A vital part of the self-directed approach (SDE) to education the world over is the commitment to fostering a natural, self-guided learning process that allows children to explore their interests and passions at their own pace, free from external pressures and prescribed curricula. 

Whilst private tutors are used in many SDE environments from time to time, and sometimes at home for some specialist classes where children prefer to do there, the focus on English and Maths, reflects more the parents concern that if they don’t do this, ‘how will they ever learn?’ or just a worry that ‘my child might get behind’. We know from research and experience that the best way to learn to read and write is naturally, intrinsically, and not forced. Children, in an environment like ours learn to read and write at different ages, sometimes when they’re 5 sometimes when they are 12. The most important thing is that children gain a love for reading and writing and the best way to do that is to let them discover it, not to be forced to do it. 

Here are some reasons why tutoring may not be beneficial for your children when they attend a self directed/democratic learning centre or school:

Undermines Trust in Intrinsic Motivation 

Self-directed education believes in nurturing a child’s intrinsic motivation to learn. Providing private tutoring at home can send the message that external intervention is necessary for a child’s academic progress, potentially eroding their self-confidence and belief in their own abilities. And it can model that there is a “right way to learn things”, which can cause children to doubt themselves if they approach things in a different way. 

Imposes External Structure 

SDE prioritizes freedom and autonomy in learning. Private tutoring can impose a structured, adult-led approach to education, which can kill a child’s natural curiosity and desire to learn about the world independently. 

Contradicts the Core Self-directed Principle 

Most SDE schools operate on the core principle that students are trusted to make decisions about their own learning. Private tutoring can undermine this principle by introducing an authority figure who dictates what and how a child should learn. This is the opposite to an SDE environment.

Risk of Burnout 

The combination of Self-directed education and private tutoring can potentially overwhelm a child, leading to burnout or disengagement from the learning process. SDE schools advocate for a balanced, holistic approach to education that respects a child’s well-being. 

Limiting Diverse Interest 

Democratic communities encourage children to explore a potentially infinite number of interests beyond just Mathematics and English. Private tutoring, which typically focuses on these types of specific subjects, can restrict a child’s exposure to diverse learning opportunities, and hence teaches children that these are not as valued. 

Financial Pressure 

Having private tutoring can be a big financial commitment for families. Children learn to read and write and do Maths as well as an infinite number of things in SDE environments. Adding to the expense can be hard for some families. 

The Self directed/Democratic philosophy of education places great emphasis on trust, autonomy, and self-direction, believing that children have an inherent ability to learn when provided with a supportive environment. Private tutoring may have its merits in certain contexts but can potentially contradict these principles and disrupt the natural flow of learning that we aim to foster. It is really important to carefully consider the alignment of educational choices with the underlying philosophy and values of the approach so as not to confuse your child. They won’t get the benefit of complete trust.

Schools have perpetuated the idea of Artificial Intelligence, long before AI existed.

Artificial Intelligence is becoming increasingly present in our lives from virtual assistants such as Siri and Alexa to predictive algorithms which often guide us through questions when we visit a website. With the onset of language AI models such as Chat GPT, AI can promise positive affects but there are real concerns about its potential impact on society, including the possibility of job displacement, privacy violations and even existential risks.

One reason why the onset of Artificial Intelligence is so unnerving for many people is that the definition of intelligence as perpetuated by an out-of-date schooling system, values the ability to pass exams over focusing on more holistic competencies of human nature. Intelligence is not simply a matter of processing information or performing well on standardized tests, but rather, as Ken Robinson explored, a ‘dynamic and multifaceted construct that is unique to each individual.’ He emphasized the importance of cultivating diverse forms of intelligence and encouraged pupils to pursue their passions and interests, rather than forcing them to conform to a predetermined set of standards and expectations.

Pupils who can do well in current traditional schools in terms of being able to navigate the system and achieve high grades are often described as ‘clever’ or ‘bright’, but intelligence is something different.

A holistic approach to intelligence recognizes the value of several skills and competencies that are essential for success in many aspects of life including communication, emotional intelligence, creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, adaptability and social awareness.

