waldorf steiner

[heninthemidden]

hi,

anyone had good experience of waldorf steiner education system?

zazizoma - the festivals non-plussed me to be honest; as an atheist, I found them aesthetically beautiful in many ways, the fires and red clothing at St Johns, the flower arch for the "bridge" or leaving kinde, the may poles, the candles.

I was always terribly conscious of the fact that these were symbols - the spiral obviously is a well known ancient symbol in mysticism and myth, as inner conciousness, cosmic awareness, enlightenment, pathway to the inner soul and so on.

But any questions I asked were evaded, with a patronising half smile, or moving on swiftly.
Why, in this school which was sold as "non religious" were they re-enacting these ritual almost pagan ceremonies with such grave and cosiderable conviction?

I never liked the controlled "spiritual" earnestness actually, just as I'm turned off by that high church chanting type of voice always used in sermons. The advent spiral remined me of an incense filled orthodox church in a way.

I was also surprised that there wasn't also, a project about the history of the spiral, May Day, St John's - finding out about it, and drawing pictures of the days events, as othe schools would have used as a perfect opportunity to arrouse enthusiasm.

But just as I loved the singing at the schools, I found it very stirring to sing in harmony, or those rounds. There's something about a mass of people singing which gets me every time. I like that in churches too.

I personally don't believe that this "reverence and awe" is soley the domaine of the spiritual, and I think Steiner waldorf tries to imply this.

Atheists can be moved to profound feelings of veneration and emotion at the wonder and beauty of things- it doesn't have to be religious or spiritual.

Zazizomoma- I don't of course think "something scary" will happen to children whom walk the spiral- now that's supernatural nonsense isn't it now? And you're putting words into my mouth.

It is the question I put to lemontart I think, at the beginning of this thread. Isn't it important to know the reasons behind what happens at the schools? I get the feeling you, and those at the schools don't think so; earlier you said
""Education practices therefore must be judged on their success and merits" - meaning it doesn't matter how we get there, or what reasons lie behind the decisions?

I disagree, hugely.

In schools based on such a frankly bizarre and ludicrous belief system, it should matter even more.

Particularly when there is so much kept from parents, and apparently some teachers.

Ofsted quite often comment I believe, on lack of written records. Those Thursday meetings..who knows what is said about incarnating children, their temperaments, left handedness, how firmly they're putting their feet down...

Having said this, there's no reason why the advent spiral, or any other religious ceremony can't move one. I just think we need to be told the full reasons behind it.

Okay, I'm going to attempt a brief explanation that is not intended as advocacy.

When the anthropops say Aryan, they mean the people in ancient India. The idea is that after the sinking of Atlantis the tribes migrated to various other parts of the world, and the 'seat' of civilisation moved with a particular tribe to the region of India. After the era of India (Aryan), there came Ancient Persia, then Egyptian, then Greco/Roman, and now we're in the northern European era. It's intended to be an historical perspective tracing the rise to dominance and subsequent fall of various leading cultures. And I may have missed something in the list because I'm digging into dark recesses of memory. I trust that an anthropop (or rosicrucian or theosophist or hermeticist) will suggest corrections to this presentation if necessary.

Yet Steiner also did make comments about blonde hair and blue eyes signifying a superior ability to think. And with him speaking and writing in German, well, I think the natural inclination is for people to assume that his Aryan meant Nazi. Actually, Hitler co-opted the term and the swastika for his own evil ends.

Couldn't tell you about the date, don't know. Relationship of the earth to the sun along it's seasonal path perhaps?

Thank you Northern, that was very beautiful and I really enjoyed reading your description and thoughts.

The only point we disagree on is that I believe you can separate, and should separate, the Steiner curriculum from anthroposophy. I don't believe the anthropop perspective is essential for the curriculum to work. I don't believe that SWE schools should be religious schools. I'm not disagreeing with you that some of them actually are.

There is great resistance to this idea in some anthropop circles because of the firm belief in the spiritual mission, and the desire to keep schools as the centre of the spiritual community. I can only say that this desire is not shared by many of the Steiner teachers I have had the privilege to work with, and I certainly don't carry it into my own work.

The reality that I have found is that usually a minority of teachers in any school are actually the dogmatic types, but for many complicated social reasons their voices tend to dominate. It does not have to be this way.

Ideally, for me, discussion of children would be approached in the Thursday meeting from a variety of perspectives, and if using the Aristotelian ideas of phlegmatic and choleric helps to see the picture clearly, then I'm fine with them being used. But they must be used in a broader context and from a modern, secular, perspective. And I see no reason why they couldn't be documented.

Oh- and zazizoma- I wouldn't read and find out what Steiner had to say on just about everything, if the schools didn't follow his "indications" on almost everything.

