I hope you enjoyed the "This American Life" podcast about the Brooklyn Free School. How is it an example of Deweyan educational principles in action and how is it not?
Hearing about the Brooklyn Free School was very interesting. I had never heard of it beforehand it definitely sounds a bit out there. I personally don't think I would want to be apart of a school like, although if it was with high school, I think it would be different. To me, it is an example of Deweyan education because he believed that classrooms should be like a democracy, which is what the students in the Brooklyn Free School were doing. Also, he wanted things to focus on what was going on in students' lives, such as acting as members of society and living in a community. Many believed that classrooms would become out of hand if children were able to make more choices and have more freedom, but it sounds like the Brooklyn Free School is progressing with this idea quite a bit. The Brooklyn Free School is in a lot of ways like Dewey education, but one way it is not it because the students have a little less authority than I think Dewey would have wanted. But let's be real, in this day and time, that can't possibly be the way. I think the Free School and Dewey are great things to incorporate in your classroom. Children are individuals and should have more choice in what they do in the classroom.
From listening to the story about the Brooklyn Free School, it seems as though the idea of the Brooklyn Free School comes from the very progressives that Dewey was trying to re-explain his ideas to in the text. In the Brooklyn Free School, “the kids decide everything about how the school is run”; they have several meetings every single day from topics ranging from getting students on and off screens to calling people names.
While taking responsibility for learning is, in part, what Dewey was talking about, giving the students full authority without adult guidance goes against his educational principles. For example, when the students are in a meeting to get rid of the no screen week for older students, a teacher chimes in with her experience, saying that when they “made this rule, there was a lot of conversation about the positive things that it would bring for high schoolers. [They] talked a lot about the effects that a log of screen time has on sleep…” In Dewey’s perspective, if the teacher believes her knowledge would benefit “the interest of the group as a whole, she can “exercise authority in a personal way… in behalf of the interest of the group, not as an exhibition of personal power.” I think Dewey would be excited about the idea of having meetings as a school to decide rules and norms and the idea of students deciding what they want to study as it permits “free play for individuality of experience,” but would caution against putting the students’ ideas above the teachers’ in every single case. For example, when a student called a meeting for being called a “whore” but no specific consequence for calling names was established, the teacher could exercise her leadership and urge students to create a consequence, as it would prevent future meetings on this matter (and establish the norm that calling people names is not ok). The teacher should be a leader rather than a dictator, someone who is “firm enough to give direction towards continuous development of power.”
Hello everyone, John Dewey is well known for his ideas on public education and also for the reform, and attempted reform, of public education. The idea of a student-run school, as depicted in the Brooklyn School example, may just possibly be as alien to John Dewey as having actual aliens come down to teach classes. John Dewey has an idea, called the principle of continuity of experience, that he often refers to in 'Experience and Education.' By this I think that he means that every attempt to reform education must pay heed to, and be informed by, educational techniques of the past. It is true that all new things must at some point be new, but a student-run secondary school would likely be rather confounding to Dr. Dewey.
The idea of students operating a school may have its merits, but to Dr. Dewey the idea of children deciding the curriculum and what activities will actually comprise the school day is quite likely absurd. Dr. Dewey writes, "But the gulf between the mature or adult products and the experience and abilities of the young is so wide that the very situation forbids much active participation by pupils in the development of what is taught." Students, according to Dr. Dewey, are almost by definition incapable of deciding the curriculum. This makes sense to me. It would be extremely unwise to place a person who has never laid bricks in charge of a masonry class. Dr. Dewey would likely not appreciate the random appearance of the operation of the Brooklyn School as he writes, "The main purpose or objective is to prepare the young for future responsibilities and for success in life, by means of acquisition of the ORGANIZED BODIES OF INFORMATION and PREPARED FORMS OF SKILL." Schools such as the Brooklyn School, and similar others that we have been introduced to at VCU this semester, appear to lack organization in what it is that they are trying to teach. As the narrator said in the Brooklyn School story, there are a lot of meetings and few, if any, decisions being made. This sounds like the operation of a poorly functioning business.
Dr. Dewey acknowledges that a new idea often must reject the old. He writes, "When external authority is rejected, it does not follow that all authority should be rejected, but rather that there is need to search for a more effective source of authority." Dr. Dewey may appreciate the idea that a new method is being attempted, but would probably feel that in this example it goes too far. The past should not be completely disposed of, but purposefully incorporated into a new idea. To me, the example in the Brooklyn School of the students being on their screens "all day" when the screen time prohibition was once lifted, is an example that it may be a bit too soon for an effective school to operate in the manner of the Brooklyn School. Thanks, Sunny
Listening to the podcast was really interesting. At first I couldn't believe that anything would or could ever get accomplished by students in a school run by students, and I was genuinely surprised to hear that so many of the students move onto higher education. Beyond my own surprise, I can see how this would be considered somewhat Deweyan or Dewey inspired. The students are creating their environment and learning about what interests them, not what someone else has said is appropriate to learn. However I do not believe Dewey would have ever set up a school to be run entirely by the student body. Dewey knew and appreciated the importance of a well trained, knowledgeable teacher. The importance of the teachers at the Brooklyn Free School is almost invalid, at least that is the impression from listening to the podcast. The teachers seem to just be there for guidance when needed, but even then their guidance can be ignored or easily overruled. I agree with Sunny's thought that Dewey may appreciate the idea of the school but that the Brooklyn Free School is pushing the limits on "rejecting authority".
Listening to the Brooklyn Free School was very interesting. The whole idea of how the school approaches learning and handling problems is very different. The students determining curriculum daily activities is daunting. I understand the concept of the school, however I cannot say it may be the best approach.
I agree students should have a voice in determining how problems are addressed in the school. I also believe students should have establish guidelines to what they are expose to. When the student wanted to address being called a "whore", any young students should have been excluded from that meeting. The younger student didn't know what the word even meant.
I can only imagine what Dr. Dewey would think about the Brooklyn Free School. He would probably agree to some concepts and other concepts would be questionable. I am sure in this discussion, each of us will have our own thoughts and opinions about the school.
Dr. Dewey mention that neither "traditional and progressive" are sufficient in itself. Both are essential. That says to me, that both are needed to accomplish the best results. There must be a balance in everything. I believe every "new idea" is based upon something that has already been established. Whether the entire concept or parts of a concept. The "new" is usually the result of trying to improve on something that we believe is obsolete or no longer effective.