Pupils who are able to be part of a learning community that values self-direction and democracy are better equipped to navigate complex social and technological environments, engage in meaningful relationships, pursue fulfilling careers, and make positive contributions to their communities and society as a whole. A holistic approach to education recognizes that intelligence is not a fixed trait, but rather a set of skills and competencies that can be developed and refined over time through experience and reflection.

When schools adopt a holistic view of intelligence, children can grow to become the masters of AI, rather than just fearing the potential threat. They can harness its power to augment their own intelligence and enhance their ability to solve complex problems, create new knowledge, and improve their lives and the lives of those around them.

It’s time for schools to stop focusing on measuring ‘what’ students need to know and to turn towards providing an environment where they allow them to be and explore ‘who they are’.

AI need not be a threat to humanity. If we focus our education system on a ‘competency based’ approach where we trust children to forge their own unique journeys; where we trust them to take control of their own lives and learning and where we as educators stop the myth that intelligence is the ability to pass tests, then we can gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between AI and human intelligence and work towards alleviating some of the fears surrounding this rapidly evolving technology. We need to continue to evolve as humans along side it. As Ken Robinson so eloquently said:

“Intelligence is diverse, dynamic and distinct. It can’t be reduced to a score on a standardized test. And Education is not a mechanical system; it’s a human system. It’s about people, people who either do want to learn or don’t want to learn”. 1.

©Ben Kestner April 203

1. Robinson, K, (2015), Creative schools: The grassroots revolution that’s transforming education. Viking (P.38)

“#DoItForTheCAS.” The screen of my phone lit up with yet another notification from one of my fellow International Baccalaureate classmates. Our Facebook group was active, now even in summer, and every time I glanced up from the Lego game I was playing with the children I babysat for, it was filled with more questions about homework assignments, funny memes to lessen the stress, and general griping about the long school year to come. CAS, or creativity, action, and service, was one of the most frequently complained about components of the program. Although the intentions of CAS may be well meaning, rewarding students for their work and passions outside of the classroom and encouraging curiosity and reflection in all aspects of one’s life, for me it had become yet another disheartening source of the message I had become conditioned to believe all my life: your success is directly tied to the score you receive for it.

I hadn’t always felt such a startling disillusionment with my formal education. When I was younger report card days were some of my favorite of the year. I hated that the teachers would only give them to you right as you were leaving the classroom to go home, to discourage students from comparing them to each other. I was incredulous. Why shouldn’t the other children know how smart I am? When I discovered that I wouldn’t receive letter grades until third grade, I was infuriated. I wanted bright and shiny As. Making due with a system of checks, check minuses and check pluses was torturous, but I was satisfied that at least I could receive the highest, most prestigious type of check mark in every subject and my math papers and spelling tests would always come back with gold stars.

When I finally hit the third grade, I wrote a report about peacocks. I could not tell you now where they live, the length of their gestation period or any of the other, actual information I learned through the process, but I can remember with all certainty that I got it back with a thick red A in the top right corner. At that point in my life, the validation of an A was enough; I craved good grades and high scores and felt unstoppable when I made them happen. The deepest sense of fulfilment I could achieve was a 100% handed to me by a smiling teacher.

If only that were still enough, I thought, as I lay watching a six year old and a nine year old map out an elaborate Lego land, complete with stores, and characters, and a system of governance. Why, when I could recite the extensive list of my extracurriculars along with a specific description of exactly what college-worthy quality each had instilled in me, did I feel as though I didn’t have any genuine, unique interests? Why, when on paper I could list off all the impressive classes I’d taken and the top grades for each, was I unable to conjure up any of what I had supposedly learned once my tests were graded? Why, when to the external IB graders I had supposedly been entirely successful on my exams, did I feel entirely unaccomplished? Why was a system created in which students learn just enough to ace (or pass) a test, then wipe their brains clear in order to cram them full all over again with the next chapter’s material?

