Talk:Alternative education

please remove the second para

i think the introduction which gives defintion of alternative education is higly problematic. Here i would suggest by removing the second para where you try to contrast it with USA scenario is what is creating trouble. Why should this alternative education / school etc based on a USA situation. I would suggest it is important here to higlight alternative schooling as agianst the 'Mainstream' or "factory" schooling system.

It is so unfortunate that this article read as if alternative education is only USA phenomenon. even if one traces the anglo saxon history of alternatives AS Nells Summerhill school in UK is the first one. and Indian traditions of early 20th century are equally important to the 'factory schooling' system. Some one needs to correct this

The second paragraph doesn't imply that alternative education originated in the United States, it is merely explaining that alternative education often has a different connotation in the US than it does elsewhere. It is important to explain whether a term has multiple meanings and whether different meanings of the term are used in different areas of the world.

The "Overview" section of the article mentions people from many different countries, the section about specific types of alternative education includes forms that are not from the US (like Krishnamurti schools), and there is a section about alternative education in specific counties. I agree that the article needs a lot of work still. It doesn't clearly describe how the concept of alternative education originated (it just lists names of people influential in it's development), the section about forms of alternative education needs to be revised, the section on international practices needs to be expanded, etc. (I have listed some suggestions for specific changes near the bottom of the page in the section "Suggestions for reorganization and expansion"), but I'm afraid I don't see a US bias. Perhaps you could point out specific examples of places in the article where the views of other countries are not taken into account? Amillion 22:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Templates on article page?

Just had a quick look at this page - my first thought was to move the templates from the article page to the talk. Any thoughts? Jtneill - Talk 14:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

That is my inclination also, but the policy is here. It does seem to make more sense on the main page, but I guess their rationale is that it will clutter the main page, and that truly interested parties will be digging a little deeper into the article and find it that way. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 14:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

I changed the Sudbury Valley School link from an outside link to an interlink. The outside link should be provided at the bottom of the SVS article. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 15:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Should the category Alternative high schools be added to the category for Alternative education? Ropcat 06:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks, Master Scott | Talk 13:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Alternatives

Someone years ago made this single unique comment:

I learned more from wikipedia in few months than from ten years of school (the person did not sign)

A rare remark striking at root-concerns relating to state controlled, regimented education.

One alternative is never mentioned anywhere: Publicly funded, decentralised education; that is, decentralised to the individual and community level but still funded from public funds.

Learners and assistants to learners would be paid; a kind of semi-Universal Basic Income.

Is anyone interested in exploring the possibility of this kind of learning alternative?

Janosabel (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

DWEM's & WASP's

Don't you think article is a little heavy in dropping the names of a bunch of dead white men (i.e. Emerson, Dewey, some Swiss guy ect.), despite their importance to the subject. And it's pretty western in that it only gives examples for countries in Western Europe, North America, & Austrailia (which is Western enough). Someone should add content and such to give it a more global point of view.--Wikiphilia 03:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

viewpoint

• For some, especially in the United States, the term alternative refers to educational settings geared towards underachievers who do not qualify for special education , rather than educational alternatives for all students.

I do not like this statement being included, however if this is genuinely a reflection of US usage of AE then i'm happy to concede. This is absolutley not a definition which would be recognised in the UK. --Brideshead 20:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

So what is the definition that is recognised in the UK? This is what it is in the US. How do I get the source for it? (207.156.196.242)

It is also the tendency in Australia to consider Alternative Education as being for "difficult" students. This particularly includes those with behaviours that are unmanageable in the mainstream schools. This is due to the fact that most 'alternative' schools are set up by the government for such children. It gives the word a bad connotation among the general citizenry.06:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)06:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)06:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)06:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.67.154 (talk)

