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.

where's the rigid, rationalist thinking, OTheHugeManatee? And is anyone here a 'rigid rationalist'? (please explain - or was it ironic?) Also, what do you mean by 'secular relativist'? What do these terms have to do with a discussion of the role of anthroposophy in Steiner schools (which you agree should be clarified) and the OP finding a playgroup a bizarre place which her dc 'failed'? (Of course her dc didn't fail anything and neither did she.)

In my experience, few people 'foam at the mouth' about a religious element in schools WHEN THEY KNOW WHAT IT IS. The 'foaming at the mouth' (so unkind) is more likely to be the quite understandable upset of finding out that a school you thought was some kind of fuzzy eco-art school is informed, not by 'a slightly eccentric set of spiritual beliefs' but by the doctrines of a new religion (anthroposophy) which THEY DON'T EXPLAIN.

Of course, as you say, they should explain it. But they don't. There must be a reason for this strategy.

Janni I hope your eldest is happier now. It took my ds years to catch up, and I agree, you blame yourself afterwards but it can be difficult to leave, for all sorts of reasons. We thought we were making the right choice at the time, and the schools weren't exactly honest.

I guess as jokes go the bit about pom bears being packets of Ahriman would probably only be funny if, as I have, you've spent much of your childhood going at the ramblings of hardline anthroposophists.

As I've said before, I agree with you and others that the spiritual stuff should be more explicitly explained. As I also said some way upthread, I don't think it's a calculated and creepy strategy. I can see how it might look like that though.

Equally, though, I don't get the reasoning behind getting very wound up about the presence of any spiritual element within education, provided it's not OTT. I personally wouldn't choose to send my own DC to a Steiner school, but to me though that's less about the flavour of spirituality than about feeling that children may find life on the whole easier to get to grips with if they grow up surrounded by a fairly normative set of social assumptions. I'd have no problems sending my kids to a C of E school. But then I think spirituality has a place in human culture and don't see its presence in schools as being a form of indoctrination. I may be wrong there, who knows

As I said before, if the presence of spiritual elements in schooling bothers you, don't send your kids to Steiner. But I do think that the level of fear and hostility that I sense from some respondees to the whole anthroposophy thing is just a bit excessive, considering I remember them being not much more than a bunch of oddballs with badly-fitting clothes and strange ideas.

yes, it's much easier to talk about Pombears than Anthroposophy..

I don't think anyone here is a 'determined hater' but after having a child in a Steiner school I am determined to know what Anthroposophy is. I think we need to be really clear that those who run Steiner Waldorf schools take Anthroposophy very seriously.

From Michael Hall Steiner school Newsletter dated 27th of May 2011:

'Illnesses Around School

Please note that as well as Chicken
Pox and Measles in the Lower School,
we have a reported case of Rubella
in the Upper School too.
Susanne and Saskia, First Aid Room'.

Why no mention of vaccination?

Also from their homepage

'Latest News

Measles Outbreak
There is a measles outbreak at our School.

Pregnant women, babies under 1 year old and people with suppressed immunity can be particularly vulnerable.

Please contact the school if you require more information.

This entry was written by xxxxxxx, posted on 21st June, 2011 at 9:16 am'.

Again, why no mention of vaccination?

because anthroposophic medicine (homoepathy?) is seen as superior to conventional medicine.

yes, mousy, and for spiritual reasons

Manatee -

I disagree - the lack of transparency absolutely is a calculated strategy. It comes straight from Rudolf Steiner - and he had very good reasons. He knew that if people understood the intention of the Waldorf school they'd be angry. They wouldn't understand, at least, it might take time.

On the contrary, very few people are 'wound up' about the presence of a spiritual element in schools - in fact Ofsted comments on the 'spiritual life' of children within a school (although I think it generally means something like 'moral and emotional' - and not supersensible). I have had very positive experiences of CofE schools, even though I'm not a believer and have never pretended to be one. These schools have been honest, and they haven't queried my position. I suppose this means I'm relatively laid-back, and I can quite understand that many people would prefer their dcs schools to be secular (in all honesty this would be better) but of course secular does not mean atheist.