It struck me just as John Green described falling in love and falling asleep: “slowly and then all at once.”  There had to be another way. I looked over at the children I was babysitting, as they independently played and explored and learned. What if there were schools where kids were trusted enough to know how and when and what they wanted to learn? I wondered if it could work. I doubted that it existed.  I typed into Google on my phone, “education systems where students direct their own learning in a collaborative setting.” Imagine my surprise to find that these schools were both very real and very effective at helping children to reach their full potentials without stifling all passion for learning. These schools existed, entirely as I’d imagined in my mind, places where students of all ages learned in entirely unique ways driven by their own curiosity, passion, imagination, and motivation. And not only did they exist in far off cities, there was one right here in Montana, only about 50 miles from my house, Glacier Lake School.

I poured over all the articles and books I could manage to find about this system of education, the Sudbury Valley model. Once I discovered learning could be driven by passion, I knew I could not squeeze myself back into the narrow mold students are required to fit within a traditional education system. I used to think that I wanted an IB diploma because I wanted a challenge. I thought a challenge would help me to grow. I realize now that what I wanted was the diploma at the end, the bragging rights to list off the scores I got on each exam. It would be another shiny gold star to reassure me of my own self-worth. In reality though, the stifling traditional school environment was not conductive to my growth in any way.

What was the point of success without passion, without curiosity? I didn’t want to do it only for the CAS anymore. I wanted to do it for no reason other than because I was wildly, uncontrollably excited.  I don’t think it is selfish or shortsighted or unreasonable or lazy to demand an education that is endlessly riveting. I want to be consumed with curiosity.

I decided not to complete the IB diploma program. I am taking the several required high school courses I have left online and several university courses about topics I am actually genuinely fascinated by. Sitting in a classroom under fluorescent lights for eight hours a day is no longer my education. Life is my education.

Several weeks ago, I got the opportunity to visit Glacier Lake School. It was empowering. A year ago, as junior in high school, I had sat in my advanced math class on the first day of school as we went over the classroom rules. Be in your seat when the bell rings or you’ll be tardy and get detention. Only drink clear liquids unless your cup has a lid. Don’t lean back in your chair in case you lean too far and fall and hurt yourself. The atmosphere at Glacier Lake could not have been more strikingly different. I saw children of all ages climbing trees to pick apples or working with saws to build elaborate contraptions of their own design or playing imaginatively in a treehouse. Most importantly though, I saw children who were excited to learn and happy to be at school.

Nora Gibbons aged 17

Missoula, Montana

Many people seem to think that they have come up with the best way of educating children. 

For decades, educators have been trying to adapt, change and re-mold the learning experience for our young people.

Many of the schools who boast a new, progressive approach genuinely want what they think is the best for their children. Many are also motivated by the competitive success for the school, and some, by their egos.

I won’t bore you with my background in education, but I’ve been that person. I’ve worked hard, over the last 25 years, on new curriculum approaches and have represented existing so called ‘progressive’ approaches within established systems. Many claim to be ‘child centered’ or ‘Inquiry based’, but in reality, they just manage to snip around the edges of an already broken educational system.

Ask yourself this question:

Does a curriculum paradigm need to teach children what we think they need to know, or should we trust children to follow their own paths?

Traditional schools, even so called ‘progressive’ ones, often focus on the first part of the sentence. 

Real learning should focus on the second.

I find myself saying “STOP!” when I hear interviews or read about the latest progressive paradigm. They all talk about how important it is to ‘produce’ intelligent, empowered, purposeful critical thinkers. They talk about how ‘inquiry based learning’ should focus on the  interests and ideas of the children – but in reality, they are offering a mostly teacher led – subject led experience.

I hear this comment often;

 “You need children to be exposed to certain subjects at school, because otherwise how will they know they exist?” 

Forget that for a minute. Just close your eyes for 10 seconds and then open them. What do you see? You see the world around you. Your mind is constantly asking questions about that world. The answer to those questions may lead you to either continue that line of enquiry or leave it, and eventually you will come across something that interests you so much, you want to spend more time on it – as much time as you like.

We need to just trust that children WILL learn. They can’t NOT learn. They need to talk, experience the world around them, meet interesting people, do interesting things, ask questions and feel that personal drive to intrinsic motivation and the joy of learning and the world around them.