Alternative education is NOT just for people with special needs

The introduction of this article says "Alternative education, also known as non-traditional education or educational alternative, describes an education that is modified or particularized for those having singular needs, such as maladjusted people and gifted children." This is not true at all. While forms of education catering to people with special needs may be considered forms of alternative education, they are not the only kind of alternative education. Alternative education refers to ANY form of education other than mainsteam education. Many forms of alternative education are geared towards the exact same people as mainstream education. Unschooling, for example, is a form of alternative education. It is not designed for antisocial children, or dyslexic children, or gifted children, or even exclusively children. It was not designed to meet the needs of any particular special group. Many forms of alternative education share this characteristic. These forms of education are alternative in their methods, not their target audience. Amillion 15:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions for reorganization and expansion

Right now the section about alternative education internationally appears to just be scattered plugs for a couple specific schools and programs. I propose that we should strive to make this section about all of the ways in which alternative education is and has historically been thought about and practiced in these countries. If we discuss a particular school, we should do so only to clarify and provide examples of different movements within these countries. The India section (which I moved from the Overview section) is the only one that accomplishes this currently.

I also think that the overview section ought to describe the history of all forms of alternative education (instead of just progressive education). We should explain what factors caused modern mainstream education to come into existence in different areas of the world and when different forms of education began to emerge (or re-emerge), and what these alternative forms were. It might be a good idea to make the overview section into a short paragraph which briefly reiterates that there are several forms of alternative education which vary in purpose, methodology, intended pupils, and philosophy, (education for kids with special needs (disabled, disiplinary problems, malajusted, gifted, etc.), progressive and wholistic education, home education, etc.) and then to tell their specific histories in their own sections. We might also put them in order of historical emergence to make the article flow better.

It might also be a good idea to make a section for different educational structures, like schools-within-schools, home education, charter schools, etc., one for different philosophies, like holistic education, unschooling, etc., different methods, like unit studies, conventional curricula, etc., and one for different target groups, like disabled, malajusted, or gifted people. Basically we should separate the different components of the administration (not the best word, but good enough) of an education; to whom are they administering it, how, why, what are they administering, and in what kind of educational structure. Amillion 22:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's a rough skeleton of what I propose -

• Introduction: defines alternative education, states that it is a general term encompassing all forms of education outside of traditional education, briefly states the origin of the concept, describes the different meanings the term might have in different contexts, describes similar terms and their uses and connotations, explains that forms of alternative education may differ in their basic educational and administrative structure, their philosophies of education, their methods of providing that education, and their target pupils.

• Educational and administrative structures (each category contains a description of the definition and history of each type)

1.1 Stand-alone schools within a mainstream school system- like charter schools (may be paid for with public money)

1.2 Stand-alone schools outside of mainstream school system (not government funded)

1.3 Alternative programs inside of mainstream school (probably government funded)

1.4 Home-based education (probably not government funded)

1.5 A function of, but separate from, mainstream education- like correctional education or special education

• Educational philosophies (again, each category contains a description of the definition and history of each type, description of methods used)

2.1 Holistic education

2.2 Student-led education -2.2.1 Unschooling -2.2.2 Autodidactism -2.2.3 Democratic schools

2.3 Montessori method

2.4 Waldorf method

2.5 Special education (there would probably be several subcategories under this)

2.6 Correctional education (there would be different types of this as well)

• International practices (each category will have a description of the meaning and history of alternative education in that country and a description of movements and forms found in that country)

3.1 Canada

3.2 England

3.3 Australia

3.4 United States

3.5 India Amillion 01:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

recent changes

First of all, alternative schools were catered for students with special educational needs as well as those who would like to experience school differently. Saying it is for "at risk" students is a little bit negative. At risk students are special education students. I think saying special education is more positive than saying at risk students. Tell me what you think. (209.177.21.6 - Talk)

It doesn't say that alternative education only caters to at risk students; it just says that that is a quite common connotation the phrase holds in the United States. Education for at risk students is different from special education in that the term "special education" commonly refers to education geared towards students with disabilities (especially intellectual disabilities), whereas at risk students generally do not have disabilities. Special education is generally conducted seperately from education for at risk students. For examply, look at this definition drafted by the Massachussetes Department of Education: http://www.doemass.org/alted/about.html?section=definition

"Alternative Education is defined as "an initiative within a public school district, charter school, or educational collaborative established to serve "at-risk students whose needs are not being met in the traditional school setting." Students who may benefit from an Alternative Education include those who are pregnant/parenting, truant, suspended or expelled, returned dropouts, delinquent, or students who are not meeting local promotional requirements."