The Brooklyn Free School seems to follow more in line with John Dewey's description of what progressive education seeks to accomplish. The Free Schools does seem to focus on the present and the future and spends little time focusing on the past. For example, when the young girl called a meeting because the two boys called her a "whore," the girl said what she needed to say and that was that. There was no further exploration into the matter. Also, the Free School does not have a rigid, preset curriculum as is the case with traditional education methods. I think that John Dewey would appreciate the flexibility of the Free School and that the school teaches their students important life skills for the future such as the democratic process and conflict resolution. However, Dewey probably would advocate for a bit more structured learning in the school. He feels that it is important to learn from the past in order to shape the future and the Free School spends very little time focusing on anything from the past.
Initially, I was quite shocked after listening to the clip about how The Brooklyn Free School runs their school. It's not a traditional school in the least bit; all students have the power and authority in the school while teachers do not have authority. Students frequently have meetings where they bring up issues or concerns, and as a whole, students vote on whether they want to pass a new rule or change something. Basically, The Brooklyn Free School is a school based on democracy where even teachers have to pitch ideas and the students decide what they do with those ideas. I can see where this can be a good idea, but I do think it could focus too much on meetings and less on the curriculum. I think Dewey would agree with the concept the school has, but would probably do so with more structure in regards to teacher facilitation and the curriculum. Schools can still have a democracy with structure and facilitation from adults. In my opinion, teacher facilitation of some sort and structure can be very beneficial for children and their education. Ashley's comment talks about how Dewey appreciated a well-trained and knowledgable teacher, so I think he would be disappointed in the fact that the teachers don't have much of a say. Even one of the students said she feels bad for the teachers because even their suggestions and concerns are not acted on.
My first thoughts on the podcast were similar to Kathleen's, but I believe it is because we're so adjusted to the way we grew up and what form of education we've received. It's the extreme opposite from what we know, as Dewey alludes to in the first chapter. Additionally, another sentence I found strikingly familiar was Dewey's comment that, "The rise of what is called new education and progressive schools is of itself a product of discontent with traditional education." With discontent among how public education is going, people love jumping to another extreme as a "last chance" measure. As for the Brooklyn Free School, I think Dewey would approve of it because he was opinionated about not forcing opinions on students (if I read Chapter 4 correctly, that is). However, I think Dewey may draw the line if he didn't know (like I still don't know) what kind of curriculum they are supposed to be following or whether or not there are any goals. And like Ashley and Kathleen's comments, he may be disturbed by the lack of voice teachers have on how the school should be run or what the best measures are for the students.
I was also impressed that Dewey acknowledged students from unique housing situations or just a disruptive home life. You'd expect a lot less empathy in a piece like this, but even Dewey knows everyone has bad days, weeks, years. Or that sometimes home lives don't look like the way they ideally (depending on who you talk to) should.
Like most have already stated, I too found the podcast to be very interesting. I have always been an advocate for giving students more freedom in the classroom, but to completely relinquish all control? I am not so sure about that. While listening, I kept thinking to myself that there was no way this could work or be effective. But they talked about how it gives them more responsibility and while there are lots of meetings, many with no conclusions, they are left with something to think about and they take their authority given by the school seriously. I think it is important to give students freedom and to let them make changes and let their voice be heard, as these are all important things to have as a member in society. I also think by giving these students all the freedom, they would be more inclined to take control over their own learning. However, I still am not sure about the actual academics part for this type of school. I guess it is just hard to wrap my head around since I am used to and familiar with one way of schooling. As far as this being an example of Deweyan educational practices, I definitely think it is to some extent. He mentions that the purpose of school is to prepare the young for future responsibilities and for success in life. Through this school, students are taking on huge responsibilities and their success is completely in their control. He also states that new education emphasizes freedom of the learner, which is definitely happening in The Brooklyn Free School. However, he also mentions that the teachers are the agents through which knowledge and skills are communicated and rules of conduct are enforced, so in that way I think this schooling would go against his beliefs because it seems that the teachers don't have very much control or voice at all and the students are learning what and how they want. I think in general Dewey would like this type of schooling, just maybe with some more structure.
I really enjoyed this podcast. Hearing about different ways of schooling is always intriguing. When your initial thought is "there is no way in hell that could work", and it does, it really grabs your attention and gets your mind thinking, thinking about ways you (as a future teacher) can incorporate some of their methods into your classroom. So hearing what the Brooklyn Free School is all about was unique, interesting, and I thought, very in line with John Dewey's educational principles. The Brooklyn Free School honors student choice and facilitate student-centered learning through play and exploration which I think directly correlates with Dewey's beliefs that the center of education is the child's own social activities and that we learn by doing. The school also supports social and emotional development through conflict mediation, personal reflection, diversity awareness and community responsibility which also relates to Dewey's belief that education is life, not preparation for life. With that being said, I had a hard time finding anything that didn't relate to Dewey's beliefs because I felt like everything the school was for, in some sense, was in line with his beliefs.
It is an interesting concept that students should be able to have the final say in their education and the environment in which they go to school. I had never heard of the Brooklyn Free School before listening to this podcast and I was genuinely intrigued with whether the concept would work. However, after listening, I do not think that the school truly helps children prepare for the future. Dewey says that this is merely a goal of traditional education, and while I do not believe that our education system today solely relies on the foundations of traditional education, I do think that there is an overall goal in today’s education system to prepare students for the “real world.” Dewey claims that traditional education is “one of imposition from above and from outside,” something that the Brooklyn Free School certainly is not. The issue I take with this is that students ignore the wisdom and advice of the teachers in the school and the adults have no say. It takes the idea of traditional schooling to the opposite extreme. He says, “the teacher…[becomes] the leader of group activities.” The teacher is not in control, but her experience is noted and appreciated. As heard in the discussion of the removal of “no screens week”, this does not seem to be the case in the Brooklyn Free School. So then, when these students go to work in the real world, will they be able to accept that they will not have a vote in every decision that affects them?
Dewey’s view of progressive education is that students would learn through experience. The Brooklyn Free School certainly allows for this in its hands-on methods and student-centered democratic decision-making process. While Dewey believes that freedom in education is important, he also says, “the educational problem is not solved when this aspect of freedom is obtained…What end does it serve?” This is again where the Brooklyn Free School seems to break away from Dewey’s views. The children’s freedom of choice seems to be the ultimate end at this school.
In all, there are aspects of the Brooklyn Free School that I think Dewey would agree with, but I do not think that he would support the entirety of the model they use.
When listening to the podcast I also thought about Dewey's view that children learn through experience. Dewey talks about how experiences should be judged on two qualities: how agreeable or disagreeable it is and also its influence on later experiences. He says "...the central problem of education based upon experience is to select the kind of experiences that live fruitfully and creatively in subsequent experiences." With that in mind, what then is the influence of the experience of the meetings that have no resolution?