What’s the best curriculum paradigm for children? The answer is no curriculum paradigm for children. Their curriculum is their imagination. We as educators need to give them the space and time to discover what they find interesting. Our role as adults is to be there for them, to facilitate their own personal journey and help them create an environment where they feel trusted, connected and in control of their own lives.

Don’t worry that they won’t know ‘stuff’. If you leave them alone, they will not only know ‘stuff’ but what they know will be simply deeper and more meaningful than most of what they are told in a traditional School.

If you find it hard to believe all of this. I simply ask that you talk to someone who has lived a self-directed education life. I’m sure you’ll find them incredibly interesting!

Ben Kestner

July 2022

My niece, who is thirteen and lives in the UK, recently needed to choose what GCSE subjects she will take next year. It is that time in her life where she needs to sit down and decide her subject choices for the next two years.

Now, for most people that is normal. It is what you must do; it is what we all had to do. The school system is asking for them to choose and it is compulsory. It is the next step on the path of life. This act of choosing is a huge decision which will shape the future path of a child in a direction which will be hard to change.

‘Subjects’ in most traditional schools are associated with academics and usefulness for work. Which subjects are taught are decided on by someone. The content within each subject is decided by someone, and the standard a child needs to achieve is decided by someone.

These decisions are usually guided by a combination of tradition, a national or state curriculum, and the availability of teachers and the timetable structure at each school. Remarkably, that ‘someone’ who is making all of these choices is never the child themselves.

What people need to learn is a debate that has as many opinions as there are people with an opinion, and national curriculum policymakers decide for us what they consider essential.

There is a hierarchy of importance, with Mathematics, Languages and Science at the top, then Humanities, followed by the Arts, and then pretty much anything else the school can offer.

At many progressive learning establishments such as The Learning Project in Ibiza, there is no hierarchy of things a child might want to learn or be interested in. Who are we as adults to say that Mathematics is more important to someone than say, Dance? Try telling that to a professional ballet dancer. It is important that we as humans learn to read and write, as well as having some proficiency with the number system, in order to function well in society, and it is important to do away with hierarchy within subjects and let the child choose. 

A common argument for forced subject choice can go something like this: The world needs scientists so everyone should do science, because if a child isn’t exposed to science, how will they ever know what science is? 

A doctor who says, “If I hadn’t done science, I wouldn’t be where I am today”, usually gets the answer from me, “But you would be doing something else wonderful instead”. 

We need to get away from our worry that the world will not have scientists unless we force kids to do science. The world surrounds all of us with science every day and it is surely more important to encourage questioning and a love for learning, and then give opportunities for that curiosity to grow. Some of us will naturally lean towards science, and if there is a genuine interest, a drive, and all the time in the day to pursue that interest – wonderful learning happens.

Back to my niece. Here are her choices:

It is compulsory to do Mathematics, English and Science and then the choices are:

I look at that table and think that what I would like to select are all from the final box. Or better yet, there are three others I am interested in spending my time doing – and they are not even listed.

Is it too much to question WHY this system still exists? WHY someone has decided that Mathematics is more important than say, Art and Design?

Often, even the choices in the final box are not possible if the class fills up and if your choices clash with the timetable planning. This system squashes a child’s innate desire to learn what they want to learn. It also re-emphasizes and continues the myth of a hierarchy of areas of learning.

The curriculum should indeed be only limited by the imagination of a child.

There are things you can do to change this. One is to consider another learning environment for your child which could include a more progressive school or homeschooling. An environment that allows children the option to develop self-agency now, where the child can explore their own world with the support of a caring community – to explore what they are interested in pursuing. For some, these choices are not possible, so another avenue is to question. Have this conversation with your school, your friends, and your colleagues.

At the very least QUESTION the status quo and never accept the ‘…because it is the way we have always done it’ answer.

Many of us may have heard someone we love or care about say “I just need some time and space”. You may have said it yourself. This sometimes-earth-shattering phrase can be the ‘writing on the wall’ when it comes to a relationship or partnership. It can be a way of saying “I need to think, reassess, close my eyes, evaluate, reset – in a place of my choice”

Having worked in many different schools, I have come to hear children say this when the environment they are experiencing becomes too much for them.  “I just need some time and space”. When the bell goes every time they become intensely interested in something, when they’re told to learn something that doesn’t interest them, when the highly competitive nature of the environment praises for what they ‘can’ do, and makes them feel inadequate when they ‘can’t’.