Amillion 19:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

At risk students are students that have singular needs. Special education is not only for students with singular disabilities. You can go on http://www.dictionary.com and they will tell you that special education includes students with singular needs. What do you think? (209.177.21.6 - Talk)

Special education is for students with disabilities. If you look at this site: http://www3.ksde.org/leaf/survey_on_education_costs/at-risk.pdf you can see that legally (here it is discussing Kansas statutes specifically) an at risk student is a student that meets one or more of a number of criteria (they are a potential dropout, they are failing, etc.) but does not qualify for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. While education for at risk students is similar to special education in that it is geared towards a particular audience whose needs can not be met (in the judgment of lawmakers or educators) in mainstream education, and both forms of education are in fact functions of mainstream education (even though they are separate from it) they are not the same thing. Amillion 01:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Saying at-risk students is negative, but saying they have singular needs is much more positive

Click on this link: definition of special education. Saying at-risk to describe them sounds so negative. Doesn't it sound better when it says singular needs? Special education has changed a lot. It was once only for people with singular disabilities but now it is also for those with singular needs too. People with a mental illness have difficulty with learning and they too need special education. (209.177.21.6 - Talk)

Yes, but the dictionary.com definition is hardly evidence of a definitional trend. The fact is that Special Education IS DIFFERENT THAN education for at risk students. They are not the same, they are not conducted in the same facilities, and they are not geared towards the same students. A student who qualifies for special education WILL NOT attend a program for at risk students. It is not a matter of what term "sounds better." These are simply fundamentally different things. Students with disabilities severe enough that they are unable to function in a mainstream classroom will go into special education. Students who are teen parents or are failing their classes for reasons OTHER THAN having a disability (a.k.a. at risk students) will go into programs for at risk students. You claim that education for at risk students is special education because these students have something you call "singular disabilities" or "singular needs." How exactly do you define these terms? Can you find evidence of their use outside of dictionary.com? These so called "disabilities" are not really disabilities at all if they do not qualify the children for special education. And if we examine the term "singular needs," which I can only imagine means "a single problem which results in a child's removal from mainstream education," we can see that at risk children often have more than one "need" (so their needs are not "singular") and children receiving special education sometimes only have a single need (so their needs are "singular"). These children do not differ in the number of their "needs," but in the type. Children go into special education because of medical conditions which interfere with their ability to benifit from a mainstream classroom (including mental illness). They go into education for at risk students because they make poor choices. These are very different things. I'm going to revert your edit. Please leave this version until we resolve this discussion, so that we don't get into an edit war. Amillion 06:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

You also might note that "at risk" is not a derogatory term. It simply refers to the fact that these students are at risk of dropping out. If you did not understand what I attempted to explain in the previous paragraph, you might want to take a look at the second site I cited when we discussed this in the "recent changes" section of the talk page. The site refers to a legal definition of at risk students: http://www3.ksde.org/leaf/survey_on_education_costs/at-risk.pdf I can find additional examples of specific legal and academic references if you believe that my claims need more evidence. Amillion 07:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Way too PC. These so-called "at risk" students are simply lazy or unwilling to accept the authority of a teacher. What is needed is for them to take responsibility for their own life and prepare for the future. If they put as much effort into their own education as they put into socializing, music, sex, etc., they would do much better and not be a drag on the rest of society. 71.214.70.246 (talk) 09:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Overview POV

I've done a cursory edit, but it needs more work. In particular, I don't think we should suggest that all or even most alt-ed folks were opposed to compulsory education, per se. Ethan Mitchell 22:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it needs a lot of work. I agree with you; alternative education is an incredibly broad category encompassing an almost unimaginable number of ideas and points of view. We should not suggest that proponents are all for or against anything at all.