I feel as though the meetings that were called that had no follow up or subsequent action would go against Dewey’s view of experience in education. The experience may meet the first quality of being agreeable. However, how does an experience where they never find a resolution influence later learning and experiences? In the podcast it is said that the meetings with no resolution have happened several times. While this may show that the previous experience did influence subsequent experiences (they didn’t find a resolution the first time, so they don’t have to find it the second time) does that mean that the experience was a quality educational one?
Chapter one of the reading discusses progressive versus traditional education. The purpose of traditional education is to pass down information/skills to individuals and teaches conformity--essentially preparing the newer generations for the future based on what was successful in the past. What is taught is static. Progressive education emphasizes quality and meaningful personal experience and experiment, so teachers are encouraged to incorporate these freedoms in order to teach the whole student. I think that the free school model in Brooklyn practices this type of freedom in their method because they allow choice and more of a constructivist-based education. A lot of the rules are created by the students, making it a very democratic environment that is both important and relevant for the learners in the "real world." I think in my future classroom, I would like to create a sense of democracy, but I am not sure if I would be comfortable in handing down all control to my students, especially in the elementary grades. Maybe when it comes to making classroom rules and consequences, then I would gladly encourage that, but in terms of calling a meeting every time they think it is necessary... I'm not sure about that. I think this is a more effective model that could work better in higher grade levels like the Brooklyn Free School, but may not be as effective with younger students because of the lack of provided structure.
Listening to this account of the Brooklyn free school was fascinating, and I appreciated that Gunther didn't really draw a conclusion of whether or not the free school was a better method of schooling or not. At first sight, the free school seems to be very similar to Dewey's views on proper educations. One thing he emphasizes is the importance of democracy, and its ability to cultivate a "better quality of human experience". The Brooklyn Free School certainly does rely on democracy, but I think that it leans way to heavily on that one trick. Simply establishing democracy as the center of everything in a school isn't enough to make it the pinnacle of human experience to learners. I think the free school leans more towards the blind progressivism that Dewey describes in the first chapter, focusing more on rejecting existing conventions than actually striving towards positive change. Listening to the students debate during their meetings was interesting, but slightly frustrating. Dewey liked the idea of experience based education, but he also admitted that the experience of the past can enrich the future. The teachers of the free school tried to chime in to the meetings with input based on their past experience that could have been valuable, but were mostly ignored by the quarreling students. DeweyI also think the students ability to call meetings with no structure isn't very productive. When one girl was bullied, she called a meeting with no foresight to a goal or end product of her meeting. We got a very small glimpse into the free school so I would be interested in learning more about how education is carried out there. The fact that so many students there go on to higher education was surprising to me.
On text, it sounds like the Brooklyn Free School would be a disaster. However, it was really eye-opening to hear these students were really owning up to their roles and taking responsibilities. Personally, I still stand with the standard schooling system, but I really respect what Brooklyn Free School stands for. You can easily incorporate some aspects of the Brooklyn Free school such as: including your students when establishing classroom rules, having students vote on certain matter, making time for class meeting, and etc.. The Brooklyn Free School gives every student to have their voices be heard and exercise their freedom. While it's so important to provide opportunities for students to speak up and feel like they're part of the school, an extreme of anything can cause more damage.
The Brooklyn Free School definitely has some parts that John Dewey would agree with. The school is set up in a way that the students are 100% in charge of what goes on in their school. They are responsible for taking ownership towards their education, which I think John Dewey would agree with. However, students being in charge about anything and everything sort of goes against the Deweyan principles. The teacher's role is supposed to be the facilitator and if he/she believes the students are making decisions that will not benefit them, he/she has every right to exercise their authority. In the Brooklyn Free School, the teacher's vote counts just as much as the students, making it hard to exert their authority. The Brooklyn Free School has lots of components that Dewey was encouraging, but he'd look for a bit more structure.
As I go into my first year of teaching, I definitely want to give my students choices and make sure their voices are heard. It'd be really cool to bring in some of the Brooklyn Free School's principles and see how it unfolds in my classroom.
I read through chapter 4 and chapter 5 of Dewey's educational principles. Chapter 4 talked about the experience of education. The Brooklyn Free school exemplifies this principle, because the kids in the school are using their experiences to lead them and dictate how their school should handle tough situations. This chapter also explored who should be in charge, the teachers or the students? In the Brooklyn Free School, the students largely have control, though there are staff members who supervise the student's meetings.
In chapter 5, Dewey talks about the nature of freedom, and how the educational experience needs to give children freedom of choice and autonomy. This aligns with the Brooklyn Free School principles because those students have complete autonomy in how their individual education is going to be.
I believe that students should have a say in how their education and classroom is conducted. However, I also feel that adults and the wisdom that adults have gathered throughout their lives have a very important role into shaping them into caring and responsible adults. As a teacher, I wouldn't want to give up the very important role of mentoring and being a role model to students. I think that it also is beneficial for the teacher to fill the role of guiding students in constructive problem solving.
Before listening to the podcast I thought to myself how can this be effective? Where is the structure? There’s no courses, no tests, no homework, how exactly are these students running this school? To my surprise, it really got me thinking—specifically about how much freedom students actually have within the classroom in today’s society. At the Brooklyn Free School students are required to attend all school democratic meetings, but they are also allowed to interrupt the school day for an impromptu meeting. To me, it seemed like many students do this impulsively and out of anger. I do agree, and I think Dewey would agree, that it gives students a sense of responsibility, they learn to speak up for themselves, and it gets them thinking, what’re we going to do about it? However, many of these meetings end without a resolution or consequences. In chapter 6, Dewey says that a purpose is an end-view—it involves foresight of the consequences which will result from acting upon impulse. The foresight of these consequences requires intelligence. Many of the students are observing the conditions and circumstances during these meetings, but they are not taking action. They are not taking the significance of the necessary consequences into consideration. I agree with Nick’s comment that Dewey liked the idea of experience based education while he also noted that experience of the past can enrich the future. If the teachers of the free school were taken seriously and allowed to express their concerns, wisdom, and or past experiences at the meetings I think it would make a difference. The students would be able to form more practical solutions and consequences with the help of an older more experienced educator.
