**Schooling and Deschooling - A Concept of Educational & Entrepreneurial Excellence by Prof. em. Dr. Jürgen Zimmer** The decision to found the School for Life as a "Private Social Welfare School" – and thus to define it as part of the formal education system – is primarily based on the wish to leave the road open to nationally-recognized qualifications and further and higher education institutes. A radical alternative which would waive the possibility of recognized qualifications was out of the question because it would mean that the marginalization of the children and young people would become educationally set in stone. In principle, the long-term goal of making Schools for Life into elite institutions for the poor is to enable children of these origins a way into governments, successful entrepreneurship, science and research. Certainly not all of them, but the many talented and motivated ones. Using the image of a long-distance race, the children start the School for Life much further back, so they need to run a much longer distance and to be better than the children from more privileged families who start with social and economic benefits. In essence, this means academic excellence. But is that enough? Definitely not. The old-style school which also dominates in Thailand requires paradoxical interventions that aim to deschool, to open up schools, to enable learning that engages with real life and situational challenges. Paulo Freire speaks of generative themes, of learning being guided by key situations, of supporting marginalized people to enter into history – this is impossible to do within an academic, subject-structured curriculum. One can and must teach the subjects whilst at the same time building bridges – again and again – to real-life problems and solutions. ## 6\.1 The one curriculum or the other In terms of curriculum, there are two opposing systems of reference: one is a curriculum structured into subjects, the other a curriculum structured according to generative themes. In the case of the School for Life, the national curriculum represents the one side, while the other side is represented by a curriculum which is being developed on location, based on key issues and contents defined by the generative themes of the Centers of Excellence. Bridges between the subjects and real-life problems can be built more easily if the school develops a preference for discovery-based, action-oriented learning and the subjects are understood not only as stocks of systematically structured and arranged knowledge, but also as a kind of quarry. During a workshop on curriculum development, a Nicaraguan teacher developed a fitting image for this: all the knowledge is gathered up into a mountain. When she and her children need something, they knock at a large door that leads inside the mountain, wait until the door opens, take the knowledge they need and then quickly close the door again. In other words, if there is a problem connected to the Mekong River, this is a good reason to tap into the necessary knowledge, but there is no need to make the children learn all the tributaries of the Mekong by heart. In contrast to purely academic schools, the School for Life is primarily concerned with the matter of learning in the classroom to cope with real problems rather than artificial problems. The trick is to create challenging realities, settings that are challenging and yet manageable, where there is no other option for the students than to learn – on their own accord – because the problem makes sense to them. ## 6\.2 Learning in projects The project as a pedagogical method was developed by John Dewey and William Heard Kilpatrick and is still relevant today. Although there may be some doubt as to the historical accuracy of recounts of Kilpatrick's typhoid project, in its essence it is still an excellent example. It concerns an incident in a rural American school, from which two children from a farm were missing because of typhoid fever. The class wondered why diseases occurred so frequently on this farm, and sent the class representative to the farmers to ask if they could inspect the farm to find out the causes of the typhoid fever. The farmer agreed, and the class began to collect information on typhoid fever and its causes. Translation: they took pieces of knowledge from relevant subjects and, still dissatisfied, questioned those people from whom they hoped to gain useful information, wrote to a university in the hope of finding out everything about flies (which transfer typhoid bacteria). They acted, over the course of the project, like the Nicaraguan teacher envisaged, and as a result of their research they were able to form hypotheses about the cause of typhoid fever on the farm: it could be polluted water, contaminated milk, or the flies. Armed with these hypotheses, the class went to the farm and reviewed the conditions. It couldn't be the milk, because there weren't any cows. There was running water. But there was a lot of garbage lying around open, the windows to the kitchen were open and had no protection against flies, and there were clouds of flies traveling freely from garbage to food and back. The knowledge as to the cause of typhoid on the farm was followed up by action: the students measured the window, asked the store about the price of wire mesh and calculated how much would be required. They built a model of a closed trash container and a fly trap for the window. They wrote a report for the farmer with detailed recommendations about what could be done in order to prevent typhoid fever in the future. They visited the farmer, presented their report and recommended him to act accordingly. The farmer thanked him and promised to implement all of the recommendations. Since then, no more cases of typhoid fever were reported on the farm. In the Dewey / Kilpatrick sense, something becomes a project if it stems from a real problem and contributes to its solution. From the perspective of School for Life, a project is not something that is done solely for didactic purposes. A project is not designed just to illustrate the material of the curriculum. With projects, we can run into surprises. Interventions in reality don't run in straight lines or according to plan from A to B. No, what happens is an almost never-ending story of learning, with surprising turns: in the School for Life there is a small swimming pool and the problem of keeping the water clean. In the first chapter of the story, filter pumps were used, but these gobbled so much electricity that they were removed again. In the second chapter, Günter Faltin's favorite theory – that of the "natural swimming pool" – was applied: a swarm of little black rice field fish and some water plants