Democratic Classrooms: Promises and Challenges of ... - ed

1 Democratic Classrooms: Promises and Challenges of StudentVoice and Choice, Part One by Kristan A. MorrisonAbstractIf we ever hope to have schools that are engaging and that trulyembody democracy, then the classes within them must provide opportu-nities for students to experience autonomy, freedom, and choice in what isstudied, when, and how. This article explores both the historical and theo-retical framework of Democratic freedom-based education and the prom-ises and Challenges of implementing Democratic practices in : Democratic education, freedom-based educationIntroductionSchools and society are reflections of one another.

2 Certain valuesand beliefs are dominant in our society and inculcated in school . Theyinclude a competitive ethos and firm conviction that a meritocracy existsin our society a view that instrumental and extrinsic motivations are moreimportant than intrinsic motivations an excessive valuing of academics A belief in the atomization and fragmentation of subjects of study,people, and nature the conviction that the characteristic of obedience (doing as oneis told or believing as one is told) is of more value in our societythan that of criticality the belief that one s worth can be defined by others (as good stu-dent or bad student)50 Once students become adults, they perpetuate those same dominantvalues in both society and cycle is complicated, however, because beyond those dominantvalues, schools are terrains of struggle (Giroux 1988), places wherecontradictory values and ideals compete for prominence.

3 Critical educational theorists, who include John Dewey and more-contemporary authors such as Henry Giroux, Paulo Freire, Peter McLaren,bell hooks, David Purpel, and Maxine Greene, argue that certain moral,political, and intellectual ideals should take precedence over others inschools. They assert that our schools should emphasize commitment to ademocratic system in which each citizen s autonomy and dignity are hon-ored in an open, just, respectful, and pluralistic community, a communitythat values and encourages a critical approach in the intellectual searchfor truth and meaning in each individual s life (Purpel 1989).

4 The community these theorists seek is a delicately balanced synthe-sis between the individual (thesis) and a collection of individuals (anti-thesis). In other words, an individual s autonomy is delimited by others rights to dignity, respect, safety, and the search for truth and meaning toeveryone s lives; if person A decides to do something that somehowinfringes on person B s rights, then person A is prohibited from takingthat action and encouraged to find actions that can both express his orher autonomy and honor the rights of Classrooms, Part One51 Many of us know from experience that our society s schools oftenfall far short of fostering the development of people who value diversity,who are both autonomous yet cognizant of others needs and rights.

5 Andwho are open-minded yet equipped with critical-thinking skills to ana-lyze contradictory ideas. Instead, many of our schools foster the devel-opment of very different sorts of that indicate that the critical educational theorists are wrong?No, it just means that they and like-minded educators must struggle toactualize their ideals in schools. One way to do that, I would argue, is toinstitute more Democratic and freedom-based practices within our edu-cational system. This article explores the historical and theoreticalframework of such practices, and then goes on to detail their promisesand and Historical/Theoretical FrameworkThe term Democratic education as used in this article is linkedwith and synonymous with the term freedom-based education, for justas democracy as a political system is grounded in individual freedoms,democracy as an educational system is also grounded in freedoms.

6 Thelinkage between the two terms is supported by the self-descriptions ofmost freedom-based schools in the United States ( , free schools, Sudbury Valley-modeled schools, unschooling families, etc.), which alsoidentify themselves as sites of Democratic Democratic and freedom-based education, students are free todecide what they study, and how, and when they study it. This form ofschooling has a number of historical antecedents, outlined by Bennis(2006). He argues that one genesis of this model of education is the formof learning found in most pre-industrial societies.

7 In these societies (pastand present), children are actively engaged in the life of a given society;they learn skills and knowledge by means of imitation, apprenticeship,modeling, and conversation rather than in any formal school education is also rooted in the Western philosophicaltradition of the ancient Greeks, in the Romantic thinkers ( , Rousseauand Froebel), in the libertarian-anarchist tradition, in the transcendental-ist movement of nineteenth-century America, and in the twentieth-cen-tury free- school movement ( , Summerhill school , led by A.)

8 S. Neill,and the many free schools that cropped up during the countercul-tural revolution of the 1960s and 1970s) (pp. 23 32). Democratic and freedom-based education is grounded in the prem-ise that people are naturally curious and have an innate desire to learnand grow. If left un-fettered, un-coerced, and un-manipulated ( , byconventional educational practices that often diminish those innatecharacteristics), people will pursue their interests vigorously and witheducational HORIZONS Fall 200852gusto, and thus learn and make meaning on their own and in concertwith others.

9 Individuals honored and respected in this process becomesocialized to honor and respect the dignity and autonomy of others(Dennison 1969; Hern 1996; Holt 1972, 1989; Illich 1971; Llewellyn 1997;Mercogliano 1998; Neill and Lamb 1992).Although most contemporary freedom-based education is found inthe form of private schools or the home-schooling version, unschool-ing (Morrison 2007b), American public schools could shift more closelyto this model by adopting more- Democratic practices and organizationalstructures (Reitzug 2003). Thus, enacting Democratic practices withinconventional, more-authoritarian and -bureaucratic schools could serveas a steppingstone toward adopting the model of Democratic and free-dom-based education more education can take multiple forms, ranging from themicro level of within-class democracy to the more-ideal macro level ofwhole- school democracy, and within each level, a number of differentdemocratic practices can be enacted.

10 For example, at the micro level, ateacher can utilize discussion; offer students test and assignment choicesthat attend to their unique learning preferences; allow students protestrights (Shor 1996); practice contract grading (Shor 1996) or self-grad-ing; allow students to call the teacher by first name; and ask students toco-construct the course (have a voice in course content, grading, rubriccreation, etc.). At the macro, whole- school level, schools can allow stu-dents to construct their entire curricula. (See Morrison 2007a, whichexamines the Albany Free school , a school where pre-K through eighth-grade students choose what, how, and when they study subjects, or seeGoddard College for university-level self-development of curricula.)