The Brooklyn Free School has components that appreciate Deweyan principles and others that do not. For example, I think that the Brooklyn Free School does an excellent job of preparing its students for successes later in life: it is a great example of democracy, and its students built skills in working with and listening to others, as well as calling meetings and standing up for themselves and making educated decisions. However, I think that it is unlikely that Dewey would support that the teachers have no overruling, as he refers to them as "the agents through which knowledge and skills are communicated and rules of conduct: enforced". Another aspect that I think supports the Deweyan principle is that the students are very involved in what they are learning. In other words, it isn't static, and the content is thought about in terms of how it has changed, and how it will affect them in the future. In my opinion, it is always important to incorporate relevant information and contexts with your students. It gives an answer to the popular "why do I need to know this?" question, as well as motivation and generates interest in the topic, which also supports retention in long- term memory. These projects also help students with their role of being active members of a community, and growing up to be adults that are conscientious of their world.
The Brooklyn Free School can be considered an example of a Deweyan educational principle due to the exposure of experience. I read chapter 2 of Dewey's book, where he talks about the importance of personal experience. In the podcast, there were several examples of debates/meetings between students which showed the idea of a progressive education. Conducting debates and meetings can prepare these students for real world situations. Working out problems is a perfect example of an experience that children will sooner or later learn. By going through this experience,this brings the notion of Dewey's idea of progressive education where the learning is less traditional and more on using experiences with education to create a meaningful connection. Involving students like the example of The Brooklyn Free School gives students meaning to learning. It is not static, which as Dewey says, "forbids much active participation by pupils in the development of what is taught (Dewey,6)." By including students, they become active participants in the society of the school system which thus increases engagement and academic achievement.
I believe Dewey would agree with a lot of that the Brooklyn Free School implements. Much like what Sunny said, Dewey is about student experience and exposure. All of which I agree with, however, I only believe the BFS to be successful due to its' small size. It would be very hard to practice that much law and order (dun dun) in a larger environment. But perhaps that's the point? The notion that assembly line education doesn't work anymore.
But the flip side of that would be the fear that the BFS graduates students that believe if they do not like something, all they have to do is complain or argue or debate to the point of no return, in which they receive their desired outcome.
In reality, I believe the BFS graduates individuals that are more connected to their community and we all know the tremendous benefits to one being an active member of his or her community....Again, I believe Dewey would certainly agree with that notion.
Sorry about the late post! Listening to the podcast about the Brooklyn Free School (BFS) was amazing. Just the fact that this exist is progress. I would support the idea that BFS sets an example of Deweyan Education principles. The one instance of the student Malia having the ability to call a meeting with the entire school because she felt disrespected by two students provides the space to learn from the 'here and now'. As a school they were able to holf a discussion about the situation and other students were given the opportunity to express their pains. Yet from my understanding I believe Deweyan Education Principles also touched on the classroom material connecting to their personal lives. I would have enjoyed learning about the classroom structure at the BFS.
The Brooklyn Free School is an example of Deweyan educational principles in action because the students rule the school. Dewey would really appreciate this school because it embeds education with democracy. The students call meetings and vote to pass or reject rules. The students have the power to propose changes, suggestions, and concerns. All students have an equal voice and can call a meeting anytime they want to about whatever they want to discuss. The teachers are present, but act as facilitators or chime in from time-to-time to voice their opinions. I think the way this school is run is so peculiar and interesting. I love that it’s mostly functional and the students are given authority, responsibility, and accountability over their actions and consequences, however, it is a little concerning that most meetings end without resolutions and that follow-up meetings rarely occur. I believe it is important to come up with a resolution or at least a temporary resolution. The practice of discussion is important, however, being able to create resolutions or compromises are just as important. Or else, the issue will continue to persist or even get worse!
The Brooklyn Free School hold deweyan educational principles in that it is run as a full democracy where majority rules and students get to participate and fully mold their educational experience. It does not express the same principles when a situation comes up where the adult in the room feels they know more about a particular subject and can make a better decision for the children, and gets over-ruled. I think that this school is good and a little extreme at the same time. I don't think it would work large schools at the democratic level that the Brooklyn free school is. I love the participation of the clearly driven students who attend, and think that this gives student ownership over their learning. I'm sure the students are much more interested in topics when they're allowed to choose what to learn about. I wonder though if there is some kind of structure? Do they get a choice of classes to pick from like in college? Do they have any specific requirements to finish school and graduate?
I found this school to be very fascinating. I believe that it does promote a positive idea of democracy and equality within the school by ensuring that students are active participants in their education, but I am hesitant about its effectiveness when addressing the amount in which these students are learning. I was intrigued when the students were discussing screen time and weighing the pros and cons of it, but was a little set back by the fact that these students were using these forms of technology to play video games during class time. Dewey was very adamant on the importance of students having a say in what they learn and providing them with opportunities to be intrigues and study topics that are of importance to them. Because of this, I believe that he would appreciate the notion of learning upon experience and working to find meanings to topics that are of some form of significance to the students. I do, however, feel as though he would be displeased with the fact that the teachers are simply bystanders in the students’ education. Because he relays the importance of teachers serving as an “igniter” in the education of students, I feel as though he would feel strongly about the fact that the teachers are not teaching or using their own experiences to help their students build on their own understandings. I do see the importance of creating a school system in which students are taken seriously and given opportunities to be in charge and make decisions for themselves. However, similarly to Dewey, I believe that teachers should help students spark ideas and then give them the resources they need to make meaning of it for themselves. In doing this, students still have the ability to be in charge of how they choose to learn.
The Brooklyn Free School is a great way for its children to learn about democracy--through experience. I think this is how John Dewey's educational principals tie in with this. From what I could collect from Dewey's book, he puts a great deal of emphasis on experience as being an important part of education. With every individual who receives an education, comes some kind of experience. It could be a good one or bad one, but there is always one. They kind of go hand in hand.
Going back to the podcast on the Brooklyn Free School, students are being taught real world skills through this sort of progressive approach. They learn communication, collaboration, and listening. I was really impressed that the students were able to make decisions that were productive to their learning experience. They really seemed to know what was best for them. I do think it might be a little radical to have the kids decide on EVERYTHING, but it definitely gave a fresh outlook on how education can be, as opposed to traditional methods.
Hearing about the Brooklyn Free School was enlightening. I had learned about it before, but not as in depth as here. The classrooms sound pretty sweet in theory, focusing on student growth into productive members that advance society. It seems many teachers might find dewey appealing, but don't look at his entire picture. The current adaptation of his ideals seems to be the universal design of learning, which does give students freedom of choice, but does not do much in terms of adapting the curriculum. It still sticks to the normal standards, which gives little focus to societal advancement.
