Failed our steiner toddler group

[Orangeflower7]

I was looking for a smaller more relaxed kind of toddler group for my ds (2.5). Got a bit fed up with the big busy groups lots of ride ons etc..so tried the steiner group. Just met one of the mums from it today who is 'sad it didn't work out for me' and am feeling a bit of a failure.

I'll explain a bit. It went on for ages and we all had to sit round the table and make a woolen spider which to be honest the children were to young to do- ds got frustrated and threw it away. It seemed that it was for the mums really, (craft) I found it stressful as I had to help make the activity so much whereas ds wanted to go play, and there was no choice of activity, all the mums were sat doing the craft activity so the children who were playing didn't have much input really.

The routine was like this (over 2 hrs) Craft-then (adults make snack which children couldn't eat just yet) -singing-then wash hands (line up) then-sit up and eat snack- then story.

I just found it too much direction and sitting down stuff for a 2 year old..although the (mostly little girls) other children seemed very obedient

It is a shame as it would have been a nice change...didn't find it very child centred though. Please tell me it's not just my ds is it, I do know a little about early years and the emphasis is a lot on play, (adult led and child initiated, choice and independence, how does that sit then with steiner?

So back to the big groups we go.

worldgonecrazy you are comfortably comparing Steiner schools to other religious schools in your postings, religious beliefs versus religious beliefs.

Just interested, are you saying there is a religion behind the teaching, or not?

Just a simple yes or no would clear my confusion? :)

I see you are familiar with Wikipedia, but you have misquoted it. Eso means "within" in Greek. Esoterikos or esoteric refers to groups where certain knowledge is meant only for the initiated. Like Freemasonry, for example.

Groups and their teachings can be esoteric, because their secrets are revealed slowly to the initiates. "Transubstantiation happens on an esoteric level" is an incorrect use of the word because what you mean is that they believe it happens symbolically, that "none of them believe they are munching Jesus' thigh" as you so colorfully put it earlier.

Mohammad's marriage was not "child sex" because their understanding of childhood was that it ended at puberty. His marriage with Aisha was consummated after she reached puberty, which is why she remained at her parents' house for several years after their marriage.

Our definition of "child" as "under 16" is a concept that did not exist at the time, neither socially nor legally.

If you really want to find some dirt on Islam, I can help you with that, but this is just a cheap shot preferred by the less knowledgeable among the anti-Islam.

Wrong again - oed actually:

Pronunciation: /ɛsəʊˈtɛrɪk/ /iːsəʊ-/
Etymology: < Greek ἐσωτερικ-ός, < ἐσωτέρω, comparative of ἔσω within.

I am definitely not saying that the transubstantiation is symbolic but that it is esoteric, pronounced eee-sow-terr-ik, as you see to be having trouble reading my typing.

binful I think it's a philosophy rather than a religion. I certainly wouldn't class it as a religion but YMMV. I suggest that the differences between belief/philosphy/religion/spirituality is a subject for another thread.

Sorry - can't get the Greek to copy and paste.

CotedeAzur - I have not made an anti-Islamic comment, I am stating that people use personal attacks on founders to attack a whole religion. That you think my comments about Mohammed were an attack on Islam proves my point very well, so thank you for that.

You can copy and paste whatever you want but that is still not what esoteric means. I have read over 10 books about esoteric groups through history, and excuse me if I am not impressed by your cut-paste efforts to maneuver from a clearly wrong use of the word.

The only way transubstantiation would be esoteric knowledge would be if it were only known to priests, for example, but then Catholic church would have to be an esoteric group, which it obviously is not.

I promise you that you are wrong. Read a book about esoteric groups and you will learn what it means.

I'm not sure what point you think you made but I have been criticizing Steiner schools and not Steiner personally.

All this came from your: "the (Steiner) people I know no more believe that the devil talks out of the TV than a Catholic believes that he is actually munching a piece of Jesus's thigh during communion, or an Islamic teacher believes it is right for a 7 year old girl to have sex with an old man."

Many Catholic people actually believe in transubstantiation and no Islamic teacher of the year 2011 would believe "it is right for a 7 year old to have sex". So what exactly do you think your point is?

What I have been telling you is that "Ooh, Mohammad married a child" is a cheap and ignorant shot and that there are juicier things to worry about a Muslim teacher believing.

Are you saying worldgonecrazy that Waldorf pedagogy is or isn't based on anthroposophy? And are you suggesting it doesn't matter if it is, because Catholicism and Islam are just as bad/crazy? Or are they worse? I doubt you know much about anthroposophy (few people do).

As a non-believer I would prefer schools to be secular, but I'll put my own worries aside for now. One of the differences between the more common faith schools and Steiner is that Christianity and Islam, for example, are established (exoteric) religions which have developed over centuries, they have had time to branch out into orthodox/liberal/etc - their doctrines have been explored, developed and refined (and of course disputed, fought over).