I've just looked at the article briefly, but I noticed an apparent lack of mention of the common US use of the term. This usage is so widespread that if you mention "alternative education," even to a professor of education at the university level, you will almost inevitably find that they associate the term with education for "at risk" students to the exclusion of any other definition. This is only my personal experience of course, but it seems to be backed up by the manner in which the word is defined by various departments of education in the US. Amillion (talk) 03:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Indian section

There seem to be some additions in the second para which talk about new forms of religious education and not necessarily alternative education. this need to be corrected. Are there sections in education that talks about various forms of religious education, it may be useful to create such pages. that para also seem to be an attempt to promote a particular point of view. --amg 05:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Explanation of my removal of "mainstream education"

Let's take example of a student who prefers to do homeschooling. This student prefers homeschooling NOT because they want to be outside of the mainstream. (If mainstream education was included in the article, it would sound like we are excluding students from society) Student who prefers homeschooling want to do something different from the USUAL practices that society deems acceptable. And also, mainstream education also refers to education in mainstream schools. Mainstream schools are schools that practice mainstreaming. As you can see, mainstream education means many different things. Traditional education focuses on the long-established and generally accepted custom. Students who choose alternative education want to do something different. This does not mean they want to be out of society. There are alternative schools that practice mainstreaming. Are you saying that those schools are NOT mainstream schools? Exactly, mainstream schools are NOT the correct term. Traditional education is the correct term. Even though they are mainstream schools, they are NOT part of traditional education. I hope I have clarified my point clear. --Ladii artiste 16:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding "drop out prevention" alternative education

I made a few changes and flagged the end of this section as incomplete, because this last sentence seemed like the beginning of a new topic: "A very different variety of drop out is the student who does not face severe personal problems, but leaves school due to his or her philosophical opposition to traditional education." I'm open to discussion about it, though. Anyone have additional information, or an alternative opinion on the matter? Forestgarden (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

A section about the dropout prevention movement which examines the reasons students may leave school ought to endeavor to present all notable reasons. When I wrote that sentence I was primarily thinking of teenage unschoolers who leave school of their own, and not their parent's volition (many of whom are influenced by books like The Teenage Liberation Handbook), but I'm sure there are other movements as well as individuals acting alone whom are represented by this statement. Perhaps it does require elaboration through; we ought to have an examination of the way in which those students fit into the ideological framework of the dropout prevention movement. Amillion (talk) 07:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:HOME

I have removed the link to WikiProject Homeschooling. Alternative education isnt a part of homeschooling, homeschooling is a part of alternative education. As WikiProject Alternative Education is being merged with WikiProject Education, i have removed the WP:HOME project tag and added the WP:EDU project tag. Twenty Years 17:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Individual schools

The description of alt. education in various countries is in need of cleanup. Much of it is little more than a list of a random selection of alternative schools. Some of these are notable (Summerhill); others probably do not stand out from others not mentioned. I am tempted to suggest deleting the whole batch but do not want to throw out the baby with the bath water, tepid as the latter is. hgilbert (talk) 01:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Four and a half years later these issues are still there. OK, so it's taken me a while to get around to this, too. In any case, I've made some strong edits taking out almost all individual school names, leaving movements and directions and a rare, historically especially notable school. hgilbert (talk) 18:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Removed POV

Have removed the following unsourced "intro":

Education in its broadest sense is any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character or physical ability of an individual. In its technical sense education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills and values from one generation to another.

Traditional education generally implies a master - pupil relationship between an adept or skilled individual who take the role of teacher and one or more pupils. A group of pupils learning together is usually called a class. Since human survival was, until recently, rather uncertain, traditionally classes were large and highly structured simply because there was no realistic alternative method by which the accumulated wisdom of predecessors could be transmitted reliably to the young - many of whom would predictably die. Religion and education were thus intertwined, since the young had to be taught not to fear war or death. Traditional schools therefore have a teacher teaching several dozen pupils by means of speaking and repeating, illustrating and copying plus dictation and writing. The traditional relationship is hierarchical and paternal and usually employed corporal punishment. As sanitation and medicine began to prolong life expectancy, children became more highly valued and attempts were made to find a method of using positive rewards to induce enthusiasm for learning instead of mere diligence and obedience induced by fear of retribution. This implies that, in alternative education, the teacher's structural authority is diminished and is replaced by sapiential authority. School indiscipline arises when a teacher fails to win respect and is unable to punish.