Hearing about the Brooklyn Free School was very interesting. I had never heard of it beforehand it definitely sounds a bit out there. I personally don't think I would want to be apart of a school like, although if it was with high school, I think it would be different. To me, it is an example of Deweyan education because he believed that classrooms should be like a democracy, which is what the students in the Brooklyn Free School were doing. Also, he wanted things to focus on what was going on in students' lives, such as acting as members of society and living in a community. Many believed that classrooms would become out of hand if children were able to make more choices and have more freedom, but it sounds like the Brooklyn Free School is progressing with this idea quite a bit. The Brooklyn Free School is in a lot of ways like Dewey education, but one way it is not it because the students have a little less authority than I think Dewey would have wanted. But let's be real, in this day and time, that can't possibly be the way. I think the Free School and Dewey are great things to incorporate in your classroom. Children are individuals and should have more choice in what they do in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteFrom listening to the story about the Brooklyn Free School, it seems as though the idea of the Brooklyn Free School comes from the very progressives that Dewey was trying to re-explain his ideas to in the text. In the Brooklyn Free School, “the kids decide everything about how the school is run”; they have several meetings every single day from topics ranging from getting students on and off screens to calling people names.
ReplyDeleteWhile taking responsibility for learning is, in part, what Dewey was talking about, giving the students full authority without adult guidance goes against his educational principles. For example, when the students are in a meeting to get rid of the no screen week for older students, a teacher chimes in with her experience, saying that when they “made this rule, there was a lot of conversation about the positive things that it would bring for high schoolers. [They] talked a lot about the effects that a log of screen time has on sleep…” In Dewey’s perspective, if the teacher believes her knowledge would benefit “the interest of the group as a whole, she can “exercise authority in a personal way… in behalf of the interest of the group, not as an exhibition of personal power.” I think Dewey would be excited about the idea of having meetings as a school to decide rules and norms and the idea of students deciding what they want to study as it permits “free play for individuality of experience,” but would caution against putting the students’ ideas above the teachers’ in every single case. For example, when a student called a meeting for being called a “whore” but no specific consequence for calling names was established, the teacher could exercise her leadership and urge students to create a consequence, as it would prevent future meetings on this matter (and establish the norm that calling people names is not ok). The teacher should be a leader rather than a dictator, someone who is “firm enough to give direction towards continuous development of power.”
Hello everyone,
ReplyDeleteJohn Dewey is well known for his ideas on public education and also for the reform, and attempted reform, of public education. The idea of a student-run school, as depicted in the Brooklyn School example, may just possibly be as alien to John Dewey as having actual aliens come down to teach classes. John Dewey has an idea, called the principle of continuity of experience, that he often refers to in 'Experience and Education.' By this I think that he means that every attempt to reform education must pay heed to, and be informed by, educational techniques of the past. It is true that all new things must at some point be new, but a student-run secondary school would likely be rather confounding to Dr. Dewey.
The idea of students operating a school may have its merits, but to Dr. Dewey the idea of children deciding the curriculum and what activities will actually comprise the school day is quite likely absurd. Dr. Dewey writes, "But the gulf between the mature or adult products and the experience and abilities of the young is so wide that the very situation forbids much active participation by pupils in the development of what is taught." Students, according to Dr. Dewey, are almost by definition incapable of deciding the curriculum. This makes sense to me. It would be extremely unwise to place a person who has never laid bricks in charge of a masonry class. Dr. Dewey would likely not appreciate the random appearance of the operation of the Brooklyn School as he writes, "The main purpose or objective is to prepare the young for future responsibilities and for success in life, by means of acquisition of the ORGANIZED BODIES OF INFORMATION and PREPARED FORMS OF SKILL." Schools such as the Brooklyn School, and similar others that we have been introduced to at VCU this semester, appear to lack organization in what it is that they are trying to teach. As the narrator said in the Brooklyn School story, there are a lot of meetings and few, if any, decisions being made. This sounds like the operation of a poorly functioning business.
Dr. Dewey acknowledges that a new idea often must reject the old. He writes, "When external authority is rejected, it does not follow that all authority should be rejected, but rather that there is need to search for a more effective source of authority." Dr. Dewey may appreciate the idea that a new method is being attempted, but would probably feel that in this example it goes too far. The past should not be completely disposed of, but purposefully incorporated into a new idea. To me, the example in the Brooklyn School of the students being on their screens "all day" when the screen time prohibition was once lifted, is an example that it may be a bit too soon for an effective school to operate in the manner of the Brooklyn School.
Thanks,
Sunny
Listening to the podcast was really interesting. At first I couldn't believe that anything would or could ever get accomplished by students in a school run by students, and I was genuinely surprised to hear that so many of the students move onto higher education. Beyond my own surprise, I can see how this would be considered somewhat Deweyan or Dewey inspired. The students are creating their environment and learning about what interests them, not what someone else has said is appropriate to learn. However I do not believe Dewey would have ever set up a school to be run entirely by the student body. Dewey knew and appreciated the importance of a well trained, knowledgeable teacher. The importance of the teachers at the Brooklyn Free School is almost invalid, at least that is the impression from listening to the podcast. The teachers seem to just be there for guidance when needed, but even then their guidance can be ignored or easily overruled. I agree with Sunny's thought that Dewey may appreciate the idea of the school but that the Brooklyn Free School is pushing the limits on "rejecting authority".
ReplyDeleteListening to the Brooklyn Free School was very interesting. The whole idea of how the school approaches learning and handling problems is very different. The students determining curriculum daily activities is daunting. I understand the concept of the school, however I cannot say it may be the best approach.
ReplyDeleteI agree students should have a voice in determining how problems are addressed in the school. I also believe students should have establish guidelines to what they are expose to. When the student wanted to address being called a "whore", any young students should have been excluded from that meeting. The younger student didn't know what the word even meant.
I can only imagine what Dr. Dewey would think about the Brooklyn Free School. He would probably agree to some concepts and other concepts would be questionable. I am sure in this discussion, each of us will have our own thoughts and opinions about the school.
Dr. Dewey mention that neither "traditional and progressive" are sufficient in itself. Both are essential. That says to me, that both are needed to accomplish the best results. There must be a balance in everything. I believe every "new idea" is based upon something that has already been established. Whether the entire concept or parts of a concept. The "new" is usually the result of trying to improve on something that we believe is obsolete or no longer effective.
The Brooklyn Free School seems to follow more in line with John Dewey's description of what progressive education seeks to accomplish. The Free Schools does seem to focus on the present and the future and spends little time focusing on the past. For example, when the young girl called a meeting because the two boys called her a "whore," the girl said what she needed to say and that was that. There was no further exploration into the matter. Also, the Free School does not have a rigid, preset curriculum as is the case with traditional education methods. I think that John Dewey would appreciate the flexibility of the Free School and that the school teaches their students important life skills for the future such as the democratic process and conflict resolution. However, Dewey probably would advocate for a bit more structured learning in the school. He feels that it is important to learn from the past in order to shape the future and the Free School spends very little time focusing on anything from the past.
