is "je" or "jij" in dutch), and like the vast majority of teachers dont have a problem at all with me adressing them with "je" or "jij".

Certainly, there still are many teachers who really do present themselves authoritarian-ish, but we'll just root that out.

Same goes for administrators, those that would be needed post revolution that is.


Oh and if you mean like he can expel you from the classroom, well, if you impeed with others who are trying to learn stuff, then whats wrong with throwing you out? [/b]
You mean like formal and familiar you?
In spanish, I believe its Tu(how do you do an accent mark?) for familiar you
and usted for formal you

[Red October]

Originally posted by Sir_No_Sir+December 01, 2006 10:27 pm--> (Sir_No_Sir @ December 01, 2006 10:27 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2006 11:27 pm

Freedom for [email protected] 01, 2006 11:20 pm
Yeah but doesn't the teacher generally represent an authority figure, as do the administrators.
not necessarily

at my school, i communicate with alot of teachers without seeing them as an authority figure, most often we're on the same level really. Oh and this is kind of hard to explain in english, but in most languages (not including english) you have a difference between "you" as in talking politely to an authority figure, older person (which is "u" in dutch) and "you" as in talking to an equal (which is "je" or "jij" in dutch), and like the vast majority of teachers dont have a problem at all with me adressing them with "je" or "jij".

Certainly, there still are many teachers who really do present themselves authoritarian-ish, but we'll just root that out.

Same goes for administrators, those that would be needed post revolution that is.


Oh and if you mean like he can expel you from the classroom, well, if you impeed with others who are trying to learn stuff, then whats wrong with throwing you out?
You mean like formal and familiar you?
In spanish, I believe its Tu(how do you do an accent mark?) for familiar you
and usted for formal you [/b]
they have that in russian too. i generall use вы (vui), which is called the familiar form, but its practically the same as equal.

[phoenixoftime]

In my hometown of Christchurch (New Zealand) there are two schools which seem along these lines: Rudolph Steiner (self explanatory) and Unlimited - a government funded school in which everyone (*all* teachers, students and support staff) are equal, all disputes must be resolved via mediation, and very progressive, high-tech teaching methods are used. The school is now regarded as one of the country's best and most advanced (as well as a magnet for hippies :wub: ) And it isn't a chaotic mess either, to use the words of a student "it's like a big happy family".

Shame I'm so authoritarian, I really like the idea :lol:

[Rollo]

I went to a rudolph steiner school here in Australia. I would use the term " breeding ground for communism ".

[Enragé]

would probably be educated in the same kind of way children in Stiener schools were taught

im not familiar with that
how were they taught?


Children above those ages,11 onwards would hopefully be encouraged to organise their own education and given the freedom to organise themselves how they choose. Once you are able to read, write and count then what you choose to do with your "education" etc shoudl be entirely up to you.


I seriously doubt that would work, in fact it wont.

Most children at that age, and actually far beyond that age, would simply choose to stop learning 75% of what they actually do need to learn.

I would have stopped learning math, grammar, anything which i wasnt interested in, which would have seriously fucked up my development right now
why?
since you need to have a base of knowledge, of things which might be very boring and very shitty to learn, but without having laid those groundworks you cant get to the good, interesting stuff.

For instance, in relation to philosophy, having to learn fuckin aristotle and plato was boring as fuck (and i would not have done that if i didnt have to), especially since they mostly talk out of their ass, but it did enable me to, in a structured, logical way, think about the same things they did, make a critique of their ideas etc etc and actually decompose most of contemporary accepted "truths" since they often trace back to aristotle and/or plato

Certainly, more influence in what you learn in school would be good, but you'll always have to learn certain things, because you need to know those things because they enable you to learn the things you want to learn/bring you into contact with all sorts of interesting stuff


You mean like formal and familiar you?
In spanish, I believe its Tu(how do you do an accent mark?) for familiar you
and usted for formal you

yeah thats what i meant.
oh and you do it like ' and then u
at least that works for me ^^


they have that in russian too. i generall use вы (vui), which is called the familiar form, but its practically the same as equal.

yea it exists in most languages i think

they used to have it in english too, but the familiar form ("thou") died out.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 01:16 pm

would probably be educated in the same kind of way children in Stiener schools were taught

im not familiar with that
how were they taught?
They were schools that encouraged children to discover their own subjects and methods of learning. Essentially they taught independence.