If your child goes to school, look closely at the Mission and Vision statement the school offers. If you need to dig through multiple layers of the website to find it, then that’s usually a sign of how important the school sees it. If they don’t have one, then you might like to ask why. 

Mission statements describe exactly why a school exists, its culture, values, ethics and so on. A good mission statement has been the result of thorough contemplation and soul searching from the organisation, involving multiple members of the community. Try coming up with your own Mission and Vision for your family. Sit down with them with a blank sheet and really try to decide what your values and desires are for your family. It’s an engaging and thought-provoking exercise.

There’s a high chance that your school’s mission statement will say something like this

 “….we provide a high quality education that builds a foundation for life-long learning…”

Life-long learning appears in many, if not most school mission statements, but how many schools can actually say what Life-Long Learning is and how many can tell you exactly how they provide an environment that builds this foundation?

We know so much more about how humans learn best, through research particularly of the brain, than before. Children from birth, have a natural propensity to learn. Babies need no encouragement to engage with their environment. No coaxing or persuading is needed for them to build connections with everything around them. There’s no need for rewards to make them interested in learning, and yet, often when they enter the traditional school system, rewards and extrinsic motivation becomes the norm. Schools need to ask themselves why this is. What shifts when they enter an environment that surrounds itself with grades, comparison with others and a set curricula?

Ideally, children are brought up in a world where caring, nurturing adults offer them multiple chances to explore and where the adults (whilst wanting them to be safe) help them navigate multiple experiences, mostly though play.

It is important that children continue to be excited and engaged with the world around them and that they continue to be comfortable with making mistakes. We know that making mistakes is essential for learning. Wouldn’t it be great if we, like so many scientists do, start a sentence when we’re discussing what might be a contentious issue, with “I may be wrong, but……”

As the late Ken Robinson said in his famous Ted Talk Do Schools kill creativity? “By the time children get to be adults most have lost the capacity [to make mistakes] – they have become frightened to be wrong”. Studies have shown children actually lose their sense of enjoyment for learning and creativity as they progress though some traditional school systems.

Schools that truly believe they want to offer a foundation for life-long learning need to provide the time and space for them to explore, make mistakes and learn what they are interested in. They need to shift the responsibility for learning to the learner. 

We all face hurdles when we are learning. Hurdles that pop up, that we may need to jump (or run around) in order to achieve something that interests us. Anyone who has reached a proficient level playing an instrument will know that scales and arpeggios are not always the most exciting part of practicing, but they are a necessary hurdle to achieve a high level of performance. The same can be said for the athlete who endures those early morning runs. But when children chose a path for themselves, it’s much more likely that they will be willing to jump those hurdles to achieve what they want. If children are being coerced in to doing something they don’t want to, it’s a much longer, harder journey.

“I just need time and space” that’s what children are crying out for. Time to focus on what they want, and the space or environment to do it.

Schools like the Learning Project in Ibiza offer an environment where children can create, play, study, invent, make mistakes, rest – all on their terms in a community that celebrates creativity.  Adults are there to guide, support and teach in a non-threatening, non-judgmental way.

Intrinsic motivation is the key to truly “learning for life”.

In 2013, when my daughter was 5 years old, my wife and I decided we didn’t want her to go to a traditional school anymore. Things had been building up for a while, but the tipping point was when she was visited for a couple of weeks by her grandmother, and we pulled her out of school for that time. When she returned, she was told she needed to ‘catch up’ on her missed learning and ‘playtime’ was used to do the worksheets required. We were also concerned about the messages home about preparing the children ‘academically’ for first grade.

One of the problems we faced with her changing schools was I was the Middle School Principal at the Kindergarten through twelfth grade school she attended. It suddenly occurred to us that we didn’t want her to attend the school I was working at.Normally, parents would find a new learning environment for their child, more aligned with their philosophy of education. We decided to start a school.

In the summer of 2013, we moved from Belgium to the States and set up a school in rural Montana on a Native American reservation. A school where we trust children to take responsibility for their learning and their lives. 