ReplyDeleteInitially, I was quite shocked after listening to the clip about how The Brooklyn Free School runs their school. It's not a traditional school in the least bit; all students have the power and authority in the school while teachers do not have authority. Students frequently have meetings where they bring up issues or concerns, and as a whole, students vote on whether they want to pass a new rule or change something. Basically, The Brooklyn Free School is a school based on democracy where even teachers have to pitch ideas and the students decide what they do with those ideas. I can see where this can be a good idea, but I do think it could focus too much on meetings and less on the curriculum. I think Dewey would agree with the concept the school has, but would probably do so with more structure in regards to teacher facilitation and the curriculum. Schools can still have a democracy with structure and facilitation from adults. In my opinion, teacher facilitation of some sort and structure can be very beneficial for children and their education. Ashley's comment talks about how Dewey appreciated a well-trained and knowledgable teacher, so I think he would be disappointed in the fact that the teachers don't have much of a say. Even one of the students said she feels bad for the teachers because even their suggestions and concerns are not acted on.
ReplyDeleteMy first thoughts on the podcast were similar to Kathleen's, but I believe it is because we're so adjusted to the way we grew up and what form of education we've received. It's the extreme opposite from what we know, as Dewey alludes to in the first chapter. Additionally, another sentence I found strikingly familiar was Dewey's comment that, "The rise of what is called new education and progressive schools is of itself a product of discontent with traditional education." With discontent among how public education is going, people love jumping to another extreme as a "last chance" measure. As for the Brooklyn Free School, I think Dewey would approve of it because he was opinionated about not forcing opinions on students (if I read Chapter 4 correctly, that is). However, I think Dewey may draw the line if he didn't know (like I still don't know) what kind of curriculum they are supposed to be following or whether or not there are any goals. And like Ashley and Kathleen's comments, he may be disturbed by the lack of voice teachers have on how the school should be run or what the best measures are for the students.
ReplyDeleteI was also impressed that Dewey acknowledged students from unique housing situations or just a disruptive home life. You'd expect a lot less empathy in a piece like this, but even Dewey knows everyone has bad days, weeks, years. Or that sometimes home lives don't look like the way they ideally (depending on who you talk to) should.
Like most have already stated, I too found the podcast to be very interesting. I have always been an advocate for giving students more freedom in the classroom, but to completely relinquish all control? I am not so sure about that. While listening, I kept thinking to myself that there was no way this could work or be effective. But they talked about how it gives them more responsibility and while there are lots of meetings, many with no conclusions, they are left with something to think about and they take their authority given by the school seriously. I think it is important to give students freedom and to let them make changes and let their voice be heard, as these are all important things to have as a member in society. I also think by giving these students all the freedom, they would be more inclined to take control over their own learning. However, I still am not sure about the actual academics part for this type of school. I guess it is just hard to wrap my head around since I am used to and familiar with one way of schooling.
ReplyDeleteAs far as this being an example of Deweyan educational practices, I definitely think it is to some extent. He mentions that the purpose of school is to prepare the young for future responsibilities and for success in life. Through this school, students are taking on huge responsibilities and their success is completely in their control. He also states that new education emphasizes freedom of the learner, which is definitely happening in The Brooklyn Free School. However, he also mentions that the teachers are the agents through which knowledge and skills are communicated and rules of conduct are enforced, so in that way I think this schooling would go against his beliefs because it seems that the teachers don't have very much control or voice at all and the students are learning what and how they want. I think in general Dewey would like this type of schooling, just maybe with some more structure.
I really enjoyed this podcast. Hearing about different ways of schooling is always intriguing. When your initial thought is "there is no way in hell that could work", and it does, it really grabs your attention and gets your mind thinking, thinking about ways you (as a future teacher) can incorporate some of their methods into your classroom. So hearing what the Brooklyn Free School is all about was unique, interesting, and I thought, very in line with John Dewey's educational principles. The Brooklyn Free School honors student choice and facilitate student-centered learning through play and exploration which I think directly correlates with Dewey's beliefs that the center of education is the child's own social activities and that we learn by doing. The school also supports social and emotional development through conflict mediation, personal reflection, diversity awareness and community responsibility which also relates to Dewey's belief that education is life, not preparation for life. With that being said, I had a hard time finding anything that didn't relate to Dewey's beliefs because I felt like everything the school was for, in some sense, was in line with his beliefs.
ReplyDeleteIt is an interesting concept that students should be able to have the final say in their education and the environment in which they go to school. I had never heard of the Brooklyn Free School before listening to this podcast and I was genuinely intrigued with whether the concept would work. However, after listening, I do not think that the school truly helps children prepare for the future. Dewey says that this is merely a goal of traditional education, and while I do not believe that our education system today solely relies on the foundations of traditional education, I do think that there is an overall goal in today’s education system to prepare students for the “real world.” Dewey claims that traditional education is “one of imposition from above and from outside,” something that the Brooklyn Free School certainly is not. The issue I take with this is that students ignore the wisdom and advice of the teachers in the school and the adults have no say. It takes the idea of traditional schooling to the opposite extreme. He says, “the teacher…[becomes] the leader of group activities.” The teacher is not in control, but her experience is noted and appreciated. As heard in the discussion of the removal of “no screens week”, this does not seem to be the case in the Brooklyn Free School. So then, when these students go to work in the real world, will they be able to accept that they will not have a vote in every decision that affects them?
ReplyDeleteDewey’s view of progressive education is that students would learn through experience. The Brooklyn Free School certainly allows for this in its hands-on methods and student-centered democratic decision-making process. While Dewey believes that freedom in education is important, he also says, “the educational problem is not solved when this aspect of freedom is obtained…What end does it serve?” This is again where the Brooklyn Free School seems to break away from Dewey’s views. The children’s freedom of choice seems to be the ultimate end at this school.
In all, there are aspects of the Brooklyn Free School that I think Dewey would agree with, but I do not think that he would support the entirety of the model they use.
When listening to the podcast I also thought about Dewey's view that children learn through experience. Dewey talks about how experiences should be judged on two qualities: how agreeable or disagreeable it is and also its influence on later experiences. He says "...the central problem of education based upon experience is to select the kind of experiences that live fruitfully and creatively in subsequent experiences." With that in mind, what then is the influence of the experience of the meetings that have no resolution?