If the schools had say,
different coloured walls,
followed a less rigid curriculum, aborigional myth over Norse,
Spanish instead of German
Noah over Manu,
did jazz and tap instead of eurythmy,
weaving instead og knitting
used gouache and acrylics,
had interesting books in the class,
played football,
drew with lines,
had black wax blocks,
did collage.....
the schools are more or less the same everywhere- because "Steiner said".

I like to see what the teachers who taught my dc's were trained with.

The Steiner waldorf schools Fellowship seems to have a majority of the UK schools under it's umbrella.

I think you said you were in Cardiff, and the Early years centre there is independent isn't it? There seem to be quiyte a few early years and kindergartens that are independent, but most of the schools are within the fellowship.

Zazizomama
"The reality that I have found is that usually a minority of teachers in any school are actually the dogmatic types,"

By dogmatic, do you mean anthroposophical? Those who takr Steiner's word as "sacred" almost?
Because this is what many people gather too; and it is those few, placed in each school, who quietly orchestrate and observe , make sure things don't stray too far - that the walls aren't painted shaker blue instead of peach, or they don't make cereal box models of dinasaurs, but make clay dragons instead.., paint a watery picture of the "sun", rather than a silver foil and wire colaage of one .....heavens above- those POINTS!

northern - Yes, what you've described is what I mean by dogmatic. Who 'places' these people in the schools? Doesn't a school's trustees do the hiring?

Thanks again for:
"I personally don't believe that this "reverence and awe" is soley the domaine of the spiritual, and I think Steiner waldorf tries to imply this. Atheists can be moved to profound feelings of veneration and emotion at the wonder and beauty of things- it doesn't have to be religious or spiritual."

Beautifully stated and again, very similar to what brought me initially to SWE. It's also the element lacking in the state schools I've encountered.

Quote Zazizoma 'When the anthropops say Aryan, they mean the people in ancient India. The idea is that after the sinking of Atlantis the tribes migrated to various other parts of the world, and the 'seat' of civilisation moved with a particular tribe to the region of India. After the era of India (Aryan), there came Ancient Persia, then Egyptian, then Greco/Roman, and now we're in the northern European era. It's intended to be an historical perspective tracing the rise to dominance and subsequent fall of various leading cultures. And I may have missed something in the list because I'm digging into dark recesses of memory. I trust that an anthropop (or rosicrucian or theosophist or hermeticist) will suggest corrections to this presentation if necessary.'

Do you know of approximate dates for this??? I expect it is on some kind of cycle as proposed by Steiner? I am just truely interested in seeing how it would relate to archeological and geological timescales.

zazizoma - if you believe there is benefit to having a class teacher for say, 8 years then you will be enthusiastic to engage with other educators by, let's say, setting up a research project and publishing your findings as a resource for other teachers/policy makers.

Here's an example

I would of course be very interested to read your work. Your findings and their implications would influence my conclusions.

It's not a good sign when someone resorts to calling others closed minded when they offer a challenge. Northern is far from restricted in her thinking, she's clearly listening to others who come on this thread.

It's just that flexibility I've found has always worked in my family.

Manatee - I'd have to look it up . . . I seem to vaguely remember thousands of years per era, but again, not positive. And the delineation between eras are not clear cut, one civilisation gradually moves into another. I seem to remember the Lascaux painting represented the tail end of Atlantis.

If you want to chat about anthro, I'd like to start a new thread. I feel it's a bit hypocritical on my part to claim that SWE and anthro should be separate, yet discuss anthro on a SWE thread. ; ) Though I did feel a need to clear up what I suspected was an misconception about the term Aryan.

Yes wilder, I do think that more study and reporting about the Steiner curriculum are needed, and I too would be very interested in and published findings.

zazizoma
"Doesn't a school's trustees do the hiring?"
any possibility that those trustees are anthroposphists?

"It's intended to be an historical perspective tracing the rise to dominance and subsequent fall of various leading cultures"

Really? Historical?

With Plato's metaphorical Atlantis as the continent these "tribes" move on from?
What about before that Zazizoma? Didn't Steiner teach that these "tribes" (root races he called them I think) evolved from jelly like beings on Lemuria,
and - how could we forget, before that were "plant man" and "sun humans" on the moon an sun, humans on mars and saturn...

And before you start accusing me of using scornful critics ways, of not being "open" and being "dogmatic"...sorry...if you start on Steiner's teaching about "evolution" you are laying yourself open.

You say, in all seriousness, that the Aryan exodus of Atlantis is "history".

Steiner had absolutely no right whatsoever to be described as a "scientist"; he rejected science in favour of a crackpot belief system which is still followed today.
You want to separate "Steiner" schools from "anthroposphy".
I suggest separating them from "Steiner" would be more to the point, don't you?

Did I in anyway suggest an advocacy of these ideas? I thought I'd caveated myself at the beginning. (Perhaps you missed that.) Apparently you know much more about it than I do.