Anthroposophy is a new religion, with an esoteric (hidden) belief system. Its followers take Steiner's ideas with great seriousness, and some of those ideas, it could be suggested, have no place in schools in a modern democracy, certainly not in the funded sector. Meanwhile - in my opinion, and speaking from my own experience - those who were responsible for the Steiner schools my dcs attended were not always scrupulously honest.

restless somestimes I whish mumsnet had a thank you button.
very well explained.

mousymouse sweet thing! It's certainly taken me a while to work this stuff out.

I've been following this discussion for a while but not had chance to get involved until now.

Cote - your argument is absolutely correct, you are obviously a very intelligent women.

Worldgonecrazy - Comparing Steiner Ed/Anthroposphy to transubstantiation or the prophet Mohammed's relationship with a child is NOT THE SAME THING. Anthroposophy is the basis of Steiner Ed and underpins the entire system. It's more like saying you are a Christian but you don't believe in God!

The way I see it, Steiner education is for people who want to be a bit elitist, send their kids to somewhere away from the riff raff so that they can feel a self-riotous and smug. Most people who go there may well ignore the anthroposophy bullshit or say it doesn't happen at their Steiner establishment, but that's because they're idiots and don't understand, or choose not to (and because it's not openly advertised by most Stenier groups). I doubt most people have even looked into it, which is scary to say the least when thinking about their children's education.

'...you know those Catholics teach cannibalism, worship an instrument of torture and think anyone who eats a Big Mac on a Friday is bound for an eternity of hellfire and pitchforks . . . . ."

People don't say that about Catholicism because that bears absolutely no resemblance to the beliefs of Catholicism. (Speaking here as a practicing Catholic.)

And again speaking as a Catholic, and a better informed one than you apparently, there is nothing esoteric about Transsubstantiation. Or symbolic (here you are thinking of the C of E). And yes, I do know what esoteric means.

Most of the parents of children in Catholic schools are Catholics themselves and are familiar with the core beliefs of Catholicism, whether they could explain in detail the doctrines of the Church or not. Your assertions about Catholics not knowing what their children are being taught in Catholic schools are ridiculous. Parents who send their children to Catholic school are not buying a pig in a poke. Children in Catholic schools are taught about Mass, the Sacraments of the church, etc. Part of preparation for First Communion involves learning what the Church believes about what Communion is. My DCs went to Catholic elementary school and so did I.

Worldgonecrazy, I don't feel I'm qualified to comment on your skewed view of Islam, but nothing you have posted rings true to me about that particular faith either.

That morning prayer has nothing at all to do with the sun then? Or Steiner's version of god as a sunlike being? Christ as a sun-god who came to earth to help the human race balance between the influences of the Zoroastrian gods of light and darkness, Lucifer and Ahriman?

as a non-Catholic (I was brought up CofE) I assumed that there is a branch of esoteric Catholicism, and that adherents might have an 'inner' understanding of a particular ritual, though I'm certain that wasn't what was being discussed here. In other words it was a red-herring and in no way comparable to having to deal with a religion that is in essence esoteric - anthroposophy.

And I would have thought of transubstantiation as symbolic, as you suggest, mathanxiety, coming from a CofE background. So it is all very interesting.

Nothing esoteric in Catholicism, not even the rite of exorcism, mysterious or even arcane though popular culture might make it seem. Some aspects of what priests are ordained to do are less known than others, but nothing is esoteric, or concealed. Every priest from parish curate to the Pope does the same basic things every day as part of his priestly duties.

If you choose a faith education you know what you are getting - a religious education.

worldgonecrazy, the debate is about steiner schools not being 'honest' and ex-parents sharing their experiences online.

I'd like to also add that you say that you are aware that Anthroposophists believe in reincarnation - have you read up about it? You then go on to write that a lot of steiners writings were rambly and a bit rubbish in places - are you cherry picking? Faceless dolls do exist - have you visited the kindergarten, looked at the nature table more closely or the school shop? And when you say 'don't get me started on Gnomes' err, you do know they play a major role in steiner education? So do guardian angels.

worldgonecrazy wasn't even referring to Catholicism as an esoteric religion. She was saying "Catholics believe transubstantiation happens on an esoteric level", because she thought "esoteric" meant "symbolic" or "metaphoric" (as opposed to "literal") until I drew her attention to it. (Whereupon she started copying & pasting from Wikipedia, hoping to look well read in Greek )

Cote - but I said at one point 'esoteric understanding of a ritual', possibly throwing a spanner of theological confusion into the works. Never mind, I think we have now nailed 'esoteric' and 'exoteric'.

btw here's a good book if anyone is reading this & have a dc at a Steiner school or are considering one:
www.sun-at-midnight.com/index.page

It isn't an 'anti-Steiner' or a pro-Waldorf book and makes a good introduction to anthroposophy.