DeleteI feel as though the meetings that were called that had no follow up or subsequent action would go against Dewey’s view of experience in education. The experience may meet the first quality of being agreeable. However, how does an experience where they never find a resolution influence later learning and experiences? In the podcast it is said that the meetings with no resolution have happened several times. While this may show that the previous experience did influence subsequent experiences (they didn’t find a resolution the first time, so they don’t have to find it the second time) does that mean that the experience was a quality educational one?
Chapter one of the reading discusses progressive versus traditional education. The purpose of traditional education is to pass down information/skills to individuals and teaches conformity--essentially preparing the newer generations for the future based on what was successful in the past. What is taught is static. Progressive education emphasizes quality and meaningful personal experience and experiment, so teachers are encouraged to incorporate these freedoms in order to teach the whole student. I think that the free school model in Brooklyn practices this type of freedom in their method because they allow choice and more of a constructivist-based education. A lot of the rules are created by the students, making it a very democratic environment that is both important and relevant for the learners in the "real world." I think in my future classroom, I would like to create a sense of democracy, but I am not sure if I would be comfortable in handing down all control to my students, especially in the elementary grades. Maybe when it comes to making classroom rules and consequences, then I would gladly encourage that, but in terms of calling a meeting every time they think it is necessary... I'm not sure about that. I think this is a more effective model that could work better in higher grade levels like the Brooklyn Free School, but may not be as effective with younger students because of the lack of provided structure.
ReplyDeleteListening to this account of the Brooklyn free school was fascinating, and I appreciated that Gunther didn't really draw a conclusion of whether or not the free school was a better method of schooling or not. At first sight, the free school seems to be very similar to Dewey's views on proper educations. One thing he emphasizes is the importance of democracy, and its ability to cultivate a "better quality of human experience". The Brooklyn Free School certainly does rely on democracy, but I think that it leans way to heavily on that one trick. Simply establishing democracy as the center of everything in a school isn't enough to make it the pinnacle of human experience to learners. I think the free school leans more towards the blind progressivism that Dewey describes in the first chapter, focusing more on rejecting existing conventions than actually striving towards positive change. Listening to the students debate during their meetings was interesting, but slightly frustrating. Dewey liked the idea of experience based education, but he also admitted that the experience of the past can enrich the future. The teachers of the free school tried to chime in to the meetings with input based on their past experience that could have been valuable, but were mostly ignored by the quarreling students. DeweyI also think the students ability to call meetings with no structure isn't very productive. When one girl was bullied, she called a meeting with no foresight to a goal or end product of her meeting. We got a very small glimpse into the free school so I would be interested in learning more about how education is carried out there. The fact that so many students there go on to higher education was surprising to me.
ReplyDeleteOn text, it sounds like the Brooklyn Free School would be a disaster. However, it was really eye-opening to hear these students were really owning up to their roles and taking responsibilities. Personally, I still stand with the standard schooling system, but I really respect what Brooklyn Free School stands for. You can easily incorporate some aspects of the Brooklyn Free school such as: including your students when establishing classroom rules, having students vote on certain matter, making time for class meeting, and etc.. The Brooklyn Free School gives every student to have their voices be heard and exercise their freedom. While it's so important to provide opportunities for students to speak up and feel like they're part of the school, an extreme of anything can cause more damage.
ReplyDeleteThe Brooklyn Free School definitely has some parts that John Dewey would agree with. The school is set up in a way that the students are 100% in charge of what goes on in their school. They are responsible for taking ownership towards their education, which I think John Dewey would agree with. However, students being in charge about anything and everything sort of goes against the Deweyan principles. The teacher's role is supposed to be the facilitator and if he/she believes the students are making decisions that will not benefit them, he/she has every right to exercise their authority. In the Brooklyn Free School, the teacher's vote counts just as much as the students, making it hard to exert their authority. The Brooklyn Free School has lots of components that Dewey was encouraging, but he'd look for a bit more structure.
As I go into my first year of teaching, I definitely want to give my students choices and make sure their voices are heard. It'd be really cool to bring in some of the Brooklyn Free School's principles and see how it unfolds in my classroom.
I read through chapter 4 and chapter 5 of Dewey's educational principles. Chapter 4 talked about the experience of education. The Brooklyn Free school exemplifies this principle, because the kids in the school are using their experiences to lead them and dictate how their school should handle tough situations. This chapter also explored who should be in charge, the teachers or the students? In the Brooklyn Free School, the students largely have control, though there are staff members who supervise the student's meetings.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 5, Dewey talks about the nature of freedom, and how the educational experience needs to give children freedom of choice and autonomy. This aligns with the Brooklyn Free School principles because those students have complete autonomy in how their individual education is going to be.
I believe that students should have a say in how their education and classroom is conducted. However, I also feel that adults and the wisdom that adults have gathered throughout their lives have a very important role into shaping them into caring and responsible adults. As a teacher, I wouldn't want to give up the very important role of mentoring and being a role model to students. I think that it also is beneficial for the teacher to fill the role of guiding students in constructive problem solving.
Before listening to the podcast I thought to myself how can this be effective? Where is the structure? There’s no courses, no tests, no homework, how exactly are these students running this school? To my surprise, it really got me thinking—specifically about how much freedom students actually have within the classroom in today’s society. At the Brooklyn Free School students are required to attend all school democratic meetings, but they are also allowed to interrupt the school day for an impromptu meeting. To me, it seemed like many students do this impulsively and out of anger. I do agree, and I think Dewey would agree, that it gives students a sense of responsibility, they learn to speak up for themselves, and it gets them thinking, what’re we going to do about it? However, many of these meetings end without a resolution or consequences. In chapter 6, Dewey says that a purpose is an end-view—it involves foresight of the consequences which will result from acting upon impulse. The foresight of these consequences requires intelligence. Many of the students are observing the conditions and circumstances during these meetings, but they are not taking action. They are not taking the significance of the necessary consequences into consideration. I agree with Nick’s comment that Dewey liked the idea of experience based education while he also noted that experience of the past can enrich the future. If the teachers of the free school were taken seriously and allowed to express their concerns, wisdom, and or past experiences at the meetings I think it would make a difference. The students would be able to form more practical solutions and consequences with the help of an older more experienced educator.
ReplyDeleteThe Brooklyn Free School has components that appreciate Deweyan principles and others that do not. For example, I think that the Brooklyn Free School does an excellent job of preparing its students for successes later in life: it is a great example of democracy, and its students built skills in working with and listening to others, as well as calling meetings and standing up for themselves and making educated decisions. However, I think that it is unlikely that Dewey would support that the teachers have no overruling, as he refers to them as "the agents through which knowledge and skills are communicated and rules of conduct: enforced".
