Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Steiner education

441 replies

alloveragain · 19/08/2009 01:17

Can anyone suggest an appropriate forum in which I could talk to someone about Steiner education? We have our concerns about it, but our children are still at a Steiner school.
Thanks

OP posts:
TubOfLardWithInferiorRange · 14/12/2009 16:23

It seems to me the criteria would be if the school was state funded or not. Independent schools can set their own requirements for teacher qualifications.

thecaty · 14/12/2009 16:46

gnome, is it possible to ask this teacher, if yes why don't you,instead of making asumptions.

northernrefugee39 · 14/12/2009 17:46

I doubt anyone is playing a game thecaty.
Has it occurred to you that if you gave straight answers, ( and the schools gave straight answers) things would be altogether easier.

gnomesrus · 14/12/2009 17:54

Message withdrawn

thecaty · 14/12/2009 18:51

Why are many of you so resentful, cheer up!

thecaty · 14/12/2009 18:54

'I post therefor I am'

mathanxiety · 14/12/2009 19:05

Northern, so interesting that you mentioned the development of adult teeth with the teaching of reading. This possibly explains why my little neighbour was madly jealous of DD's tooth fairy news, and why the poor little thing tried to get her baby teeth loose by pushing and wiggling them for about a year before any of them started loosening naturally. Her Steiner school was not willing to approach reading before she lost her first tooth (she mentioned sadly that her school didn't teach children to read while begging DD to teach her) -- but she was ready and willing and intellectually able to learn to read a long time before then (learning from DD only took a fortnight or so), which the school either failed to notice, or didn't act upon because of philosophical reasons.

Back when DD did the painting course, I asked the teacher about the Steiner school she was associated with, and what the approach entailed, was it anything like montessori (which I had been very interested in for older DCs but it was too expensive). She emphasised the organic, unstructured approach to a child's abilities, the natural elements of the classroom environment, cooking, building, exposure to nature, etc. At the time, I felt that most of what she was describing was my own childhood with fairly counter-cultural parents who were into organic veggies (we grew all our own fruits and veg), no tv, clothes hand made or knitted, lots of wood-chopping because we had no central heating (I'm still a dab hand with an axe), lots of crafts and painting and reading for fun this wasn't out in the boonies somewhere, but in the south side of Dublin and I wondered why all of these elements couldn't just be part of a child's home environment, why it was necessary to have a school in order to expose a child to all of this. I went to a Catholic convent school (Froebel method) which followed the Irish Dept of Education curriculum, but had all I could ever hope or wish for in the way of exposure to nature, wooden toys, home cooking, etc., at home. Didn't have the time (or sufficient interest back then) to ask or research what exactly a Steiner school offered that you couldn't just do at home.

thecaty · 15/12/2009 00:53

Mathanxiety, My Ds has learning difficulties. I am sure that is why he only started to read at the age of nine and after he received learning support lessons at our school and with this extra help, he adores his SEN teacher' he started to be interested in reading.
I think there may be more to Waldorf education than a bit of woodwork here and there, math, a fairly simplistic view.
Have you noticed how 5 yo's imitate. Have you thought about why children should learn to read?

northernrefugee39 · 15/12/2009 11:11

mathanxieity, your stories about your neighbour's little girl is touching and moving. It brings back so much about when our children were at Steiner school; our youngest had reading books and a note book in the drawer in her bedside table. She wrote little stories and things, and hid them away in the drawer, because she must have somehow felt it "wasn't right", even though I of course encouraged it.

What is so misguided is that most people choosing Steiner education have the idea that it is somehow "child led", that there is a freedom to develop at the pace that's right for them, that your child will be treated as an individual, all these phrases we hear. But it isn't. It follows a curriculum based on anthroposophic beliefs and "laws" so extraordinary it defies belief. And dresses them up as a "pedagogy" and "child development model" when really it's a sort of spiritual experiment.

Your description of your childhood sounds wonderful! And I bet many people at Steiner schools think that sort of childhood is the one they're choosing; I met some old parents from the school we were at the other day, they just felt that they could put up with the anthroposophical stuff because they liked much of the outdoor, beautiful surroundings, craft things their children did. (They also talked about the turning a blind eye to bullying, that just doesn't go away).
It seems to me that many people, including teachers, are like this; they're prepared to "put up with" anthroposophy, because they like some of the other aspects of the schools. And I think much of the the schools PR is based on hoping this is so.

mathanxiety · 15/12/2009 15:36

Thecaty, glad your child is receiving appropriate reading help.

As to what more there is about Steiner education, yes, I am getting the impression there is more to it than just the bells and whistles -- my question is really what else is there, what is the added dimension; is it a philosophical one or is there an intellectual component I am unaware of?

