My son's school has "norms" instead of rules. Is this a thing now? Why?

Have you asked them why they use that language? Maybe there's a well thought out reason.

Maybe it's a subtle way to encourage them to think for themselves, rather than blindly following "rules."

Rules are dictated.

Norms are usually agreed upon. Did student council meet with administration and help to develop the school norms?

CycloneAlum wrote:

Rules are dictated.

Norms are usually agreed upon. Did student council meet with administration and help to develop the school norms?

Doesn't seem to be anything that was really agreed upon. The kid just has a page that looks like the typical "expectations" page from a syllabus, but it's titled "(name of course) class norms." As mentioned, it includes not only behavioral expectations, but things like paper formatting requirements, which wouldn't really be an issue to get together and form consensus about.

His old man comes here for advice...

Sounds like you are just looking for something to complain about.

Your poor kid wrote:

His old man comes here for advice...

What advice have I requested. I am conversing about something I find strange/amusing, not asking for advice.

Some conservative legal philosophers make a big deal out of norms vs. rules. I'm not a lawyer or a philosopher, but it's probably coming from a thinky Republican place.

If you break a norm it should not have any formal consequences. But rest assured it will if your kid does. Anything can be made into a "norm" and you will not be able to challenge it. Just because it's not a formal rule.

It's the anti-thesis to having rules and be free to do whatever is not restricted by the rules.

Leftists wish to enslave you in every aspect of life.

I would frequently fart very loudly in class during school.

You're trying to troll, but this post is for everyone else you dona good job of baiting.

Without knowing details, two possibilies.

Norms are the word they use, interchangeable with habits, practices or expectations. It'd be silly and laborious to write a rule for how kids sit in a desk ("feet on the floor, not tapping pencil, head up, etc.) and every other behavior in school. Enforcing it, because it is a rule, would be exhausting. But expressing the expectations as a habit, classroom practice, or norm communicates the expectation to students, allows the pragmatism that you don't get with rules, and serves to improve the acadamic behaviors in the building. Put another way, if you make a rule for not titling/naming/dating your work, you need clear consequence. Coming up with, communicating, and then enforcing those consequences for every behavior is not efficient or effective. Norms (or habits, practices, expectations) are the more effiecient way to manage these behaviors.

If the norms you observe take the place of bigger "rules" like fighting, the norms may just be an efficient way to communicate the rule. Refer to your son's code of conduct to see if "rules" as you envision them, still exist. Otherwise, the norms may be what get posted on placards and parent letters, insead of the technical language and nuance found in the code of conduct.

Yes, "schools" are a new thing. State indoctrination has made much use of them over the last couple of centuries.

confused father wrote:

CycloneAlum wrote:

Rules are dictated.

Norms are usually agreed upon. Did student council meet with administration and help to develop the school norms?

Doesn't seem to be anything that was really agreed upon. The kid just has a page that looks like the typical "expectations" page from a syllabus, but it's titled "(name of course) class norms." As mentioned, it includes not only behavioral expectations, but things like paper formatting requirements, which wouldn't really be an issue to get together and form consensus about.

The school/teacher is probably trying to highlight the idea that all "rules" are really just cultural expectations of socially acceptable behavior. In which case, they can really be called "norms." This idea is not necessarily a promotion of moral relativism. Rather, it just explains and qualifies morality and can help students start to think about why certain behavior is either right or wrong. There are certain social expectations that are culturally dependent, like which side of the road to drive on, etc. There are other "norms" that are universal for all people in all cultures throughout history. These are what could be termed "universal morality." Like don't lie, cheat, steal, or kill. Of course every culture has certain situations that allows for these behaviors, but they generally place a ban on doing these thing for completely self serving reasons. In fact, depending on the situation, killing can actually be valued and heroic (soldier killing for defense of his society). Or lying can be heroic (smuggling a slave in underground railroad). Or stealing can be considered necessary (eminent domain seizing someone's property for the greater good). Since no single action has an absolute 100% ban in any culture, describing "rules" as "norms" is a good way to open up the student's mind to thinking about why we have the rules we have, and what purpose they serve. (Note, there is one action that I can think of that will never have a context in which it is justified, namely, sexual activity with a child---although not every culture in history would agree with me. I've heard the Spartan's were a bunch of violence loving pedophiles.)

I hope you tell your son to never accept participation trophies.

My kids' school calls term paper assignments "rubrics."

I guess that's how educators make people feel inferior.

Where's your kid go to school? Oberlin, UC Berkeley, Evergreen State?