I believe strong educational spaces are those where practice matches the following principles…

 

…strong relationships meet basic needs and allow for experimentation and risk taking

I believe this is too often taken for granted. We are often engaging in relationships for the purpose of something else, such as "achievement", rather than for the relationship itself. Being in relationships for the sake of relationship has many radical implications for our practice that are not reflected in the system at large. It models a way of being in the world. An educational space where relationships are valued in-and-of themselves feels incredibly different than one where relationships are clearly a tool for something considered more important.

 

…curiosity and interest drive engagement

People can't sustain engagement for long in something they are not interested in.

…what is learned is a function of opportunity, experimentation and observation, motivation, and time.

This means that what is learned depends on having many opportunities to engage with concepts, have the sustained motivation to engage with these concepts, which increases the chance that one better understands something at any given moment.

Another way to think about this is the more opportunities, experimentation and observation, motivation, and time there is, the more likely something is to be learned and for deeper insights to arise.

…children are among the most excellent learners on the planet.

“We don't ask ourselves anymore what is working or not working to help children learn. Instead, we ask what is happening that reflects the details of children's deep desire and skills for learning."

- Deb Curtis and Nadia Jaboneta in Children's Lively Minds : Schema Theory Made Visible

Alison Gopnik in her book The Gardener and the Carpenter goes into how children are better learners than most any computer or sentient being on this planet. How might we structure educational spaces that embrace this reality rather than work against it?