If anyone can clean it up, please return to text - but not as lede to an article on Alternative education.--Technopat (talk) 14:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Educação Horizontal

Vassouras, 08 de março de 2010.

       Sou Antônio Luiz Bianchessi e apresento-me como autor do artigo “o desafio dos educadores” traduzido para o idioma inglês.

Agradeço pela atenção a mim dispensada. A WIKIPEDIA acolheu meu artigo. Isso para mim representa motivo de grande alegria. Meus parabéns pelo interesse, tantas vezes, manifestado em prol da melhora da educação mundial. Apresento-lhes síntese de 50 anos de pesquisas, experimentos e análises na busca de um sistema educacional que propalasse a responsabilidade do educando na própria formação. Surgiu, então, a EDUCAÇÃO HORIZONTAL que se apresenta como alternativa à Educação Vertical vigente. Algumas características básicas que definem o novo sistema, como: 01) Uso de Paradigmas Internos; 02) Uso equilibrado dos Estímulos Positivos; 03) Diálogo Evolutivo; 4) Técnicas Específicas de Trabalho em Equipe; 05) Desenvolvimento Ativo e Efetivo das Potencialidades; 06) Reforço de Comportamentos Adequados, Visando à sua Repetição; 07) Habilitar o Educando para a Solução de Problemas sem litígios e com a Apresentação de ideias; 08) Formação de Clima Educacional Favorável ao Desenvolvimento Emocional e Intelectual; 09) Promover o Uso da Alfabetização Emocional; 10) Propalar o Uso Adequado do Presente do Indicativo do Verbo; 11) Uso de Técnicas Favoráveis à Humanização do Convívio Diário; 12) Favorecer e Promover a Autoestima do Educando; 13) Adoção de LIMITES CONVENIADOS; 14) Promover Abrandamento das Imposições; 15) O Educador Torna-se o Facilitador das Melhores Escolhas do Educando. Penso que o sistema Educacional Horizontal pode atender aos reclamos de uma sociedade angustiada e sem objetivos e estratégias claros e visíveis para solucionar o problema. Coloco-me à disposição dos senhores para eventuais esclarecimentos do sistema educacional horizontal. Na medida do possível, pretendo colaborar para dirimir dúvidas e apresentar propostas de superaração dos desafios, frente às exigências de uma sociedade moderna. Agradecimentos sinceros pela atenção dispensada. Vassouras, RJ Brasil.

                                    Antônio Luiz Bianchessi

Antonio Luiz Bianchessi (talk) 20:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Correctional Education?

The heading "Correctional Education" (below) only contains a link to a non-existent article. Should the headline be removed?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_education#Correctional_Education Oferswþend (talk) 03:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

what about non-schooling

Why aren't unschooling (or non-schooling) and "non-schools" like the movement of Sudbury Valley Schools mentionned here? Is it a choice due to the fact that, strictly speaking, these actually are rather non-education? denis "spir" (talk) 20:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Ambiguity needs to be cleared away

This article seems to have started with a problem from which it has not recovered. The source for the title "Alternative education" appears to be The Alternative Education Resource Organization (AERO)... founded in 1989 by Jerry Mintz[1], which describes its mission as help create an education revolution to make learner-centered education available to everyone. That may be seen as a valid and praiseworthy aspiration, but shows that AERO is a campaigning body with a point of view. It announces that it has a network which includes Montessori, Waldorf (Steiner), Public Choice and At-Risk, Democratic, Homeschool, Open, Charter, Free, Sudbury, Holistic, Virtual, Magnet, Early Childhood, Reggio Emilia, Indigo, Krishnamurti, Quaker, Libertarian, Independent, Progressive, Community, Cooperative, and Unschooling. Well and good, but those are forms of education for those with normal (perhaps sometimes exceptional) ability and aptitude for what is being taught. But the article fails adequately to explain the use of the same word for the very different way "alternative" is officially applied for education provided, not for those with normal ability and aptitude for what is being taught, but for education which (quoting the article) the U.S. Department of Education describes as... "that: 1) addresses needs of students that typically cannot be met in a regular school; 2) provides nontraditional education; 3) serves as an adjunct to a regular school; or 4) falls outside the categories of regular, special education, or vocational education" which is something different from what the AERO network education is about, as can be seen from examples such as these:

