Autonomy of School, Teachers, Parents, and Students

Erich Maria Remarque, in Three Comrades, wrote two sentences that appear to be built on a particular paradox: “The less you know, the easier it is to live. Knowledge makes a man free but unhappy.” The classic school equips students with knowledge. So is it a space of freedom or enslavement? If the former, how to use it? If the latter, why is this so and how do we break out from it? Who and what determines the autonomy of the school? Why is it so important that schools and teachers have more influence on the goals and forms of action they offer their pupils?

Freedom from

Autonomy, equated with self-determination, self–decision-making, and agency, is identified by many with the concept of freedom. And this is a key challenge for libertarians. They, especially in the US, associate public education with unjust coercion of students and their families. This view gained special significance during lockdown. On that assumption, criticism of public education was popularized by Gary North. On one hand, North emphasized illegal oppression of schools maintained by the state; on the other, he drew attention to the phenomenon of independent learning thanks to remote education. He suggested the implementation of free online learning. For example, using the resources of the Khan Academy. In this case, no one would need taxpayer-funded teachers, and students could study at their own pace and complete compulsory education even at 16 or 17. The only solution in the area of education, according to libertarians, is widespread privatization. Through it, good schools would displace less valuable ones – for example, because more and more students would enroll in them. All would then, in trying to cope with competition, focus their efforts on continuously improving new, attractive curricula and methods of education. The state would no longer impose its limits, and education would become dominated by solutions that show flexibility, diversity, and recipient orientation.

Personal freedom

Solutions advanced by libertarians are being watched by a group of people who want and can afford to provide their children with education differently from the common dimension. Unfortunately, these proposals only cover a part of the population. Limitations result from families’ lack of proper knowledge, educational ambitions, or even financial capabilities. What’s more, those trying to impose libertarian theses that limit the influence of schools and teachers decide forcefully what and how their kids are supposed to be taught. Often they also try to decide about life and developmental possibilities for children of other parents, who they’ve decided don’t see the harm public education can lead to.

The opposite of autonomy is obedience. Many people think school is intended to shape precisely this. Immanuel Kant wrote about it almost three centuries ago in “On Pedagogy”: “Disciplining bends a man under the laws of humanity, makes him feel their compulsion. So, for example, we send children to school initially not so that they learn something there, but to get them used to sitting quietly in it and doing exactly what they have been given.” Kant points out that obedience fundamentally changes a person’s life. It saves us from reflection and lets us to make simple decisions even if we disagree with them. Why, for example, do we use programs in school that we consider stupid? Because they’re in place. Why do we assess students with numbers that say nothing? Because that’s what the school grading system says. Why do we assign homework that only a few do? Why do we focus mainly on teaching what students should remember? Why do we give up on methods that are activating and inclusive in working with students? Because it just works like that. We submit. We do what they tell us. We adapt to what the system requires of us. 

Is there a way between denying the domination of individual rights to freedom of each of us, and liberation from the enslavement locked in by a sense of cultural obedience to those deciding about our lives? Must autonomy be associated with revolution and imposing one’s opinion on others? Does school make sense at all if it’s not freeing students and teachers from shackles and domination through solutions that now shape public education?

Read also:

Escape from freedom

The key to school autonomy is freedom followed by teachers, and especially by students. Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci of the University of Rochester have identified three key needs determining the full development and effective functioning of each human being. These are the need for autonomy, competence, and affiliation. Autonomy provides a sense of agency and full decision-making about development and actions that are being taken. A sense of competence is the confidence that we’re effective in performing tasks. Affiliation is understanding that we belong to a group that provides us with security and is ready to help. In turn, a study by Rebecca Collie, Helena Granziera, and Andrew Martin of 771 Australian high-school students found that lack of autonomy (or feeling excessive pressure) occurs when students:

• feel overly controlled by others;

• that they aren’t listened to;

• that they have no sense of influence on what they do at school or during school lessons.

This, along with the sense of incompetence and lack of belonging, causes students to perform poorly in school. Withdrawal follows, along with the attitude defined by the researchers as self-sabotage. This consists of students consistently limiting their activity in favor of self-learning, and over time giving up on making any effort at all. At the same time, results show that reducing pressure increases engagement while limiting self-sabotage. This means the constant control of students by teachers fosters anxiety activation, a sense of guilt and shame. This also occurs in cases of disappointment with results or teachers withdrawing attention or support for students who aren’t doing as well as expected. Just the opposite happens when learners are supported by educators through encouraging and facilitating self-initiative.

Autonomy for development

An autonomous school favors building relationships. It’s good when students and also teachers know, like, understand, and respect each other. They aren’t afraid of each other but try to understand instead. As a result, everyone can be themselves. That’s important. Henry David Thoreau asked in his Diaries: “If I am not myself, who will be me?” This is a sentence that speaks of everyone’s individual responsibility for decisions they make. When we say “They do it to us,” “the wrong core curricula’s to blame for everything,” and “Unions lost this strike,” we give up the right to influence anything. We claim merely the privilege of judging those guilty of all the evil that’s afflicting us. Therefore, in every school, it’s worth thinking together about what we are for. What’s the purpose of our actions? And according to answers that come, decide for yourself what and how to encourage and inspire yourself and your students.

To work with the sense of full autonomy, one must first stop fearing the overwhelming effects of control being exercised by others. Autonomy in school should apply to teachers as well as students and their parents. It’s also worth strictly observing the principle that boundaries are determined by the competences of individual entities. Teachers decide what and how they teach. They aren’t afraid to look for and apply diverse, preferable ways of engaging students.

Parents talk to each other and to teachers as adults to adults. No accusations or lecturing, but also without hearing in response that they don’t know anything and that they’ve no right to anything. Students decide what’s interesting for them, how they want to develop their competences and which questions to ask. Furthermore, as a community, they can formulate opinions and petitions and propose solutions needed in their school. Autonomy aims to build a sense of value, in personal and group terms, among students, their parents, and teachers. It should serve joint work between children and adults in creating a space that provides the opportunity to recognize, identify, and prepare to deal with challenges that affect each of us. It’s worth crossing out what’s not necessary from the imposed rules and the binding documents, and changing what may be overly difficult for or unattractive to students. In return, it’s worth having your proposals for working with children ready. It’s also good to have your own opinion. Be yourself at work with your charges. Or maybe, in the first place, just be someone!