Most children at that age, and actually far beyond that age, would simply choose to stop learning 75% of what they actually do need to learn.

What are you basing this on?

Also, what is it that you think children "should" be learning?


I would have stopped learning math, grammar, anything which i wasnt interested in, which would have seriously fucked up my development right now

Your development is perhaps inconsequential to my development. I'm a filmmaker, so math and grammar have very little importance to me.

You're missing the point. The point here is for young people to choose what they want to learn. Not be forced into learning things they don't want to learn.

Of course people would stop learning certain things - that's the point. They would start to learn what they wanted to learn. Not what you or anyone else deemed "appropriate".


since you need to have a base of knowledge, of things which might be very boring and very shitty to learn, but without having laid those groundworks you cant get to the good, interesting stuff.

Erm...I failed my math qualification at secondary school and have had no formal education since my GCSE's, yet I am at present doing a Masters degree in Screen Arts and done many interesting things.

I get the sense that you are judging this based on your own personal experiences. What is interesting to you may not be interestsing to me and you cannot force me to learn about these things, regardless of how much you think it "lays a base" if I do not want to.

Whatever it is you are doing with your life clearly needs these things and without them you may not be able to "get to the good...stuff", but what you need has nothing to do with me.


For instance, in relation to philosophy, having to learn fuckin aristotle and plato was boring as fuck (and i would not have done that if i didnt have to), especially since they mostly talk out of their ass, but it did enable me to, in a structured, logical way, think about the same things they did, make a critique of their ideas etc etc and actually decompose most of contemporary accepted "truths" since they often trace back to aristotle and/or plato

So you chose to do that. That was your choice.


Certainly, more influence in what you learn in school would be good, but you'll always have to learn certain things, because you need to know those things because they enable you to learn the things you want to learn/bring you into contact with all sorts of interesting stuff

You need to know them because they enable you to come into contact with all sorts of interesting stuff you like.

Anarchism means freedom and you have to accept that, or change your views. You cannot force people to do things they don't want to do - That's the opposite of freedom.

[Enragé]

They were schools that encouraged children to discover their own subjects and methods of learning. Essentially they taught independence.


hmm
ok
if it works.


What are you basing this on?

Also, what is it that you think children "should" be learning?


personal experience, looking at my kid brother, big brother, friends etc etc

also i think there was some study which showed that children up to a certain age were actual physically/neurologically incapable of those methods of learning
but donno if it was true.

Well, certainly we'll have to discuss that, but

a fair degree of math, own language, exposure to different kinds of ideas (i.e teaching children not to be closed-minded)
that'd be like the bare minimum
and then people can build on that depending on interest, skill etc, but even then you'll still have to learn boring and shitty stuff to be able to do the things you really do want to do.

Also, if you dont expose children to certain things, which they in the beginning might not like at all, you're going to be bringing up very two dimensional children.


Your development is perhaps inconsequential to my development. I'm a filmmaker, so math and grammar have very little importance to me.

You're missing the point. The point here is for young people to choose what they want to learn. Not be forced into learning things they don't want to learn.

Of course people would stop learning certain things - that's the point. They would start to learn what they wanted to learn. Not what you or anyone else deemed "appropriate".


if you cant add and deduct (or whatever its called), you'll suck as a filmmaker too. If you dont know what 36 + 52 is, well, you'll run into problems with simple day to day stuff too.

Same goes to grammar, if you cant write properly, how on earth are you going to make things clear to someone in some e-mail, letter or whatever.

Also, were you born knowing you were going to be a filmmaker?
doubt it
I wanted to be an astronaut (so...in your idea i could've just stopped learning everything which you dont need to be an astronaut)\
then i wanted to join the army :rolleyes: (so...i would've stopped learning anything which didnt enable me to kill or shit like that)
now
im leaning towards journalist or something like that

now
if in the past i had only learned how to fly the spaceshuttle and how to shoot people for "my" country (which in your system i probably would've done)
how on earth can i catch up to such an extent that i can become a decent journalist? (supposing i have enough talent as it is :P )



What is interesting to you may not be interestsing to me and you cannot force me to learn about these things

the point was that alot of things weren't interesting to me either
but i still needed them.