Steiner schools are not secular. As you admit, they are faith schools.

Indoctrination of course can be subtle - but it implies teaching a set of beliefs uncritically. Critical thinking is where Steiner schools fall down; it isn't valued, in fact it's discouraged. Children shouldn't be too much 'in the head'. This should be a matter for concern.

However, whatever we might think of spirituality - it's necessary to state what it is these schools mean by spiritual, so distinct is its meaning to anthroposophists, so precisely NOT what most parents expect it to be. It is not a vague idea of 'something other' or 'our better selves' or 'God-lite'. It is doctrine. It's spiritual science.

I strongly suspect that you don't know what anthroposophy is. That wouldn't be uncommon for a Steiner alumni. But you can't understand why people bother to criticise the behaviour of Steiner schools unless you really know what anthroposophy is.

Why don't you find out?

...I've just had a cross note from Michael Gove saying that should have been 'Steiner alumna'. He is so pedantic.

So did any Steiner Schools get to be free schools?

restless I strongly suspect that you don't know what anthroposophy is. That wouldn't be uncommon for a Steiner alumni. But you can't understand why people bother to criticise the behaviour of Steiner schools unless you really know what anthroposophy is.

Why don't you find out?

I hope you didn't mean that to be rude or patronising, though it would be possible to take it that way. As it happens I'm very familiar with the doctrines of the anthros: my mum was one, in a pretty serious way, for a long time. As part of getting to grips with the odder sides of my childhood, I've done a fair amount of research on it since, in particular to place it in the context of other strands of European occultism.

I don't know if you saw my previous, detailed posts (way back around page 5 of this now rather long thread, I think) about my own experiences of Steiner education. I'm not really either a lover or a hater, as I felt there were positive and negative aspects of it as an approach. I simply think that while anthroposophy is a bit woo, I'm not convinced that there's anything actively dangerous in it. Or at least, no more or less so than any of the other minority belief systems I mentioned in my previous post.

Critical thinking is where Steiner schools fall down; it isn't valued, in fact it's discouraged. Children shouldn't be too much 'in the head'. This should be a matter for concern.

OTOH I can really relate to this, and it still makes me cross. The whole 'too much in the head' thing got right up my nose when I was a pupil there. I was academic, fairly intellectual and ahead of much of the class as a kid and found the borderline anti-intellectualism of some - note some, not all - of the teaching staff alienating and, for me, very invalidating as it seemed to denigrate or minimise the worth of things I was good at.

Anyhoo. Please don't get the mistaken impression that I'm defending this approach to education. I've found this thread in some ways a very therapeutic opportunity to talk about what was a huge part of my childhood; it's just that from my personal knowledge and experience it wasn't straightforwardly either good or bad. Just rather odd

Emma Craigie (née Rees-Mogg) is an advisor at the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship, she met with York Steiner School back in December:

'She explained how after
their success in helping to get
government money for what is
now the Hereford Steiner Acad-
emy, the Fellowship had been
in discussion with the education
department and we were all en-
couraged to come on board. She
implied that, if we wanted to
pursue this, we?d encounter no
problem that couldn?t be solved.
Other Steiner Schools, she said,

were already on their way'.

Approximately 25 Steiner schools (including new initiatives) have expressed an interest in Free School funding.

Hereford Steiner Academy and the 10 million cash injection from the Government for 300 pupils

Probably shouldn't read it have been waiting all day for sodding gas man. Blood pressure likely to go too high.

Thanks for info. Will look at when more relaxed.

Manatee -

'I simply think that while anthroposophy is a bit woo, I'm not convinced that there's anything actively dangerous in it.'

I don't agree. I don't think it's just 'a bit woo'. And if you do know what anthroposophy is and you don't think there's anything in it that's actively dangerous, we will have to differ.