were put into the pool and everyone stood back to watch what happened: the water became crystal clear, because unlike gold fish, the rice field fish don't make the water dirty, but rather eat the organic particles that are floating about. So that is what happened: the fish multiplied, the water was clean, and the children could bathe – in small numbers – in it. In the third chapter of the story, the number of fish started to decrease. Little green water snakes could be observed, squirming around among the fish and eating them whenever hungry. In the fourth chapter, after many discussions with the children, larger fish were introduced into the pool, based on the philosophy of "rather cloudy water and fish to eat than a pool full of little green snakes." In chapter five, a cobra family settled down near the edge of the pool, with a particularly aggressive Cobra mother. The number of fish decreased once again, and even approach the pool was risky. In the sixth chapter, a small earthquake caused cracks in the pool wall, the water ran out, and for a while the pool was empty and neither fish nor Cobras were to be seen. In the seventh chapter – inspired by a biology lesson – the pool was repaired and an attempt was made to clean the water with microbiological agents. Fish were put in once again, in order to be introduced later in the canteen. The number of dogs on the farm had now increased so much that the snakes had decamped to further away, and fish could grow and multiply. It was then that the oxygen problems appeared: you could see them in the early morning with their mouths stuck half out of the water, gasping for air. So a sprinkler system was built, and the fish lived happily ever after - or rather the learning experience did, as most of the fish end up in the wok. So the difference between the typhoid project and the project of how to clean the pool is that the prevailing circumstances are not always as expected, but that nevertheless – or perhaps even because of this – a lot can be learned. It may be that the objectives change over the course of the project - from swimming to rearing fish, for example - or that alternate routes need to be taken. ## 6\.3 When children do research - mind mapping These alternate routes shouldn't be understood as aberrations, but rather as opportunities. It is all about ensuring that the curiosity of the children does not meet with barricades. It is about the discovery, and - in the Humboldtian sense – the assimilation of the world, about developing a curriculum with the children, so-called "Mind Mapping". Curricular maps are drawn up with stations for particular learning interests. Since the project "How can we clean the pool" doesn't take up eight hours a day, there are plenty of opportunities for this. And thus, questions arise that ask to be addressed through research and experimentation, such as: can fish sleep? Why don't they sink? Don't they breathe? Why do fish float in water, but not stones or wood? Why does a stone sink more slowly in oil than in water? Why can birds and butterflies fly? Do they sometimes crash? Airplanes fly too - how? Why do they sometimes crash, why don't they glide down to the ground if they have wings? How do rockets fly? And when fish get hungry, what do they eat? How do they have babies? Do they lay eggs, like birds? Don't the eggs float away? Why don't people lay eggs? What is an egg, actually? If we don't eat the fish, but we sell them, where and for how much? Why only 20 Baht for a fish and not 200? Money is so easy to get, you just put a card into a machine and press a few buttons... And so on. Mind mapping means agreeing with the children, based on the maps which represent the learning interests they expressed, on priorities and paths, because experimental investigation with an intimate relationship between theory and practice takes time and requires didactic imagination and preparation. When preschool children at the John F. Kennedy School in Berlin asked their teacher Nancy Hoenisch how rain is formed, she took a pot with water and put it on the stove; when the water boiled and steam rose, she took an aluminum tray, put on some ice cubes and held the tray over the steam. Now the children could see how droplets of water formed on the underneath of the tray and fell down, and Nancy could explain to them how rain occurs. This brings with a problem into focus that requires much training to resolve. There is talk of inadequately trained teachers in Thailand (and elsewhere), who are used to standing passively at the front of the class and lecturing rather than promoting exploratory, experimental learning. But you can't enable an understanding of a swim bladder and gills without dissecting a fish, and you can't explain the recoil principle of a rocket if you don't build one yourself. On the outskirts of Jakarta, there is a now- famous School of Nature, where the entire Indonesian curriculum is taught on a field with only a few shelters for rainy weather. To explain the reaction principle of a rocket to the children, the teacher took an air pump and jammed it into the opening of a plastic bottle. The kids then pumped until the bottle shot up dozens of meters into the sky with a loud bang. Or the example of floating and sinking: the children drew a measuring scale onto a small board, attached a rubber band to the top and lined it up with the zero line. Then they attached a stone to the end of the rubber band and lined up glasses full of various liquids. The children noticed that when the stone was dropped into the various liquids, it fell to different depths, which is strange and requires an explanation. A teacher is a good teacher if he or she succeeds in enlivening even the national curriculum, constantly referring it to the children's explorations and expeditions, large and small, and using it like a quarry: a treasury of knowledge which, regardless of which subject it comes from, helps to enlighten and shape our environment. ## 6\.4 Dynamizing the day With museum-like structures – lessons in 45- or 50-minute intervals, with fixed timetables, sitting quietly in the classroom – this is hard to do. There are other possible rhythms, ones that are stretched over the entire day. A pilot study led by Professors Dietrich Benner and Joerg Ramseger at the full-time elementary school in Munster-Gievenbeck, Germany, demonstrates how child-friendly rhythms can be combined with the school day and old patterns can be given up: the children can play in the morning as well, and systematic and situational learning can occur alternately. In the case of the School for Life, a rhythm sometimes forms within the sequence of teaching and center-oriented project learning: lesson – project – lesson – project, for example, or a lesson unit in which theme-oriented, interdisciplinary learning takes place through team teaching, alternating with an intense phase of the project. Team teaching in block periods about, for example, "fire and fire prevention" or "over- fishing in the Andaman Sea" requires careful preparation and research, both of which children can already be involved in. Basically, the whole day is there to be used. The rough division into morning classes and afternoon projects and mini-enterprises is no longer relevant, this is the most unimaginative way of shaping the school day. Even the old relict of same-age class groups can be replaced with theme- and project-based groupings which disregard age. ## 6\.5 Getting out of the classroom Something else is important: the escape from the classroom, those good-for-nothing places where the frontal teaching situation is so tempting. In the School for Life, the Centers of Excellence are constantly changing, providing constant temptations to leave the school and the classroom and to make the entire campus into an arena of learning. Institutions such as the laundry, and its problem with organic detergent, or the campus as a territory for snakes, and how to drive them away. There can be wandering classrooms, or ones that pitch their tent at times in the theater, at other times under trees or on the beach. This mobility keeps everyone awake, but there is no rule that says that a class can't sometimes spend a day in a quiet corner of the campus for the purposes of pursuing matters of philosophical depth. The concept of a School for Life is not dependent on the classroom, but rather on places for meeting, learning and living, like little home harbors for the members of a class who have something in common for some while. The Green School in Bali is one of Avant-garde here, and shows that the "classroom" doesn't need to look like a classroom, but can be an adventurous bamboo structure with cave-like depths. When the School for Life began, there was a great deal of approval on the national level in Thailand, from the Education Commission to the Ministry of Education, of the concept to leave the classroom behind. This position was later contradicted by the provincial education administration, which insisted on the construction of classrooms, in line (as always) with the standard regulations. But the compulsion to follow convention acts as a reason for movement: even if there have to be classrooms, they will only be used when it really makes sense. The more productively the teachers use the situation approach, the more learning opportunities they will discover beyond the classroom. ## 6\.6 From kindergarten to university The School for Life has the chance to develop a unified educational approach from kindergarten to university, based on the principles of the situation approach and avoiding ruptures between the steps on the educational path. The buildup is gradual, beginning with the kindergarten and primary school (grades 1-6), followed by the Junior High School (grades 7-9) and Senior High School (grades 10 - 12). The Ubon Ratchathanee University has developed a program of "Entrepreneurship" which allows a Bachelor and a Master's degree – the latter is possible if parallel to their studies, the student establishes a company that meets not only economic but also social and environmental criteria. With the prerequisite of bilingualism (which in turn is only possible when the communication takes place bilingually from kindergarten onwards, and 'native speakers' assume a major role), it might be possible in the distant future to offer the alternative of a double qualification: the national exams after the 12th grade and the International Baccalaureate. This qualification, nowadays recognized globally, would require the establishment of a two-year IB college. Thus, the graduates of the School for Life would be well-equipped not only nationally, but also as a 'global players'. Another option is to expand vocational education for those who aren't interested in or suited to a high school degree on the basis of their learning history. Here, it is important not to simply borrow conventional models of vocational training, which would leave the students no better off than if they received the Thai vocational education – a rather weary enterprise marked more by poor quality than by innovation. The alternative ideal route for innovative thinkers of any provenance, therefore, is the startup: the founding of ones own company with the School for Life as point of departure. If the idea is sophisticated, the "entrepreneurial design" carefully considered and the orchestration of the components right, this can represent the most sustainable way of breaking the cycle of poverty. ## [Concept](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/196/concept) Chapters - **[1. Little History School for Life Chiang Mai](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/210/1-little-history-school-for-life-chiang-mai)** - **[2. At First Sight](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/209/2-at-first-sight)** - **[3. Characteristics](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/208/3-characteristics)** - **[4. The Family Concept](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/207/4-the-family-concept)** - **[5. Kindergarten](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/206/5-kindergarten)** - **[6. Schooling and Deschooling](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/205/6-schooling-and-deschooling)** - **[7. Learning Through Life](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/204/7-learning-through-life)** - **[8. The Seven Centers of Excellence](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/203/8-the-seven-centers-of-excellence)** - **[9. Think Tank and Master Workshops](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/202/9-think-tank-and-master-workshops)** - **[10. The Setting](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/201/10-the-setting)** - **[11. Teachers](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/200/11-teachers)** - **[12. Guests](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/199/12-guests)** - **[13. Partners](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/198/13-partners)** - **[14. Transfer of innovation](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/197/14-transfer-of-innovation)** - **[15 ](https://phuketer.com/s/00000600/wiki/196/concept#15.-attachments)[Source PDF (external site)](https://school-for-life.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/SfL-Konzept-2003-2016_fin-1.pdf)** School for Life, 185/3 Moo 4, T. Pameing, Doi Saket District, 50220 Chiang Mai, Thailand Tel. +66 53 248194