• A Publication of the National Dropout Prevention Center, South Carolina,[2]
• 'The Real Meaning of Alternative Education' Focal Point A National Bulletin on Family Support and Children's Mental Health (2001),[3] and
• Definition: Alternative schools are designed to educate students who have not been successful in regular schools, often because of behavior, disciplinary, and safety concerns. An alternative school may involve a range of different educational settings other than the typical school. Many alternative schools have regular and special education programs and use building-wide behavior intervention programs.[4]

The content of the section headed "Origins" fails to offer any explanation of this, and only adds to the confusion of any reader who has got that far. The above comments on this page show that this has been a continuing concern for some time. Are contributors who are currently editing here willing to rectify this, to improve the article? Qexigator (talk) 00:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Done: The article is now in much better shape[5], but still lacks sufficient citations to let the tag be removed. Meantime, to my mind the ambiguity mentioned above has been cleared away. Cheers! Qexigator (talk) 21:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Fork

I wonder if there should not be two articles, one on AE approaches for at-risk or challenged students, and one for AE as an alternative pedagogy... HGilbert (talk) 21:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Or reconstruct the article with a main section (with sub-headings) for each of those, after an introductory section explaining that both are governed by requirements of Civil and political rights according to the Public law (including Constitutional law and Administrative law) of the locality? Qexigator (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

+ Of the contents list of the Book in the 'See also' section, could the following be taken as an outline for re-constructing this article?

• Systems of education (primary, secondary,... alternative, special)
• Process (Curriculum)
• Education theory
• Economics (of 'alternative' education)
• History (of 'alternative' education)
• Philosophy (of 'alternative' education).

Given the rubric at the article's top, the way in which alternatives typically differ from the mainstream could be described under each heading. Qexigator (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

+ Or should the present structure be retained? Qexigator (talk) 23:50, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Contents look fine, except that I would think that we can and should skip the process, theory, and philosophy sections, as these are already covered in the separate articles for particular systems that we would link to (e.g. Montessori schools. I'd suggest a different order, however:

History

Systems

Economics

Educational law is a whole separate cup of tea. I'd tend to avoid this where possible...perhaps something about requirements for provisions for special needs could be included...there must be articles about this we can link to, however. HGilbert (talk) 01:35, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

On looking again, I am finding difficulty in seeing how to redistribute the parts of the article under those heads, or even the list of "See also"s[6]. Qexigator (talk) 14:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

+ I now see the division of the present article under two main headings, with parts of UK and US sections moved into the APA heading as likely to be an improvement in itself, and as the "first step" proposed in my RFC comment below. I will go ahead, in the hope that it will be acceptable, and not be seen as out of order. Qexigator (talk) 11:03, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

The long-standing header actually redirects for special school, learning disability, and gifted education. I am inclined to go with this, which resolves the problem completely, and reserve this article for alternative pedagogical approaches, moving the other material to one of the articles listed in the header. Is there any objection to this? HGilbert (talk) 12:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

So, rename this article 'Alternative pedagogical approaches' and move the content of the part now in 'Alternative education (special needs)' to whichever of Special education or Learning disability or Gifted education is the relevant topic? That makes good sense to me. Please go ahead. Qexigator (talk) 13:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Is the current version relying on the header redirects, ready for renaming as 'Alternative pedagogical approaches'? Qexigator (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Checking the content of articles listed when using the search box at the top of the page for articles containing "alternative education", I see no conflict with letting the present article continue with the current title "Alternative education" including the redirects at the top. In other words, I see nothing in the title or content of the present article,[7] which is incompatible with the content of any of those others. Qexigator (talk) 09:00, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