Absolutely Northern! How can anyone expect children to grow up to counter the dragons (metaphorical) of ignorance, poverty, intolerance and other fine words with an education that rejects the rational in favour of the teachings of a Mystic Barmpot (not my phrase sadly, it's so richly true)

Let us keep returning to the fact that Steiner gained his 'knowledge' through clairvoyance! Call me a cynic but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

The scientific method and a good dose of critical thinking are more useful than twaddle. You can have a wooden sword if you like: concrete representations of ideas have a great place in the classroom. It's called theatre. And it's even better when the children are encouraged to take a really creative part in the process.

And what if there were no anthros on a board of trustees?

zazizoma - it's really hard to be all things to all men. It's difficult to have any idea what you're advocating.

I thought I've been very clear about what I believe. Secular Steiner-inspired education.

TRA LA! Steiner inspired.

That's not a Steiner School.

Now all you have to do is pick the bits which inspire you!

It's like sciency-sounding homeopathy

Steiner rebranded.

Steiner-lite

Absolutely a very confused fish indeed.

Roy Wilkinson, An Introduction to Steiener's Spritual world View - the chapter on evolution is a summary, although reading Steiner himself on the subject is very...amusing.
Apparently the surface of the moon was once like "boiled lettuce".
Jelly man is interesting too.

Creationists? Boff! That's nothing.

Hello Manatee-glad the party was good

zazizoma -I was thinking about 'awe'.

As an adult I've had feelings of awe and deep emotion inspired by life events; as with the birth of my children, or by superlative works of art, or a view of mountains, the ocean, the sky-line of a great city. I'm sure my dcs will have these feelings too, no amount of education could kill it. The idea that 'reverence and awe' rarely exists in state schools and that this is a lack, a deficiency whose opposite could be manufactured in the dreary tree-lined cul-de-sac of Rudolf Steiner's imaginary world, is witless posturing.
It is not up to schools to meddle in the private, emotional lives of children.
What's noticeable in Steiner education is this very flaw: presumptious meddling.
How could using the discredited idea of humours help to see a picture of any child clearly? Aristotle the empiricist is here poorly represented. Any child exposed to this is at risk of an appalling breach of trust.

I am in awe at how much ds achieves in state school, compared to Steiner.

Pmsl @ the surface of the moon being like boiled lettuce!!! What the...? I did a FANTASTIC module last year, a large part comprised of the evolution of earth and how it comes to be habitable to humans, some of which science cannot yet explain, and maybe never will, but never was the surface of the moon like (snorts) boiled lettuce!

Anyway, Roy Wolkinson has inspired me, by talking such total crap (based on Steiner prattle), to just explore a few of his points...

Quote Wilkinson 'We are told that the stars and planets evolved accidentally out of some cataclysmic event'

Not ACCIDENTLY, but FACTUALLY. We are told what the evidence shows us. This does not detract from the wonder at all, but actually makes it something we can look forward to learning about, along with methods such as radiocarbon dating.

Quote Wilkinson On the one hand, there is all that appertains to the body and, on the other, all that has to do with the mind.

See fabulous texts such as 'The Merleau Ponty Reader' (Toadvine and Lawlor 2007), (and in fact anything to do with the work of Merleau-Ponty), 'Descartes Error' (Damasio 1994), and 'Writing on the Body' (Conboy et al, 1997), for a selection of the literature that argues the case for embodiment, something Steiner clearly missed (ooh, maybe he did not incarnate properly!!!?)

Quote Wilkinson 'It is poor logic to reason that life can develop from matter.'

Nobody does!!! It is a poor argument when one does not know what they are arguing about!!!

I could carry on, but have got other things to do!

northern - your anti-anthro rant aimed at myself was completely inappropriate. You are the one who directed manatee to the aryan reference. I felt it was unfair to manatee to remain under the misconception that aryan does not carry its normal meaning in this context. Perhaps you thought that references to the zodiac symbols and atlantis were not enough to incite the degree of indignation you felt was appropriate. Or perhaps since anthro is racist anyway you felt is was all one and the same. Perhaps you are so used to your own level of indignation that you simply don't appreciate other people's responses. You are twitchy on this topic.

And tra la?

wilder - I may have a higher threshold for ambiguity than some, but I have been very careful about my use of of 'I believe' as definite and 'perhaps' as indefinite to indicate precisely where I stand. On what basis are you suggesting that I have been unclear about what I represent?

I love awe and reverence.

I believe that the attention to detail and artistic elements of a Steiner classroom do indeed help to nurture awareness and respect for beauty. This attention to artistic detail is not a priority in any of the state schools I have known. Perhaps they are somewhere. This is not witless posturing.

I find the pictures of choleric and sanguine helpful as descriptions. And it doesn't mean that I am adopting what you've described as a pseudoscience of humours. I would like to point out that ayurvedic medicine is based on similar ideas, and perhaps you would like to extend your scorn to that as well. If you don't like these terms, don't use them. But don't tell me I am ignorant because I do. You should however criticise if you find I use them as absolute and definitive labels.