This is a report from a grant from the EEA and Norway funds (Project Czech-Norwegian bridge to democracy by experience, no. EHP-CZ-ICP-4-029) and here is one of the output which is our trip to the north. The visit was bilateral, and after the autumn visit of three teachers from Nyskolen in Oslo, that is, in Colibri and Donum Felix, it was time for us. Below you will find our observations, impressions and observations from the five-day trip to Nyskolen.
Nyskolen is a private school with approximately 120 pupils between the ages of 6-16. It is by all accounts the most progressive school in Norway, however recently Nyskolen has been moving closer to the mainstream of Norwegian state schools and the mainstream is moving closer to Nyskolen. Educators from state schools can be seen quite often at Nyskolen, and according to the director of Nyskolen, Sunniva, the founders support the direction of greater student participation in school life.
Nyskolen started as a small free democratic school, but changes in legislation, parents‘ expectations and the school’s view on various topics, e.g. the advent of digital technologies, directed the school into a larger structure. The school still applies the principles of direct majority democracy and creates space for pupils‘ participation in the school’s form, but it has limited the possibility of realizing personal freedom. We had a shance to talk to the teachers about the changes over time, because many of the teachers have been at the school for many years and the school has had the same director since it started, Sunniva, who devoted herself intensively to us during our stay. So what makes the school different?
The first and immediately obvious is that the school is a living organism where children have the opportunity to influence the space around them. Painted walls in the yard, art projects on the walls inside the school, a wall to put your own „tag“, class names made up by children (what adult would name a class „Sus“ or „Kawaii“?). It occurred to us that children do not change in the presence of adults. They seem very informal, they are usually seen communicating with children outside of the lesson itself, smaller children come to them for hugs. For all participants of our visit, the high level of relations between children and staff was among the first things we shared with each other. It was nice that the students were communicative and interested in our presence, we sometimes exchanged a few words with many of them, sometimes even managed to discuss how our school differs from theirs.
In terms of organization, the school practices limited age mixing. Some lectures take place in a one class (e.g. mathematics, languages), other lectures combine two classes (especially the optional ones). In addition to these, let’s say, classic subjects with compulsory participation, there are also so-called „sibling groups“ and circles. These are mainly focused on social skills through activities that interest children. They have the opportunity to choose them several times a year and to design them themselves once every year or two. There is age mixing across the entire 1st or 2nd grade (to borrow a concept from the Czech education system) and currently in the sibling groups you can choose between for examle school band, theater and improvisation, football and basketball, cook etc. In addition to the „sibling groups“, there are also age-mixed circles where decisions are not made, but various topics essential for school life are prepared – especially respect for differences and communication.
The classes are relatively small, approximately 15 students each, we have also experienced divided classes with 4 students. Teaching is in the hands of the teacher. The school does not implement any specific methodology, however, it uses dialogic approaches, the focus on cooperation, the use of opportunities to take children’s interests into account in teaching and adapting topics to current events is evident. This is helped by the smaller number of students in the class, so students get to speak more often, the teacher’s ability to change the organization of the lesson, for example by dividing it into groups, is easier and faster, and the teacher can monitor and join groups more effectively. Even so, it happens (as in any duty-based system) that some pupils seem somtimes disinterested, do not participate in the activity or participate only partially, so to speak „by eye“.
The school does not give homework. Chromebooks are often used in the classroom, which every child has from the first grade provided by the school. Each classroom also has a wide-screen TV or projector with the option of wireless connection to the teacher’s laptop. Classes have a clear beginning and end, others follow after a short break. We were interested in the fact that the classrooms are locked during the break. The reason was the mess and sometimes broken things in the classrooms, which the school no longer wanted to see.
School democracy is realized through meetings of the whole school and meetings of the first and second grade. The whole school meeting lasts only 30 minutes and is compulsory for everyone, however it is possible to participate online from the classrooms. This solution is used especially for children who cannot sit for half an hour and only speak when it is their turn, or for children who have difficulty speaking or just coming in front of a large group of people. A topic we experienced was serving only vegetarian lunches for the first six weeks of school in the new school year. After the proposal is clarified, the first round of voting is done – indicative. The voting results are recorded and clear graph with visible results is projected on the wall. This is followed by an opportunity for those who were in the minority in the vote to argue why they took their position. After the proponents of the minority opinion have spoken, it is the turn of the proponents of the majority opinion. This is followed by a majority final vote, based on which the proposal is either approved or rejected. This vote did not take place during the meeting we witnessed because time ran out of 30 minits time. So the decision was moved to the next meeting.
The meetings are led by authorized students – one lead the meeting, another takes minutes, and the third goes around the room with a microphone. Meeting leaders also prepare the meeting agenda. Anyone with an agenda item will email the meeting leader. He will consider whether the topic should be decided by a meeting of the whole school, a meeting of the first/second school grade, or if the topic should not be postponed for several reasons (e.g. because the proposal is illegal, or the proposed rule already exists).
We found it unusual that parents can intervene in the life of the school, including its rules, through an institution similar to school councils. By the decision of the parents‘ representatives, for example, personal phones are prohibited in the school, which are handed over to the nice basket in the Sunniva office in the morning.
Nyskolen also tries to approach conflict resolution dialogically. For mixed-age activities (sibling groups and non-decision-making circles) there are always two employees so that, if necessary, one of them can solve the situations that have arisen. We liked that the principal Sunniva’s office had many children taking turns during the day and that the door was often open to them. Sunniva also has Lego figures in the office in case of conflict resolution. According to her experience, it helps smaller children to play some situations with it, especially when it is something that affects them a lot. It allows children to outline the situation in a playful way, without the need to explain so much, and the characters also allow them to partially separate themselves from the situation.
Another little thing that seemed important to us was that Sunniva opens the school every morning, sits at the entrance and greets the children. For Sunniva, this is an important start to the day and she feels that “mood of the school” is somehow better than when she didn’t do it. It opens up an opportunity for the children to meet her, sit down, and perhaps also helps the children to start to be more aware of mutual relationships and their importance in school when they enter school.
At the regular weekly meeting of the school’s teaching staff, we noticed that there were more men than women (although not all of the staff were there). Sunniva doesn’t think much about it, but when we shared our knowledge with her, she replied that they really have a lot of men and that even the state requires at least 60% of women to 40% of men in school or vice versa, a greater deviation of this ratio is already perceived as problematic.
Our schools are very different, partly in concept, partly in legislation. From the trip, however, we brought with us the knowledge that the cultivation of relationships and the creation of a safe and welcoming environment at school can be implemented in different school concepts and that it is often the little things that contribute to the final result.
During the school visit, we also had 4 project-oriented meetings and countless individual discussions on various topics:
- Meeting with all school employees (not all of them are involved in the project), presentation of the visit from Donum and CoLibri, presentation of the project and a report on the solution phase we are in with a subsequent discussion and ideas on how to solve some points and what we have not yet caught and should add
- Reporting and discussion regarding Activity 1
- Reporting and discussion regarding Activity 2
- Reporting, reporting and financial matters (project manager and Nyskolen director and economist)