text removed from Top[8] This revision[9] will be a simple and concise explanation for non-specialist inquirers, such as readers (or editors) who notice that a source cited 9 times in an article for one of the alternatives has the title Alternative Education for the 21st Century: Philosophies, Approaches, Visions. Another source, Breaking Down the Barriers to Learning: The Power of theArts[10] refers to a year-long study of a project to adapt that alternative's educational methods to the special needs of high-risk delinquent youth attending the Yuba County Court and Community Schools: The partnership project... aims at developing a nationally-replicable...model program. It has been aided in the last few years by grants from the Kellogg Foundation and The California Endowment....The students in question are a challenging group. Between the ages of 11 and 18, most have been expelled or suspended from regular public schools because of violent behavior and criminal activity. Many have learning disabilities and minimal reading and math skills. Getting them to care about school is a major hurdle. Qexigator (talk) 10:16, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

"Two meanings of alternative education" (RFC)

I've requested WikiProject Alternative education editors to comment about a possible fork at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Alternative_education#Two_meanings_of_alternative_education. HGilbert (talk) 00:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Noted, and for convenience, I have copied from the linked page, and added A, B, C for ease of reference:

"The alternative education page currently tries to embrace the two prominent meanings of the term: alternative pedagogical approaches, and education for populations with particular needs (special needs, gifted, at-risk). Should these:

A remain merged into a single article

B be split into two different articles, something like Alternative pedagogical approaches and Alternative education (special needs), with a disambiguation page?

C be split into two different articles, one of which retains the title Alternative education...?"

Qexigator (talk) 07:04, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: Of the three proposed, I am not sure how to disentangle the content for a split. As a first step, the article could be retained but reconstructed with two main parts, one for "Alternative pedagogical approaches" and the other for "Alternative education (special needs)". We would then be in a better position to decide between the three. Qexigator (talk) 07:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

+ Split articles? If I understand the proposal, perhaps both could open with a lead /lede based on the current article's, adapted suitably for its own topic, and maybe the "Terminology" section. Next, if for the sake of this discussion we let "Alternative pedagogical approaches" = "APA" and "Alternative education (special needs)" = "ASN", then "Origins" would go to APA together with all of the "Localities" section, except any which should be detached and put in ASN. What, then, would go to ASN-

from Canada? None.

India? None.

Japan? None.

UK? paragraphs 2 and 3.

US? Subsection "Dropout prevention".

Qexigator (talk) 07:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

public law requirements

I'm not sure what this is doing in the lead. Legal requirements for compulsory education have little to do with the article's theme. Alternative pedagogical approaches often offer programs that begin before the age range of compulsory education (early childhood programs), continue after it, and/or operate outside of it (in many countries, alternative education is not approved by the state and actually operates outside the law).

The confusion might be arising because in many countries, provisions for special needs are legally mandated. At least in the USA, this only applies to public schools, however, so that private schools' special needs provisions are largely voluntary (there are some exceptional situations where this boundary is crossed, however). Even here, alternative education and legal provision are two very separate concepts. This relation could be spelled out in the body, but is so peripheral to the concept of alternative education that it hardly belongs in the lede. HGilbert (talk) 08:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

"Alternative" is not a label for anything goes, any more than the conduct of students in schools or institutions for school age children is a free for all. Given that in most countries education, as defined by local law, is compulsory for children of school age as defined by the local law, it is important to make clear, what we cannot assume is self-evident to otherwise uninformed readers looking for accurate information, that "alternative" is always subject to whatever may be the local law. This means, as was previously included in the top, constitutional law and administrative law of the locality. In the case of USA, the constitution inhibits the federal government but permits state legislatures and executives, subject always to rulings of the Supreme Court. In the UK, what the government of the day continues or changes, from the starting point of compulsory school age and social care and welfare provision, happens under laws enacted by Parliament, usually by imposing requirements to be provided or enforced by local public authorities. Qexigator (talk) 09:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

+My surmise is that what is outlined in my last comment above is sufficiently common knowledge among people, residing in anglophone countries in north America, western Europe and elsewhere, who are reasonably well informed on the topic, and that we may suppose this may be one reason why there may be a dearth of easily accessible sources to cite in support of it. But maybe those remarks could be adapted for the article, much of which is or looks like unsourced editorialsing, and possibly contentious presentation, such as:

• Alternative education presupposes a tradition or standard practice ....
• The top-heavy and muddled presentation of the section headed "In the United States", which misleadingly obscuress the distinction between the two types of "alternative"
• It might be considered as a natural evolution of education to offer options and not a regimented one size fits all approach.
• The most recent development within alternative education in Canada may be to follow the United States in their “Charter School” movement. In the US specific states have passed legislation permitting their departments of education or local school boards to issue "charters" directly to individual schools wishing to operate autonomously. "crystalballing" in Wikispeak.
• ...mainstream education in India is based on the system introduced by Lord Macaulay...
• "Free school" is a term used to describe a non-profit group (or independent school) which specializes in the care and education of children who refuse to attend standard schools.

Qexigator (talk) 11:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

If we don't find citations to back this up, it might be common knowledge, irrelevant, or simply invalid. In any of these cases, it doesn't belong in the lead. Let's try to stick to well-sourced material. We want this to be a good article.HGilbert (talk) 11:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Neither irrelevant nor invalid, and is the environment in which "alternative" attains meaning. The article will never be good enough without sufficient mention of it, with due prominence, but avoiding excessive length by relying on links. What I have added could be expanded, but is probably enough said there. Qexigator (talk) 12:33, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I have removed the following because it is simply not true

• The constitutional and administrative law as well as the determines the limits of mainstream, and thus implicitly what constitutes "alternative," education....

Educational curricula and methods are primarily not set by either constitutional or administrative law, at least in the US. What constitutes mainstream education is far more a matter of custom and individual school districts' determinations, not laws. (In England the national curriculum prescribes the curriculum much more, but not the methods.) HGilbert (talk) 20:26, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

text removed from Top[11] and, 'Origins[12] :The fact that "educational curricula and methods are primarily not set by either constitutional or administrative law" is beside the point. Under the US Constitution states are permitted to legislate for poviding education at public expense. Is anyone having the responsibility for a child of school age entitled to refuse to let the child be educated? Where there is compulsory school age, as in UK, it will be a nullity unless the responsible authorities are able, in case of dispute, to determine if the obligation is performed, whether by reference to something expressly prescribed, including official guidance, or if none, by reference to what you describe as custom and individual school districts' determinations; and the latter will be either the same as what is there and then "customary", or in some other way determined by lawful process (that is according to adminstrative law, under the constitution). That is the way the law of compulsory school age education necessarily operates. Thus, someone acknowledged to be giving homeschooling in good faith, could be judged to be in default. In practice, schools offering education using alternative pedagogical methods will not depart too far from what is acceptable in terms of basic literacy and numeracy and general knowledge, and avoid teaching against received ideas, such as by denying the existence of elephants, or bears, or garden implements (unlikely examples, to make pov free point). Qexigator (talk) 00:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Standard tests and grades

To improve the article's informative value, given that it mentions schools in USA, including those that offer one of the "Alternative pedagogical approaches", are obliged to comply with external requirements for testing and grading, such as mentioned in Education in the United States should it not explain to what extent this affects the curriculum and teaching method? Similarly, in respect of other localities. Qexigator (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Inline links and see also section

I think the standard is to use inline links in the article and drop anything already linked there from the see also section. WP:See also gives details. HGilbert (talk) 23:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, so will you undo revision of 20:10[13]? Qexigator (talk) 00:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I have restored the inline links. Looking at the See also section as it stands, it seems a clear arrangement...I wonder if this might be kept as is? This allows other educators who are not mentioned inline to be included there. HGilbert (talk) 11:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Maybe the classified list of S.a.s could be yet further extended. Unusual treatment, but perhaps this is a topic which invites an alternative approach to editing. Cheers!. Qexigator (talk) 12:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Spam?

Is this[14] spam? Qexigator (talk) 16:36, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alternative education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929000500/http://www.learningforacause.org/ to http://www.learningforacause.org

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:20, 10 October 2016 (UTC)