There was always a dilemma for me when I was a teacher and then administrator in traditional schools, “How to engage and promote a child’s natural instinct for learning within an environment not set up for individual and personalized passions and interests? How do we move education to where children are in the driver’s seat of their own learning?

Children now are preparing for a world where some career options are not even known to us yet, and some jobs which exist now won’t exist in the future. Children today will likely have multiple jobs and professions throughout their lives and so they need to acquire the flexible and varied “survival skills” needed for an unknown future. Tony Wagner in his book ‘The Global Achievement Gap’ says that children will need:

• Critical Thinking Skills
• Collaboration across networks and leading by influence
• Agility and Adaptability
• Initiative and Entrepreneurialism
• Effective oral and written communication
• Accessing and Analyzing Information
• Curiosity and Imagination

Children at self-directed, democratic schools are given an extraordinary amount of time and space to learn these survival skills. They are given opportunities to lead remarkable and interesting lives on a daily basis and they gain trust in themselves, and the tools and confidence to forge their own paths according to their innate drive and passion.

My career has taken me from inner-city state schools in the UK, to middle school Principal at two of Europe’s better known and prestigious International Schools in Germany and Belgium, to setting up my own school in the USA, and now, for probably the most exciting move, Head of School at the Learning Project, Ibiza.

I’m sure that The Learning Project will become an internationally known environment for self-directed learning. A place where children mix freely across ages and where the core of the philosophy is Freedom, Democracy, Responsibility and Respect.

As the new Head of School, I look forward to sharing with you the exciting learning opportunities The Learning Project can offer your children and how we can work together with your family to offer the best environment to nurture their natural instincts and keep their curiosity and passion alive into adulthood. 

My wife and daughter (who is now 13) and I look forward to meeting you in person.

Below, is an article published in the Missoulian newspaper on October the 5th by Ben Kestner in response to an earlier editorial.

I read the editorial section of the Missoulian this Wednesday with particular interest as a parent and as a teacher/administrator of some 25 years. Again, we see another report showing more and more of our teens are experiencing depression and suicidal thoughts (see Missoulan September, 30 2015). And again, there is a cry for more training for school employees, parents and peers in suicide awareness and prevention, which is of course, crucial. But instead of only looking at prevention we should also focus on the causes. The editorial, importantly, also says, “(p)arents, peers and others must help create an environment in which youth know their feelings will be taken seriously.”

Home and school are the environments where children spend most of their lives. So it seems logical to focus on these environments in order to reach the cause – like preparing the soil and conditions for a flower to grow. According to research including that of Peter Gray – (Ted Talk “The decline of Play and the Rise of Mental disorders) and his excellent book, “Free to Learn – Why Unleashing the Instinct to Play Will Make Our Children Happier, More Self-Reliant, and Better Students for Life” – the correlation between the decline of opportunities for kids to experience unstructured play at home and school is directly related to the rise in mental disorders in teenagers.

Not so long ago, we could walk down neighborhoods and see children playing in the streets – the school days were shorter, the school year was shorter and there was a lot more recess time for kids to socialize and play in and out of school. Now, kids are put under more and more pressure at school and at home to succeed academically. They are taking high stakes tests and are being given more and more homework. The emphasis is on ‘core’ curriculum areas and, as a result, other subject areas that encourage and develop critical thinking and innovative practice are on the decline.

When do kids get the chance to experience the important aspects of play that we know helps them to structure their own lives and behaviors?

My plea to parents and educators is to look for ways where kids are given the chance to interact with each other away from adult control and influence. In schools, we need to restructure days to allow for longer recess. We need to cut down on homework. (Did you know, for example, that there is NO evidence that homework has any real benefit to elementary-school-aged kids? See Alfie Kohn’s “The Homework Myth”.) When kids are given more freedom and autonomy, they grow up to be happier and more successful members of society. We need to give children their childhood back.

A.S. Neill, a famous educator who founded Summerhill School in the UK, a democratic self-directed school once said, “I’d rather our school produced a happy street cleaner than a neurotic Politician”.

We, parents and educators, above all, surely, want our kids to be happy, right?