Intro Comments

I've just spent an hour skimming attendant documents for the first time.  They don't seem to include much if any direct mention of the traditional structure of schools (the teaching of highly discreet disciplines, one-hour periods as a general rule, text-based learning, accountability for learning as demonstrated by test-taking and so forth).  Are these dimensions given, i.e. not up for discussion?  My own (however nascent) research career, and background as a science teacher, has convinced me that kids can and should use their classrooms to launch studies that address the complex, layered, and I would say even chaotic problems people face in real world situations, very few of which "fit" into traditional models of class room activity. By following these pathways, contemporary schools seem by contrast to inhibit the best and most desirable arenas of student learning, such as critical thinking, original thinking, actual-world problem solving, and professional development.

Yet working on such actual-world problems is something even grade-school children can tackle, given appropriate guidance.  Indeed, I believe this sort of work is really the only way that kids become active and informed adults, productive and visionary citizens.  Putting off such practices until entry into workplaces (including the workplace "families-as-parents") means that the essentials of education are also forestalled.  (Not to mention that by then, people may be conditioned not to become imaginative and responsible participants in problem-solving activities.)

I understand that coming to terms with a Master Plan will give people in this state an opportunity to advance some coherency into a "messy" dialogue about education in California.  But I'd like to see this dialogue become a jumping off spot, so that the plan isn't treated as a hardened piece of engraved granite but rather a first and very incomplete document from which several qualities can be derived:
* A better grasp of "equality" and how that value can be both academically and economically established in and through our educational system
* A common belief, grounded in practice, that encourages the participation of a huge "clientele" in the "making of schools"
* A scheme, creative and innovative in nature, that allows students to become involved in real work and in real problem-solving
* A sense of community that grows through the effort of making the Plan and adding to the discussion.
I have some faith that dealing with an Internet discussion will make the creation of the Plan, and its review, accessible to a much broader audience than perhaps has been the case in the past.  Let's see if this perception has any truth to it, as we progress over the next few weeks (and months).