My ideal Primary (Elementary) School

[Charlie D]

Would be based on these three principles:

1. School is where children learn how to find and trust their own internal locus of evaluation: Internal Locus of Evaluation means that 'authority' lies within the self rather than in society or another person. So, the central question shifts from trying to live up to or please others to: “Am I living in a way which is deeply satisfying to me, and which truly expresses me?” (Carl Rogers, 1961)
2. School is where children learn how to build respectful relationships with others: Using Thomas Gordon's model of Respectful Communication, children learn how to 'own a problem' (and therefore help resolve it) and develop their empathy. (Gordon was a student and colleague of Carl Rogers). This is also a crucial counterpoint and boundary to point 1 in my opinion.
3. School is where children learn to develop a 'growth mindset' to learning instead of a 'fixed' one: Rather than viewing kids as 'good at' something or 'bad' at it, the belief is that each child is simply at a different point in their development, not necessarily related to their age e.g. an 8 year old may display a greater understanding of maths than a 9 year old. Therefore, what is tracked and praised is the child's effort, something which they can be fully personally responsible for rather than their level of attainment, which is inevitably measured versus others (see point 1 above). This follows the work of Carol Dweck whose studies have shown that 'growth mindset' kids are much more able to cope with life's failures and surprises than 'fixed mindset' ones. They are happier.

I think these can be summarised in one goal of developing children/people who are 'fully comfortable with themselves and with an ever-changing world'.

Almost all schools seem to place 'knowledge transfer' above these three principles. 

But what about...

Small class sizes? Well, I think this naturally follows from point 2 i.e. when a group is too big, modelling and developing relationships is much harder to do. But if someone showed me how a class of 40 could each get sufficient personal attention to achieve the same aim, then I don't see that as a non-negotiable.

The 'right' curriculum?  If you stick to point 1 then it follows that what children learn will, to a great extent, depend on what they feel is intrinsically valuable. They should however be exposed to a wide range of possible learning areas to see which ones will interest them the most.

I accept the caveat that a certain level of literacy and numeracy is necessary as a building block for the rest of the curriculum. Personally, I don't see any other 'subject' as a building block, not even science. Yes, studying science can help kids to understand and develop the abilities of 'enquiry' and 'logic' (themselves building blocks), but so can dance, history, english or any subject if taught with that in mind. Indeed, if one accepts point 1 as core to what a school does, the teachers MUST ensure that all lessons facilitate the development of the child's internal locus.

[leora]

I find myself completely agreeing with all of that. Thoughts I add are: Schools are microcosms of society. New schools create social change by sowing the seeds of change in the new generation. In fact according to some sources that is why they were invented. - as a tool to facilitate the creation of an obliging workforce for the industrial revolution. My ideal elementary school therefore explores the new paradigm in terms of social thinking and freedom consciousness, places the rights of the individual above the rights of the group (as the group is made up of individuals and that way everyones needs are met) whilst encouraging the individuals to function as a synergystic system.