I began my career as a special educator during an exciting time of educational innovation. It was the early 1970s and the reform movement known as open education was reshaping the look and feel of public school classrooms. Invoking such phrases as "freedom to learn," open educators recharged the traditional curriculum by switching the responsibility for learning from the teacher to the student.

Along with many other counterculture movements of the late ‘60s and early ‘70s, open education was a grassroots phenomenon. "Open classrooms" sprang up in public schools. Parents who wanted a more radical change in their youngsters’ educations set up alternative "free schools." Books by educational writers became best-sellers. In How Children Fail, John Holt presented myriad examples of how the lock-step traditional curriculum alienated students from their learning. In Lives of Children, George Dennison vividly described how teacher-student relationships based on honesty and trust could motivate even the most hard-pressed learners. In 36 Children, Herbert Kohl narrated the positive changes in the achievements of his Harlem sixth graders when he realigned the curriculum with their personal experiences.

As a young teacher, I was enthralled with the prospect of changing from a purveyor to a facilitator of learning. In my "open classroom," I discovered both the joy and the frustration of trying to coax responsible behavior out of youngsters who were far more adept at channeling their vast reservoirs of energy into resistance and fighting than into their schoolwork. I found the reality of promoting a democratic classroom atmosphere a lot harder than the slogans and books indicated. Many days I felt overwhelmed with the process of negotiating the bows and whys of reading, math, and behavior with my students. During the discouraging times I often cast an envious eye at my colleagues who were content to award stickers for worksheets completed.

My resolve was strengthened one rainy fall afternoon by Peter, a 12-year-old with a gift for succinct observation. We were discussing his upcoming progress report. I was urging Peter to evaluate his improvement in reading when he looked me dead in the eye and asked, "Why do you keep bothering me? It’s not my job to care about whether or not I learned anything, it’s yours — you’re the teacher!" I was stunned. It was my moment of truth, and I knew that my conversion to open education was complete. As time went by, I understood more clearly that teaching responsibility was a long, circuitous journey with many pitfalls, joys, and occasional glimpses into the souls of my students.

Within a few years, open education as a reform movement flamed out amid reports of chaotic classrooms and lack of standards. By the mid-seventies, the educational pendulum of reform had swung back to competency-based learning, behavioral objectives, and direct instruction. Yet my faith in student choice and decision making remained constant. I had seen too many significant changes in my students as a result of their open classroom experiences to doubt the power of respect and responsibility to beget respect and responsibility. I encouraged students to select their own reading materials and saw students with learning disabilities raise their reading comprehension to grade level. I watched my class work together to transform our classroom into an imitation town with streets, stores, a bank, and even a counseling service. I participated in a classroom discussion where students admonished others to tone down their behavior because, in Jimmy’s words, "we are a community and we’ve all got to get along."

So 25 years later, I am writing an introduction to a group of articles that remarkably echo the same message as open education. Enduring truths, it seems, will find a way to grow and flourish. Alfie Kohn, Richard Curwin, Allen Mendler, William Glasser, and Robert Wubbolding are some of the most widely read authors in education. They have written extensively on learning, teaching, and human behavior. In this issue of Reaching Today’s Youth, their writings represent an impressive array of unified ideas regarding the conditions that foster personal growth. Their ideas complement each other and provide fresh insight into the dynamic relationship between respect and responsibility. Each one advocates nurturing responsible behavior by respecting the right of young people to make their own choices. As Alfie Kohn puts it, "you have to give young people responsibility in order to have them act responsibly."

Respect and responsibility are synergistic. They feed and grow off each other. The more respect and responsibility we give young people, the more we will get in return. This is neither a maxim nor an act of faith, but a reality that is reflected in the writings of several other contributing educators. Like pieces of a mosaic, their ideas for fostering responsibility form a compelling illustration of how adults and young people can live and learn together. Linda Goulet describes a set of guidelines she has used successfully to help school-hardened special education adolescents gain self-respect. Linda Bell explains how tadpoles, caterpillars, and a parrot can teach young people empathy and patience. Other contributors, including Joe Young, Bill Messenger, and staff members at YAIYA (Young Aspirations/Young Artists), present creative approaches for weaving art, cartoons, and music into youth projects. Their approach appeals to the open educator in me who constantly marveled at how unmotivated students slid easily into high gear when they were doing something they found interesting. Sylvia Rockwell follows up on Alfie Kohn’s critique of social skill instruction by describing how service learning and mini-business ventures help form bonds of trust between youth and the adults who would help them.

One of the most often cited criticisms of social skill development is lack of evidence of generalization to the community at large. What is often overlooked in this critique is that school-based programs are only part of the solution for helping young people achieve respect and responsibility. As Sister Mary Rose McGeady explains, many young people are challenged each day merely to find shelter and feed themselves. If we want to help youngsters who continually confront homelessness, violence, and abuse, we must first respect their plight and second respect their tenacity for survival. We have much to learn from survivors such as Lucia Diaz who went from maid to the Executive Director of the Mar Vista Family Center, the agency that gave her a new lease on life. As sociologist Paul Goodman observed, many young people grow up surrounded by absurd conditions. Before we seek to change their behavior to conform to our idea of responsibility, we must first learn about the contexts that shape their lives. We need to hear their voices to better understand their needs.

During my initial, fitful months as a teacher in an open classroom, I learned that when we give young people choices, they do not always choose as we would. Young people have different priorities, and attempts to force them into preconceived molds will only harden their resistance. At the same time, young people are also unpracticed in sound decision making. Adult guidance must not be abdicated. This is the mistake that many open educators made, and it ultimately hastened the demise of open education as a reform movement. Some teachers thought that open education meant turning all control over to students. They placed unrealistic expectations on their young charges and anticipated that students, once unfettered from adult authority, would just naturally dive into their studies. When this did not happen, many teachers, parents, and students came to the conclusion that democratic practices were not compatible with sound educational practice.

Twenty-five years after the hey-day of open education, we are still searching for the best ways to help young people learn responsible behavior. However, the lessons from the past are not lost. My reading of these articles reinforces my belief that, provided the right balance of mutual respect, adults and young people can form a potent partnership for personal change.

Martin Henley is a regular contributor to Reaching Today’s Youth’s "Teaching Responsibility" column, a professor in the Education Department at Westfield State College, and Director of the Pegasus Center for Enabling Education. During his 25 years as an educator he has taught sixth grade in urban schools, taught special education classes for emotionally disturbed students, served as a Head Start director~ and administered an inclusive school for autistic students. Henley is author of Teaching Self Control: A Curriculum for Responsible Behavior. He can be reached at Westfield State College, Education Department, Westfield, MA 01086.