Northern, I now live in a house with central heating . I love having warm feet, plenty of hot water, etc. My childhood was fun in many ways, but I have to say I liked other kids' houses with their wall to wall carpeting, TVs, white sparkly fake Christmas trees... Parenthood is truly a thankless job . My childhood friends had parents who I'm sure loved them and did their best for them too, bumbling along as best they could as we all do now, I suppose.

About children learning to read I don't think any of mine learned to read in school because of formal instruction there. Two had learned before they even started school. The other three 'got it' while they were in their kindergarten year at various points (in the US where they started school you go to kdg at age 5). One DD summed up the process of learning to read thus "the letters disappear!" She was so excited to finally see the words. Made me think the process is actually one rooted in biology or neurology and not something where you can follow steps and expect an automatic or predictable response to instructions. Also, a child's brain is better able to approach the abstract symbols and decode than adult brains are if they've missed the childhood window of opportunity in this area (it's difficult for adults to learn to read even if they don't have dyslexia) and maybe this too is rooted in biology/neurology -- again this has me thinking that childhood is the time to learn to read and get your brain working on abstract symbols.

Reading opens up the world of other people's thoughts and experiences for a child, it can satisfy a child's curiosity about earth and space, all the sciences, the past -- you name it, you can read about it. And you can become a critical reader; children naturally develop in their reading tastes, going from simple stories to more complex plots. A teacher can further challenge and guide a child through the use of comprehension and analytical strategies.

Why learn to read? Well, intellectually, human brains are built to understand the abstract as well as the concrete. Reading and maths (and music and art) provide an opportunity to use our capacity to work with abstractions. Ideally, children would be able to develop physical strength and co-ordination at the same rate as their intellectual progress. I know this is not biologically sound thinking here, but I see the brain as a muscle -- you use it or you lose it, basically.

I don't know where you're going with the allusion to imitation, but my observation is that children learn to speak this way -- they can even learn two or more languages in infancy and early childhood purely by listening and imitation. Research shows that newborns have already embarked on the path to apprehending speech. We are wired to learn from a very early age. Babies in deprive circumstances (Romanian orphanages, for example) who are not spoken to or interacted with show negative results in their overall intellectual development, not just in terms of learning speech.

thecaty · 15/12/2009 21:21

Math, funny really I think your piece on rading is great apart from the any age bit. Today was godexample of how age matters.
I accompnied my dc's class 5, 10yo, to the theatre to watch 'the lion, the witch and the wardrobe'. There were about another 10 classes in the theatre about 3 of them my dc's age. The others were year one,s and year two's and year three's. I had a year three class sit next to me and it was staggering how disrubtive these 30 kids were. I do not believe they were bad kids but they simply could not follow the plot as they were too young. Tere was alot of talking and restlesness and believe me they did not posess the intellectual capacity to follow most of the play which involved some abstract consepts that was not within the grasp of those children so they got bored and chated instead.
eading is a fundamentaly abstract activity or at least it involves abstract shapes that have to be pronounced to make words and then meaning. As you say it opens up the world to the reader. My point is that I am glad my son did notget forced at the age of 4 to read as did his friend at state school who to this day hates school. Instead my ds could develop his social skills etc. at Kg.

thecaty · 15/12/2009 21:24

My last message is a bit scrammbled as my c is playing up

gnomesrus · 15/12/2009 23:28

Message withdrawn

gnomesrus · 15/12/2009 23:41

Message withdrawn

gnomesrus · 16/12/2009 00:00

Message withdrawn

mathanxiety · 16/12/2009 16:22

I agree with gnomesrus about the probable cause of the fidgeting and lack of attention to the play. These children were 7 or 8. I also think the subject matter and plot may have gone over their heads. Thecaty, I would expect children of your DS's age to be far more interested in this particular story than 7 or 8 year olds. My oldest DD went to a fairly simple dramatisation of Edgar Allen Poe stories one Halloween many years ago, and got a lot out of the experience, but she would not have been able to plough through the stories herself in their original form at that age; her younger siblings would have had a miserable experience at the play and would not have appreciated the written stories either, obviously. They all could have read them, but they would not have appreciated them. So they were given other materials to read at an age appropriate level.

My DCs' reading has always been graduated according to ability to decode the abstract symbols ("I Can Read" books), ability to concentrate on a text over time (going from 12 to 32 to 64 pages, to chapter books, to much longer books), and emotional ability to grasp the nuances of ever more complex plots and character development. The earliest books develop the ability to decode while delighting with sympathetic characters or appealing illustrations, while the later texts have appealed to different aspects of the DCs' developing sense of empathy, and intellectual capacity to understand vocabulary and follow the plot, and understand elements such as metaphor and motif, and appreciate devices such as juxtaposition, dramatic effects, etc. I would be very surprised to see children at kdg level tackling Edgar Allen Poe, but young teens could. And 12 year olds would not find the early childhood books too gripping for long.

