There should also be a value for Steiner schools, e.g. “anthroposophy”? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthroposophy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf_education —Dieterdreist (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hey @Dieterdreist:, I had messed up my table formatting and waldorf schools were hidden on the bottom row. Should be fixed now. :) Diacritic (talk) 09:30, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
At German-Wiki for amenity=kindergarten there is a section with "optional tags" especially for "pedagogical concepts / thematic focus":
-- Beginn translation with DeepL -->
If used, add the tag institution=* - Values (country-specific) can be: Kindergarten / Kindertagesstätte. The concepts, shaped by historically known pedagogues and often named after them, can be named as follows: - institution:pedagogy=* - values can be: freinet / froebel / korczak / montessori / pestalozzi / waldorf / reggio / outdoor.
For the physical, linguistic, musical, etc. For physical, linguistic, musical, etc. promotion and integration, a day care centre can offer thematic focal points:
- institution:support=* - values can be: sport / movement / music / linguistic / nutrition / religion / special_talent / sick_child_~ / social_~ / cultural_~ ~integration / ~inclusion.
Separate multiple values with *;*
<-- end translation with DeepL --
- I don't see the benefit of the institution: prefix because pedagogy= refers to the amenity=* directly. It is not in widespread use: [] mostly in Germany. --Lkw (talk) 09:25, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- My aim with this proposal is to have pedagogy tagged consistently and Lkw has pretty concisely described why the institution prefix isn’t necessary.
- I’m afraid I don’t have a good grasp of what institution:support=* is trying to achieve. It looks like there are several different dimensions of data that are captured with it: what specialties are offered, who the target clientele is, etc. I’m happy to incorporate any good ideas, but it’s not clear to me how the tag works. Diacritic (talk) 11:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- As a German I agree that the support tag is rather unclear, but some of its concepts seem useful for a future proposal. institution:pedagogy is as of yet more widely used than the plain pedagogy tag (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/compare/pedagogy/institution:pedagogy/institution:support) though that might be a valid usecase for automated conversion as the prefix really seems out of place. However, I think we should still consider an educational prefix as in the education 2.0 proposal, which was not rejected because it wasn't useful but rather because there was too much, from what I garnered from the dicussion now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xerus (talk • contribs) 16:30, 8 October 2022
Issue with `alternative`
If "alternative" is to be the "catch all" value for all values that are not "mainstream" and not any more specific value, this is a problem because then "alternative" is essentially a category.
To have categories on the same level in tagging as specific values is always a problem that can be observed in other taggings where unfortunately the damage has already been done (see e.g. building=residential vs building=apartments, surface=unpaved vs surface=dirt): When something is tagged as pedagogy=alternative, it is impossible to know whether it has been surveyed but cannot be specified any more specifically (because that school does not belong to any specific education system while still not being mainstream - i.e. possibly many private schools) or because it has not been specified any more specifically because the surveyor was lazy and/or a documented value for this pedagogy does not exist (yet).
I think it would be better to not have "alternative" as a value at all. Any "other" alternative school systems should just be tagged with their name, even if they are not documented yet.
- Hey Westnordost. You raise a good point and I certainly don't want to encourage loss of fidelity of data through a category. I do feel like there is some potential use for a value for bespoke educational approaches that are specific to an institution: many "alternative" schools cobble together multiple different theories and produce a unique hybrid that aren't going to become a separate pedagogical approach. Maybe a value like "bespoke" or "hybrid"? Diacritic (talk) 00:53, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- I was going to comment the same thing as Diacritic — at least here in Portugal, there are a some alternative schools that explicitly espouse a specific pedagogy, but many are a mix, or a custom flavor of existing established pedagogies, including the most well-known one, Escola da Ponte. I would support a "bespoke" or "hybrid" values, but if those don't gain consensus, I would rather have a generic "alternative" option than not have those schools marked at all — which, mind you, may not be due to mapper laziness but e.g. to lack of clear or consistent information in the school's promotion material (leaflets, website, videos, interviews, etc.) that would require unreasonable effort just to be able to signal the school in the map. --Waldyrious (talk) 09:11, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Can something be done to advance this, other than adding the tag here and there? I am amazed there has not been any scheme about this so far, this was one of the first things I thought might be useful when working with OSM data! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xerus (talk • contribs) 15:49, 8 October 2022
- Hi @Xerus:,
- Thanks for your support of this proposal. The minimum time required for an RfC is two weeks, so there is no barrier to me opening this proposal up for a vote. I've chosen not to do that yet for a couple of reasons.
- * While I'm happy with the proposal, I'm hesitant to proceed while I still have unresolved questions about the institution:pedagogy=* tag. I can't be absolutely certain that there isn't a subtlety that this proposal doesn't accommodate for, and I was hoping to get feedback specifically from the German mapping community. If you have colleagues in the German community that would be interested, I'd really encourage you to solicit their feedback here. More attention and focus would only make the proposal stronger.
- * Adoption of this tag hasn't really taken off quite yet. I would hope to see this tag get a bit of use before being put to a vote.
- Leaving this proposal without a vote doesn't stop this tag from being adopted as you see fit. If you agree it is a useful tag feel free to keep using it :) Diacritic (talk) 09:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- FYI, I was actually waiting for this proposal to be finalized (and approved, as I'm sure it'll be) to start mapping schools in Portugal with these tags. Would you prefer me (and others in a similar situation) to go ahead and start using the tags regardless? --Waldyrious (talk) 09:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- As a German myself, I have commented on the issue above already ;)
- A friend of mine is looking into reviving and reworking Education 2.0 this month though, which might warrant moving this into an appropriate namespace then. So maybe it makes sense to wait a few weeks for him to figure this out. --Xerus (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Xerus (or danke!). I also reached out on the Community Page as well, and got some useful insight. :)
- I’m interested to hear about the potential Education 2.0 rework; it’s a formidable task! I tried to write this with a potential expansion to education tagging in mind. My impression is that smaller proposals are more likely to gain traction than larger ones, and I didn’t want to have this tied to an all-encompassing proposal. I hadn’t expected a namespace would be necessary, though: is having something like school:pedagogy=* or education:pedagogy=* a better option than pedagogy on its own? Diacritic (talk) 05:50, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Hey Diacritic, thanks for the edit you made to the table adding some structure/categorization. Can you share a bit more information about this categorization? I've been trying to make sense of all the different pedagogies and haven't been able to find an agreed-upon organization. There's the article A Map of the Alternative Education Landscape which proposes the following broad categories (with notes of my understanding in grey):
- Transmission model (traditional education)
- Freedom-based learning (free school, modern school, democratic school, homeschooling(!?))
- Social constructivist models (cooperative learning, progressive education?)
- Critical pedagogy (education for active citizenship)
- Spiritual developmentalism (montessori, waldorf)
- Integral or holistic education
Of course, do check their article for the full details, as my understanding may be faulty. Anyway, does this division make sense to you? Are you basing your categorization on a different analysis? And if so, is it accessible for reference? I tried looking in Wikipedia but between w:Alternative education#Forms and approaches of alternative education and the contents of w:Category:Alternative education, it's a mess over there. Thanks! --Waldyrious (talk) 08:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Waldyrious for the link. I tried to start with the categorisation to more clearly outline what a "reform pedagogy" is, but I think I've missed the mark. I've also been unable to find a good breakdown and it looks like every category I've found has some form of overlap. I think the best option is going to be to remove the categorisation entirely lest it further confuse matters. Diacritic (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)