ReplyDeleteAnother aspect that I think supports the Deweyan principle is that the students are very involved in what they are learning. In other words, it isn't static, and the content is thought about in terms of how it has changed, and how it will affect them in the future. In my opinion, it is always important to incorporate relevant information and contexts with your students. It gives an answer to the popular "why do I need to know this?" question, as well as motivation and generates interest in the topic, which also supports retention in long- term memory. These projects also help students with their role of being active members of a community, and growing up to be adults that are conscientious of their world.
The Brooklyn Free School can be considered an example of a Deweyan educational principle due to the exposure of experience. I read chapter 2 of Dewey's book, where he talks about the importance of personal experience. In the podcast, there were several examples of debates/meetings between students which showed the idea of a progressive education. Conducting debates and meetings can prepare these students for real world situations. Working out problems is a perfect example of an experience that children will sooner or later learn. By going through this experience,this brings the notion of Dewey's idea of progressive education where the learning is less traditional and more on using experiences with education to create a meaningful connection. Involving students like the example of The Brooklyn Free School gives students meaning to learning. It is not static, which as Dewey says, "forbids much active participation by pupils in the development of what is taught (Dewey,6)." By including students, they become active participants in the society of the school system which thus increases engagement and academic achievement.
ReplyDeleteI believe Dewey would agree with a lot of that the Brooklyn Free School implements. Much like what Sunny said, Dewey is about student experience and exposure. All of which I agree with, however, I only believe the BFS to be successful due to its' small size. It would be very hard to practice that much law and order (dun dun) in a larger environment. But perhaps that's the point? The notion that assembly line education doesn't work anymore.
ReplyDeleteBut the flip side of that would be the fear that the BFS graduates students that believe if they do not like something, all they have to do is complain or argue or debate to the point of no return, in which they receive their desired outcome.
In reality, I believe the BFS graduates individuals that are more connected to their community and we all know the tremendous benefits to one being an active member of his or her community....Again, I believe Dewey would certainly agree with that notion.
Sorry about the late post! Listening to the podcast about the Brooklyn Free School (BFS) was amazing. Just the fact that this exist is progress. I would support the idea that BFS sets an example of Deweyan Education principles. The one instance of the student Malia having the ability to call a meeting with the entire school because she felt disrespected by two students provides the space to learn from the 'here and now'. As a school they were able to holf a discussion about the situation and other students were given the opportunity to express their pains. Yet from my understanding I believe Deweyan Education Principles also touched on the classroom material connecting to their personal lives. I would have enjoyed learning about the classroom structure at the BFS.
ReplyDeleteThe Brooklyn Free School is an example of Deweyan educational principles in action because the students rule the school. Dewey would really appreciate this school because it embeds education with democracy. The students call meetings and vote to pass or reject rules. The students have the power to propose changes, suggestions, and concerns. All students have an equal voice and can call a meeting anytime they want to about whatever they want to discuss. The teachers are present, but act as facilitators or chime in from time-to-time to voice their opinions. I think the way this school is run is so peculiar and interesting. I love that it’s mostly functional and the students are given authority, responsibility, and accountability over their actions and consequences, however, it is a little concerning that most meetings end without resolutions and that follow-up meetings rarely occur. I believe it is important to come up with a resolution or at least a temporary resolution. The practice of discussion is important, however, being able to create resolutions or compromises are just as important. Or else, the issue will continue to persist or even get worse!
ReplyDeleteThe Brooklyn Free School hold deweyan educational principles in that it is run as a full democracy where majority rules and students get to participate and fully mold their educational experience. It does not express the same principles when a situation comes up where the adult in the room feels they know more about a particular subject and can make a better decision for the children, and gets over-ruled. I think that this school is good and a little extreme at the same time. I don't think it would work large schools at the democratic level that the Brooklyn free school is. I love the participation of the clearly driven students who attend, and think that this gives student ownership over their learning. I'm sure the students are much more interested in topics when they're allowed to choose what to learn about. I wonder though if there is some kind of structure? Do they get a choice of classes to pick from like in college? Do they have any specific requirements to finish school and graduate?
ReplyDeleteI found this school to be very fascinating. I believe that it does promote a positive idea of democracy and equality within the school by ensuring that students are active participants in their education, but I am hesitant about its effectiveness when addressing the amount in which these students are learning. I was intrigued when the students were discussing screen time and weighing the pros and cons of it, but was a little set back by the fact that these students were using these forms of technology to play video games during class time. Dewey was very adamant on the importance of students having a say in what they learn and providing them with opportunities to be intrigues and study topics that are of importance to them. Because of this, I believe that he would appreciate the notion of learning upon experience and working to find meanings to topics that are of some form of significance to the students. I do, however, feel as though he would be displeased with the fact that the teachers are simply bystanders in the students’ education. Because he relays the importance of teachers serving as an “igniter” in the education of students, I feel as though he would feel strongly about the fact that the teachers are not teaching or using their own experiences to help their students build on their own understandings. I do see the importance of creating a school system in which students are taken seriously and given opportunities to be in charge and make decisions for themselves. However, similarly to Dewey, I believe that teachers should help students spark ideas and then give them the resources they need to make meaning of it for themselves. In doing this, students still have the ability to be in charge of how they choose to learn.
ReplyDeleteThe Brooklyn Free School is a great way for its children to learn about democracy--through experience. I think this is how John Dewey's educational principals tie in with this. From what I could collect from Dewey's book, he puts a great deal of emphasis on experience as being an important part of education. With every individual who receives an education, comes some kind of experience. It could be a good one or bad one, but there is always one. They kind of go hand in hand.
ReplyDeleteGoing back to the podcast on the Brooklyn Free School, students are being taught real world skills through this sort of progressive approach. They learn communication, collaboration, and listening. I was really impressed that the students were able to make decisions that were productive to their learning experience. They really seemed to know what was best for them. I do think it might be a little radical to have the kids decide on EVERYTHING, but it definitely gave a fresh outlook on how education can be, as opposed to traditional methods.
Hearing about the Brooklyn Free School was enlightening. I had learned about it before, but not as in depth as here. The classrooms sound pretty sweet in theory, focusing on student growth into productive members that advance society. It seems many teachers might find dewey appealing, but don't look at his entire picture. The current adaptation of his ideals seems to be the universal design of learning, which does give students freedom of choice, but does not do much in terms of adapting the curriculum. It still sticks to the normal standards, which gives little focus to societal advancement.
ReplyDelete