Wondering about the history thing now....

thecaty · 16/12/2009 20:04

Both my dc's started reading at the age of 7 as when you writr you read, right.
I understand why the year 3's did not really enjoy the play and you are right it was too complex and that is exacttly what i mean, there is an age appropriate way of treating, teaching your children.
Given it cost £8.50 to get in it was a real waste of taxpayers money!
If my ds or dd had wanted to read at the age of 4 I would have let them but I would have not encouraged it unless I had felt there was a very strong desire.
When my dd was in Kg 2 years ago there was two dc's that were fluent readers and they at times read to others. I was glad though she was allowed to have as much play as she wanted. Now in class 2 she still plays with a real gusto for want of a better word.

thecaty · 16/12/2009 20:15

Math, what history thing do you mean?
My ds sometime reads early childhood books as he is curious and is starting to be able to reflect on his early years.

restlessnative · 16/12/2009 21:41

thecaty just a note here: in most cases in a state school parents would be asked to pay for a school trip, or at least pay towards it, so you need not worry too much about UK taxpayers.

Anyway the production currently playing in the UK is described thus:

'CS Lewis?s classic tale of the land where it?s always winter but never Christmas comes to the stage in a unique new production from Anvil Arts.

Featuring a cast that includes Lower Earley actor Anne-Marie Piazza, the show follows four children find their way through a wardrobe to a magical land, ruled over by the White Witch.

Together with animal friends they meet in the forest, the children go in search of Aslan to defeat the Witch and restore Christmas to Narnia.'

Perfectly acceptable for any 7/8 year old I know, however restless and excited they might be on a school trip. The recent film is far more complex but still, not beyond the modern child. You understand fiction on different levels as you get older: at 8, a voracious reader, I read the Narnia books several times, gaining layers of imagery and language. My intellect needed feeding, I grew with the books I read.

Perhaps they were bored because it wasn't very good? Just a thought

But I agree with Mathanxiety, Edgar Allen Poe is another matter: I still find him difficult...

thecaty · 17/12/2009 01:24

Rest Did you not read the reviews? excellent play, in fact the production was quite crafty as it included some unmissable slapstick humour. But maybe it was a bit difficult for the seven yo's to grasp the layers you mention, or sit down quietly for more than 15 minutes.
What layers are they, just out of curiosity?
Won't blame you if you can't remember as it was probably I while ago since you read the stories.

SteinerBullied · 17/12/2009 05:05

Hello everyone. I'm the husband of the family who created the www.titirangisteinermessenger.com website mentioned on pages 24 and 25 of this forum.

It's amazing to see how far and wide it can be found online.

I just wanted to say that if anyone had any questions about it, please, let me know.

Thank you.

northernrefugee39 · 17/12/2009 07:44

A couple of thoughts about age appropriate material in relation to Steiner. In some of his advice to teachers, Steiner emphasised quite often that it was important to present things to children which was over their heads because it would sink in to their souls later. I don't think he was talking about Narnia either.....

When they were at Steiner school, the Shepherds play, performed by the teachers particularly, and some of the eurythmy performances were excruciatingly long, turgid and boring. The younger classes found it very difficult to sit through those. Although naturally, some were quite deprived at our school, of visual and aural stimulation, so just seeing something different may have held their attention.

northernrefugee39 · 17/12/2009 07:52

Hello SteinerBullied. I've seen your website and hope things are going ok for you and your family.
I was wondering whether, before your bad experiences, you felt Steiner school was the sort of education you wanted for your dcs? Did you subscribe to its anthroposophic base, or know about anthroposophy before?

restlessnative · 17/12/2009 09:15

thecaty well then we're agreed! The slap-stick element at the theatre made the play even more cleverly aimed at younger as well as older children. I'm sure the actors coped with the mêlée - perhaps better than some of the audience.

I still read the Narnia books to my children, so I've read them recently. I do remember understanding the Christian imagery, if that's what you're getting at, when I was quite small; since it is pretty obvious what with the lion & the voluntary death of the lion on the table & the rebirth of the lion etc. But that wasn't interesting to me. I loved the stories and the details, the children's courage in the face of danger (which makes you feel courageous too) As an adult I see that a lot of it is dated and some elements even dubious but the stories are still great (and the pictures too)

btw - CS Lewis was not too keen on anthroposophy, if that's what you're getting at. He thought it was 'authoritarian'.

Of course children vary as to what they'll take from a story but the point of this kind of theatre is to be entertained, to be transported. I watched Peter Pan as a very small child and wept when it ended but I simply didn't realize that Peter can be seen as an allegory for a certain kind of narcissistic adult male. No. Especially as he was played by Lulu.

Now 'His Dark Materials'...

restlessnative · 17/12/2009 09:31

northernrefugee that's so interesting.

And it's great to see Steinerbullied on this forum. I loved your classic 'shepherds' sketch'! Good luck to all of you

Swipe left for the next trending thread