Anarchism means freedom and you have to accept that, or change your views. You cannot force people to do things they don't want to do - That's the opposite of freedom.

You cannot be free if you have never been confronted with the full scale of your potential, your options etc

[The Feral Underclass]

if you cant add and deduct (or whatever its called), you'll suck as a filmmaker too. If you dont know what 36 + 52 is, well, you'll run into problems with simple day to day stuff too.

As I said in my original post, it will be necessary for small children to learn how to read, write and do basic arithmetic but as soon as they reach a certain age whereby they can conceptualise their world as independent human beings these young people will be able to do whatever they choose.

The fact of that matter is, none of what you are saying is relevant to anything. What you think is necessary and what you think is or is not important to learn is totally and absolutely inconsequential to me and I suspect many others.

People should and will be able to learn anything they want in an environment organised by themselves. If a group of people want to learn about 19th century photography and another geometry and neither want to learn about the other then this will be the reality.

Quite frankly, there is nothing you can do about it. Unless of course you want to force it.

[Quills]

Most children at that age, and actually far beyond that age, would simply choose to stop learning 75% of what they actually do need to learn.

Who are you to tell someone what they need to learn? I'm pretty sure it's up to the individual what they choose to do with their time.

And if they later decide that they want an occupation that they aren't skilled for, well, they can always go back to 'school' and learn it later in life. A process which will be made much easier post-revolution.

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by NKOS

personal experience, looking at my kid brother, big brother, friends etc etc

also i think there was some study which showed that children up to a certain age were actual physically/neurologically incapable of those methods of learning
but donno if it was true.

Well, certainly we'll have to discuss that, but

a fair degree of math, own language, exposure to different kinds of ideas (i.e teaching children not to be closed-minded)
that'd be like the bare minimum
and then people can build on that depending on interest, skill etc, but even then you'll still have to learn boring and shitty stuff to be able to do the things you really do want to do.

Also, if you dont expose children to certain things, which they in the beginning might not like at all, you're going to be bringing up very two dimensional children.

Don't you think it's possible that in many (if not most) cases, kids are turned off from learning because school is such an unpleasant place? You might have boring teachers forcing you to learn about stuff in a really dry way, or be forced to observe stupid rules for no reason (things like tucking your shirt in).

From my experience, when kids are allowed to learn and discover for themselves, they enjoy it AND learn more. Also, kids are naturally curious, so I don't see why they wouldn't learn a lot just by, well, being kids.

[Political_Chucky]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 01, 2006 04:06 pm

Every area would perhaps be different when it came to education depending on how they decided to educate children, but we are talking about children who require continous attention and care. 4 - 9 year olds perhaps - maybe older - would probably be educated in the same kind of way children in Stiener schools were taught.

Children above those ages,11 onwards would hopefully be encouraged to organise their own education and given the freedom to organise themselves how they choose. Once you are able to read, write and count then what you choose to do with your "education" etc shoudl be entirely up to you.

Also remember that society would be organised in such a way that the ability to realise ones dreams would not be constrained by monetary issues. Things such as film making or travelling would be easy to do.

Ones life should be full of experience and adventure and children should be encouraged to understand that, their world around them and be given the independence and tools to realise their own freedom.
I love that idea! I personally hated school. I don't consider myself extraordinarily intelligent but more intelligent then the average student considering I had Honor classes in middle school and was offered to take AP classes in highschool. But my last 3 years in highschool have been horrible, this last year especially with me having a 0.6 GPA. But once I started getting interested into politics this last summer, started researching on my own, and really putting my mind to it, my grades have improved greatly. I think its because since its my senior year, I have had more freedom on choosing what I wanted and what I wanted to learn.

Your idea, would be a very effective solution to people who fuck up their lives due to school. Schools seem to want to force ideas into students who simply don't want to have anything to do with it. Instead of making the students fail horribly in school, they should allow them to choose their speciality.

I have found that students who enjoy Math strive to find answers. Students who enjoy Language arts like to ask questions. Math would consist of scientific, and mathematical classes while Language arts consisting of English(grammar and sentence structure) and history. That would be my idea of the system in that case but definitely something to think about.