Awkward Utopia

Apologies for taking so long to get this up.

—

5:01 p.m. PATRIOT Committee meets.

—

I started by asking whether we’re really qualified to be revolutionizing the school system. I think that maybe doing the project well would require a lot more time and research than we’re actually about to invest. Bob and Josh believe we’re at least as qualified as the people running it now. Matt reminds me that people don’t always know exactly what they’re getting themselves into, but that trial and error, as in business, leads to success. His point is well-taken.

Matt suggests that, in keeping with this article, rather than focusing on imparting knowledge, we might want to focus on teaching our kids to want to learn. Bob says it is the method of delivery of the knowledge and not the knowledge itself that he blames. I suggest we try to make the curriculum as self-paced and self-directed as possible. Josh reminds us that our students are going to be the best and brightest, so we can afford to cram as much information into as little time as possible.

Matt lays out an idea for “curriculum modules.”

There is some discussion of how the word “curriculum” is spelled.

The general idea behind Matt’s modules are that a students can move through them as quickly as they like. Thus, each student gains the same skill set but at his own pace. We talk about how rigid our curricula should be. We want the kids to get a broad and firm foundation in all subjects before we start giving them choices about what they want to study.

Zach suggests we utilize our trimester schedule by having a class during the first two terms and then separating the kids according to whether they’re 1. ready to move on to new subject matter or 2. in need of some remediation (without ever using the word remediation) during the third trimester. Then we talk about having one “study hall” or “divergent” period each day, in which students are separated according to whether or not they’re ready for new material (instead of devoting an entire trimester to it). Then we talk about breaking students into small groups led by a faculty mentor during that period.

We continue the discussion at Chipotle.

—

5:47 p.m. Matt’s Math Minute.

—

5:48 p.m. Regular meeting commences.
—

5:49 p.m. Awkward Intros.

—

Our topic is whether the state should distinguish between minors and adults — and if so, when — in matters like:

• marriage
• sex
• drinking
• smoking
• driving
• voting
• working
• entering into contracts
• owning property
• justice

ZM: Those are all different activities that require different levels of maturity. We shouldn’t give them all one blanket age restriction.

JN: Our institution basically makes people minors while in school and adults once they’ve left. Drop-outs are stigmatized.

BL: We’ve seen, though, that social conditioning and the value of a HS diploma will keep people in school. There’s no need for it to be compulsary.

MM: Maybe we should give competency tests.

JN: For sex?

BL checks himself before suggesting an oral exam…

SS: The article claims that adulthood naturally starts at puberty.

ZM: Physically but not emotionally. Think of HS!

SS: But the article addresses that.

BL: It says HS kids are conditioned by society to think they’re immature and irrational.

ZM: If HS age kids are adults, what is to stop parents from kicking them out of the house before they’ve finished HS?

BL: That might be a problem, but the rights they would acquire would help them cope.

KR: What’s the benefit? Legal emancipation is always an option.

JN: I think there should definitely be a distinction, but maybe the age should be lower.

Robert Y: Why not give people a competency test?

BL is skeptical: Cultural factors might play into the decision too much.

MM agrees.

BL: There should be a standard for adulthood… maybe military service, or maybe a universally-recognized age.

SS: First, lowering the age doesn’t mean removing the tests in place (CWPs, driver’s licenses, etc.). Second, as far as the last item on the list, if what you mean by justice is whether we should try “minors” as adults, I think it’s fundamentally unfair to allow that unless you’re going to change the rest as well.

BL: Kids know right from wrong. We should try them as adults but take age as a mitigating factor.

SS, MM and ZM note that there’s a difference between a capital crime and a misdemeanor or a violent crime and a monetary crime.

BL: I think it’s reasonable to assume a 14-year-old knows not to hit people. We are inculcated from childhood to “turn the other cheek.” Why shouldn’t they be subject to the same repercussions?

ZM: They’d definitely have to be afforded the same legal protections.

SS: But you have to remember, at least according to the article, placing all those restrictions on teenagers has real effects. Maybe they would be responsible adults if we treated them as such. Then you try them as you would an adult. But if by telling them they’re irresponsible they learn to be irresponsible, that’s not their fault. You don’t have to accept that infantization is real, but it seems possible, and if it is, we can’t take away their ability to respond to situations the way adults do, and then punish them as if they can.

JN: The Amish send their kids out into the world sometime around age 16. Once they return, they are treated as adults. Maybe people should have that choice.

BL: No, we can’t let people choose to be a minor. Once you’re an adult, even if you’re still in school, you should be accountable. otherwise I’d still be a child.

ZM: But HS kids are more or less surrounded only by their peers. I have a friend who is a cop. I would say he’s more of an adult than I am, even though in HS I was far more mature than him, yet we have the same legal rights. School is like a state of limbo.

