This is precisely what I’m working to do with CASE, the Center for Advancing Sudbury Education.

The primary obstacle facing truly alternative education is that our government has a virtual monopoly on education. We’re compelled by law to give financial support to the government’s schools; anyone wishing a full-fledged alternative has to pay for that with after-tax dollars.

Why must we continue to confuse government-guaranteed access to education with the government’s being in charge of the schools?

This discussion hits very close to home; too close for comfort.

“Should I stay or should I go?” Yes, I was hearing that tune in my own head in the mid-90s, during my stint as a public-school teacher. I decided that, for my own health, I had to leave; but I experienced considerable guilt at the ones I’d be leaving behind.

It’s difficult not to get riled up, or to rile others, when discussing such issues. I’ve often said in public presentations that I’d rather discuss politics and religion than education, because arguing over who’s in charge of the country or universe is nothing compared to arguing over the right way to raise kids.

So I really don’t want to alienate or anger anyone, but I do want to put some of your words up against themselves:

You say:

your comment that it’s better “to keep working in the current system, critiquing it, and at the same time preparing for a new one” is pretty much where I stand

and also:

I can’t say I have much hope that schools will ever, at least in my lifetime, decide to change themselves into something without bells, prescribed curriculum, and true youth empowerment.

I can’t tell you what’s right for you, of course, but I will share with you my choice: I decided that I didn’t want to wait until my next lifetime to make a real change. I decided that the best thing I could do would be to do whatever I could to promote an alternative approach, rather than work within (for or against, as a reformer or subversive) a system unlikely to change itself.

Two roads are diverging in a forest. Granted, one path offers, presently, little in the way of financial rewards; but I’m telling you, Frost had it right: the road less traveled has, for me, made all the difference indeed.

Please let me know if you are interested in a complimentary DVD of the full length film (80 mins.)

You can email me a mailing address.

Danny Mydlack
newamericanschoolhouse.com
dmydlack@towson.edu

I’m not sure I see anything in Miguel’s reply that I can agree with in my own experience in schools of students organizing for much of anything beyond a better prom or lunch, so I wonder if he gave evidence of that. I also don’t think he’s fair to Stephen to dismiss Stephen’s ideas as “whining,” when they are substantive, whereas Miguel’s response is not. I’m new to Downes, so this makes me curious about the treatment his ideas receive. (I’ve also occasionally read Miguel, and seen him once at least consider quitting his job because he’s seeing no change in education, so he seems conflicted about this basic issue.)

By “one future to choose” I really was hinting at the possibility of quitting school at some point to explore alternative educations without them. (Again, the paycheck is a golden handcuff that makes this a challenge.)

I know that “Abby” is the daughter of privilege, so her “unschooling” is problematic. Most students’ parents are not a sleep-researching father and stay-at-home mother like hers. So finding alternatives for all, instead of just the privileged, leads me to dead ends right now.

But the idea of spending my last decades participating in attempts to create alternatives to a system that, if not “totally” broken still attracts me. Yes, I’ve seen moments of value in my classrooms. But the cost-benefit analysis of those moments for young people doesn’t comfort me. Are they worth 12 years of factory processing we subject our students to?

And isn’t the search for other ways an attractive one?