I have nothing against Anthroposophy or any other nutty religion, as long as they don't try to dupe me into handing my DC over to them.

Steiner people should be honest and upfront about their motivations and underlying philosophy. Then, they would attract people whose mindset are at least somewhat close to their own and there would be no problem.

The problem is that they are dishonest and insidious, deliberately hiding their beliefs when talking to prospective parents. As a lifelong atheist who grew up in a Muslim country, you might understand why I was rather upset by the revelation that a nutty cult that saw education as a means to facilitate the reincarnation of some spirit into DD's tiny body was trying to con me with a pretty vegetable garden

Well ladies through some of the links I have discovered that the Goethaenum is actually on the hill behind me. I will be popping to the bookstore on Thursday to browse some of the books and to take a complementary guided tour.

I debated a Steiner school in Switzerland for my ds and also came away with an uneasy feeling. TBH i wouldn't have paid it much more thought, however since this post and the attitudes of some posters I feel like forearming myself with more info...It's all made me very uneasy to say the least!

Binfull - this is exciting news! Come back and tell us about your tour.

If I'd had the internet before I sent my eldest to a Steiner school there's no way I'd have done it. I was naive and desperate to believe it was a good alternative to the local state school where he was so miserable. We stayed for six years - once in, it's hard to leave for a variety of reasons, not least because your child is so out of the mainstream that you worry about how they'll fit back in. The school also made no effort to inform me, as a new parent about anthroposophy - I gradually discovered what it was all about. Luckily, for us, it was my younger son's chaotic class one that spurred us into leaving. A class that started with 24 children and has now closed four years later as there were only five children left. That is the level of chaos to which Steiner classes can descend.

My goodness. I go away for a dirty weekend minibreak and come back to find this thread's got very cross and shouty.

As I mentioned before, I'm an ex Steiner pupil. All the way through, from playgroup to finishing A levels. And I have to say I find the tone of both the determined defenders and also the determined haters on this thread very strangely heated.

I'm not going to rehash my earlier posts about my own experience of Steiner education. I'll just say

• To me there is a direct comparison between Steiner education and a faith school
• I agree with the posters who say this could be made more explicit in the schools' literature
• However those posters who describe Steiner and Anthroposophy as an evangelical cult along the same lines as Scientology, with sinister purposes and international, shadowy influence are overstating the case.

I've met masses and masses of these supposedly shadowy types - my mum was a senior one of them for many years, and we forever had badly-dressed oddballs staying in hour house as a result. Anthros aren't the Men In Black. In my recolleciton they're men and women in badly-fitting wool jumpers with a particular view of the world, and sometimes a sketchy or oddly skewed attitude to modern life, but nothing more sinister than that. You'll find the same kind of person in the Swedenborgian Society, the Quakers, the Theosophists, followers of Sivananda Yoga, and countless other minority spiritual practices Really. Sometimes set in their beliefs, but no more so than any other kind of fervent believer who's unwilling to consider nuances in their determination to maintain their position.

Steiner school pupils do get an education tinged with these weirdo beliefs. On the whole we tended to take the piss out of them (especially Eurythmy, which is ineffably tedious and daft). I don't know any ex Steiner pupils who have gone on to be anthros in their own right - most just go and get normal jobs, in the normal world, like normal people.

When people ask me about Steiner, I do joke about having grown up in a cult. I'm still angry about the level of hypocrisy I encountered among some of the more 'purist' Steiner types there; but that was more about the obvious disjunction between their elevated discourse of spirituality and the actual evidence of their normal, messy humanity. Again, you'll find the same disjunction in any belief system. But it's not really a cult in the sense that there's pressure to give them all your money, never leave the fold or somehow sacrifice your individuality.

Those who foam at the mouth about their children getting a slightly eccentric set of spiritual beliefs transmitted in the course of day to day education are most likely the same people who would be incensed by the idea of their children being taken on a 'church visit' in the course of the school term. To these I'd say: if that bothers you, then don't send your children to the school. To the secular relativists I'd say: if you want your kids to have a smattering of mainstream faith, don't bother. If you don't care about faith and trust that your kids will make their own minds up, then don't worry about it. But to all the critics I'd say: seriously, either direct your philippic at all minority belief systems, or else just calm down a bit, as you're wasting impressive quantities of energy on a distinctly average set oddballs.

Pombears! Ahriman in a bag surely!

Binfull Yes. Absolutely. All that artificial processing has deprived the potato of any nutritional content, and the little 'bear' faces represent a distorted parody of an archetypal form in the natural world. Everything about pom bears is designed to separate us from intuitive connection with natural forms and encourage us into rigid, rationalistic thinking.