MM: If infantization happens because of education, people develop differently depending on whether they choose to work or go to school.

BL: Your cop friend might be more mature than you, but consider someone who dropped out of HS and is less mature than you.

ZM: I don’t 100% grant that adolescence creates immaturity.

JN: A 17-year-old not in HS should be able to sign a contract. And at 15, the ability to sign a contract doesn’t mean you drop out of HS.

BL: There are opportunity costs and monetary costs to education (though public subsidization throws our calculus off). But since HS-age kids can’t work, they are either HS students or dregs.

JN: Some geniuses in history were on own their own early in their life or dropped out of school, and they were successful. There’s lots of anecdotal evidence that suggests that at least some kids that age can function as adults.

BL: Carnegie is an example. People are industrious and inventive.

MM: So that’s compulsory schooling, labor, and contracts…

ZM: What about self-destructive behavior (drinking, smoking)?

BL: This country’s puritanical ways are absurd!

ZM: Yet this country has risen to prominence.

BL: Psh!

ZM says he’s just arguing to be silly.

MM: What about voting?

JN and ZM move to avoid the topic of suffrage.

MM: Marriage?

RY: Marriage is a commitment, same as any other contract.

BL: Some places people can marry at 14 or 15.

SS: This question like many of the others is easy if you change the age restrictions for all those things, and in doing so you change the culture, and in doing so you change the kids themselves. It’s not so clear-cut if you just want to start letting 14-year-olds get married.

BL: I agree that there is some amount of infantization. You can’t just throw kids into the real world and expect them to adjust.

MM: We’d need a gradual change.

ZM: Maybe we should start by trying to reverse the trend. Currently the threshold for adulthood is getting higher and higher. Parents are going with their kids to job interviews!

KR: Newsweek says there’s a 150% increase in people moving back home after college.

BL: That could be partially due to the appreciating price of housing, but I agree. Denslow’s had conference calls with parents of his students complaining about grades!

MM: One of the comments on Amazon was about a tension emerging between parents’ right and children’s rights.

KR: True, parents would resist a lower age for adulthood.

ZM: I had a friend in HS who was a good kid despite her parents, and she couldn’t get out because they wouldn’t give her the freedom. Is this practical? Could we change the age even if we wanted to?

RY: Kids would mostly choose to live with their parents while in HS for financial reasons.

JN: For me at least, when I go home, I live by my parents’ rules.

BL: What are parents’ rights?

ZM and KR define them as the right to place restrictions on one’s child.

BL is split: I’m partial to the Roman concept of paterfamilias in which the parents have complete control. But in our society, the role of the parent is to develop the child into a responsible future adult. They have obligations, not rights. It doesn’t matter what age a child becomes and adult; when it happens, the parent’s job ends.

SS: I would be interested to see how parents would react. I know my parents disagree as to whether I’m old enough to be on my own.

—

We talk a LOT about curriculum while at Chipotle, focusing on the earliest years. We want the emphasis to be on “language and humanities” rather than “discovery” classes like math and science (although there are some differences of opinion between Matt and Bob on that one). We would like classes to be taught by teams of teachers, each of whom has expertise in a particular subject area (literature, grammar, history, etc.), but all of whom work together to create a curriculum in which subject areas are integrated and build on one another. Students will study a foreign language and have PE class starting from Year 1. (Note that we formally agreed to refer to kindergarten as Year 1 and 5th grade as Year 6. Each year is composed of three trimesters).

There will be a “divergent” period — the jury is out as to whether we’ll refer to it as “study hall” or not — in which students meet with a faculty mentor in a small group setting. It will be at the end of the day, but it will not be the last period of the day. The last period of the day will be a “rotation” period in which students alternate between such classes as:

• music
• art
• health & nutrition
• etiquette
• cooking
• computer technology

There will also be a large block of “unstructured” time. During this period, students are free to run around the playground or spend time in their Houses. The school day will start and end with announcements and maybe some sort of calisthenics.

The day will break down as follows (in no particular order):

• Announcements: 30 minutes (total)
• Language & Humanities: 2 hours
• Discovery Period: 30 minutes
• Foreign Language: 30 minutes
• Rotation Period: 45 minutes
• Divergent Period: 45 minutes
• PE: 45 minutes
• Unstructured Time, Lunch & Breaks: 2 hours (total)
• TOTAL: 7 hours 45 minutes

In the later years, the schedule would shift so that Discovery Classes are weighted more equally with Language & Humanities, but we haven’t nailed that one down yet. When I begin work next week, I’ll see if I can get my hands on a school day schedule for the purpose of comparison (I work at an elementary and middle school).

In sum, our school will be set apart from those other poor excuses for educational institutions by:

• House communities
• the point economy
• video monitoring of classes
• an integrated curriculum
• small group mentoring
• publication of grades and the ensuing competition among students
• an emphasis on creativity