Although this is the title of our next Vimarsh reading, it applies to today's deliberation. We read "The Best Schools" by Thomas Armstrong. It was a much livelier conversation compared to last time, particularly as we had differing opinions on this topic.
A few questions came up more than once and I would like to ask you three:
1. Can we totally divorce school from society? When success is defined mainly through monetary terms in our society, can a school that doesn't really focus on this even exist? The question is not whether a school like this SHOULD exist because that is covered by Thomas Armstrong. Rather, can a school based on the ideals of human development 'succeed' in a society over run by academic achievement? If you know of examples of such schools, we would love to hear about them.
2. How can we define the role that a school plays on 'developing' a human being when there are so many other factors influencing and shaping the development of that person? Is that even something a school should be doing? Of course, I have my own opinion but I think we deliberated on that enough this evening. What do you, our readers think?This question goes back to the aims of education. Is the aim of school to make their students (a) literate, score good marks, get a good job and earn good money (b) become independent and resourceful, develop a strong identity and sense of self, learn disciplined ways of thinking and be happy? We actually started the entire discussion by asking whether the two can co-exist and we had members who agreed and members who didn't.
3. Is the human development discourse one that applies only to upper class students? This argument is very well countered in the book and for me it was the most powerful argument made by Dr. Armstrong. Would you send your own children to a school that does not speak the academic achievement discourse but hesitate to do the same for the students in an inner city because you feel that academic achievement is their only option?
I am really looking forward to reading your responses. Please let your thoughts flow freely :)
Also we would like to expand our circle of members to those with very different experiences and opinions because that is one way in which we can all grow and learn. If you are interested in joining Vimarsh, please email me.
A few questions came up more than once and I would like to ask you three:
1. Can we totally divorce school from society? When success is defined mainly through monetary terms in our society, can a school that doesn't really focus on this even exist? The question is not whether a school like this SHOULD exist because that is covered by Thomas Armstrong. Rather, can a school based on the ideals of human development 'succeed' in a society over run by academic achievement? If you know of examples of such schools, we would love to hear about them.
2. How can we define the role that a school plays on 'developing' a human being when there are so many other factors influencing and shaping the development of that person? Is that even something a school should be doing? Of course, I have my own opinion but I think we deliberated on that enough this evening. What do you, our readers think?This question goes back to the aims of education. Is the aim of school to make their students (a) literate, score good marks, get a good job and earn good money (b) become independent and resourceful, develop a strong identity and sense of self, learn disciplined ways of thinking and be happy? We actually started the entire discussion by asking whether the two can co-exist and we had members who agreed and members who didn't.
3. Is the human development discourse one that applies only to upper class students? This argument is very well countered in the book and for me it was the most powerful argument made by Dr. Armstrong. Would you send your own children to a school that does not speak the academic achievement discourse but hesitate to do the same for the students in an inner city because you feel that academic achievement is their only option?
I am really looking forward to reading your responses. Please let your thoughts flow freely :)
Also we would like to expand our circle of members to those with very different experiences and opinions because that is one way in which we can all grow and learn. If you are interested in joining Vimarsh, please email me.
4 comments:
Hey,
I haven't read 'The Best Schools' but its definitely going on my list of books to read. So, my thoughts come completely out of the way I have seen and experienced the role of schools.
On the latter part of question two -'Should a school even work on 'developing' a human being?' I believe in fact that it should be at the core of the role that the school plays in the life of a student. It also links to question 3 - if it is in fact applicable only to upper class students then should there not be a way to tie the two aims you mention - literate, score good marks & become independent thinkers?
I'm still not sure about how that can be done because 'developing' a student as resourceful etc. seems something that can be done in the form of a culture that the school creates or builds (the impact of which may not be measurable but things you probably observe in the choices they make later in life). On the other hand good scores, a good job are more quantifiable outcomes.
I'm looking forward to attending the next meeting and reading more posts on the blog. Thanks Purvi :)
Hello everyone,
This seems be to be a greatly stimulating conversation. I do have my 2-cents to add to the first question - Have you heard of the school called "Summerhill" started by A.S.Neill in between the world wars? From my reading of the book - Summerhill, I understood that school existed during that time as a lone example - challenging the definitions of success! According to Neill, the schools had to be structured around one theme - how the child feels, rather than what he must know!
However, the question whether that school was "successful" would again raise another question of how we choose to define "success" - if we aren't convinced about the definition followed by society at large.
What was clear though - Summerhill accepted students who were labeled as "problem" children, where largely the families, societies had almost given up on them i.e. I think they had already been relegated to being failures. Neill has gone on to define what success meant to him and quoted examples of how some of his children did succeed according to his definition.
I would greatly encourage this group to keep that book for discussion or reading together a few excerpts that would challenge our thinking even in existing paradigms of thinking.
Saurabh
Thanks for the recommendation Saurabh! I had not heard about Summerhill but will defiitely follow p with some research of my own.
We are ALWAYS keen on finding such schools because we look to them as models of what is possible.
If you are in Mumbai and would like to facilitate a club meeting around this book, we would be happy to have you. I will still go ahead and recommend it at our next meeting.
Hey Purvi,
Unfortunately I am not in Mumbai, based out of Jaipur now :) I am mailing you a brief overview of the book (e-copy) that definitely is not the complete book.
Just let me know your address and I shall send you a copy :)
Saurabh
Post a Comment