autonomy is downstream of relatedness design in SDE spaces
I would say that most SDE settings start from the premise that autonomy is central. Self-direction after all rests on autonomy, it is the three of the basic SDT psychological needs that is most obviously compromised in the conventional schooling system.
But if you start from the premise that you want to give (perhaps your) children the opportunity to self-direct it makes sense to conceive autonomy to be central; however, these psychological needs are interlinked, one is not more important than the other and to start with autonomy as the sacred cow is to engage in poor design.
The question from a design perspective is: in what way are they interlinked and in what ways do our choices in one domain (attempting a particular need satisfaction attempt) affect the other domains.
Does a specific experience of relatedness lead to a specific understanding of autonomy?
Are all three really related. There are interlinkings between each three and the other two. How do they all link together? I have answered this now.
I wonder if part of relatedness frustration in SDE settings is that whilst autonomy, competency and relatedness are interlinked in actual fact in design terms relatedness is key. It creates the psychological safety, it creates the framework for relating to people and if knowledge is constructed it is constructed within a network of people.
Potential for people coming in as Cedar said at greenhouse disrupts focus and competency improvement through work. It is also impacting their autonomy if they can't focus.