Rather than rude or patronising, you can think of me as pointed. I don't feel animosity toward you personally, at all but I don't mind how you take me, it was your school and it's your mother, after all. I did read your previous posts, which were very interesting.

Have you seen any of Roger Rawlings comments about his Waldorf education? His mother was also involved. I worry if I put a link here it will disappear, but I could try if you like.

MarshaBrady - no, none of them got it the first time. But maybe they will now, or over the next few years. Gove will only discuss Latin grammar by email, and that only on Thursdays.

"Each of us has an etheric body which normally nests completely within our physical body. But in cases of certain illnesses this supersensible body may separate itself from the body, a fact which will be visible to clairvoyant sight. As an indication that this type of sight was a circadian ability of early peoples, we can find idiomatic expressions still extant which point to that ability. We may say, for example, if a woman is acting crazy that "she is beside herself", "she is off her rocker", or "she is deranged". In German the word is "verrückt".

[page 92] 'In cases where the supersensible does not quite fit into the rest of the human being, people felt: the etheric body is verrückt ['shifted', literally 'moved off its place', a word that today means 'deranged', 'insane', 'crazy']. This was then transferred to the whole person: Der Mensch ist verrückt 'that person is shifted', i.e., 'crazy'. A purely external fact is described, the displacing of the etheric body. Just this sort of picture-making, going back to the time when pictures of the spiritual world could still be observed, is exceedingly interesting. If people would only recognize this, if learned philologists were not so sound asleep, proceeding as they do quite surperficially on their materialistic tracks! If they could enter instead into the inward soul element that finds its expression in external language-forming, philology would turn of itself into a science of the soul and then into spiritual science. For this reason it is a shame that philology has become so materialistic; young people actually have no opportunity to observe the effects of soul and spirit on the forming of language.' (Steiner)

I attended public school in the United States and must say that I certainly had no opportunity to observe the effects of soul and spirit on the forming of the English language or any language, up until now. With the advent of Waldorf Schools in this country, this situation can change for the better through the study and sharing with our children such insights into the soul and spirit present in the genius of language from now on."

This is all very breathless stuff, from here. Obviously the soul was of primary importance to Steiner.

Manatee, I agree with your comment that anthroposophy falls into a wider context of European occultism. Some would call that 'woo', but others would not be inclined to be so flippant.

Math It does seem to be the case that others on this thread find the content of this minority belief system more disturbing than I do. As I've mentioned before I just remember a bunch of funny-looking people in bad clothes with slightly strange attitudes to modern life, hence the flippancy I guess. But clearly others perceive something more sinister at work.

Could you be more specific about which aspects of the 'doctrine' in particular seem to you to be more sinister than common or garden 'woo'? I'm not suggesting here that you should not be concerned, but I'd be very interested to hear a more detailed critique. I'd be especially interested if there are aspects (other than the well-documented 'racial' stuff, which we can agree out of hand is very dodgy) which you would see as having damaging effects in a wider social context.

Well what a fantabulous thread !!! I'm slightly paranoid as I posted on Wednesday and my post didn't pop up (wonders if reputation is that bad as have seen Mumsnet have deleted stuff already ...)
Well Manatee I would beg to differ,I think Steiner education is very OTT. I'll leave out the 'Racial stuff' as you seem to know about that,mind you that alone would have been enough for me to never set foot in a Steiner school!

What is damaging ? For my family it was ...

That the school forgot to mention that their aim was to help my child reincarnate properly.
They forgot to mention karma in the prospectus.
When my daughter asked about karma after we found out what the fek was going on her teacher said "Oh err yes um thats when someone calms down,they are then CALMER "
When I asked the board of trustees why they weren't open about what the schools aim was they said they thought all the parents knew !
They knocked all creativity out of my child as she had to spend hours doing layers of water colour painting and then hear that she had done it 'wrong' ( it was an exercise in helping her soul I later found out ) She rubbed out her pencil lines as black was not allowed and replaced them with orange !
She didn't know how to do research when she left the school as everyone copied off the board.
She wasn't allowed an opinion as Steiner thought kids were not developed enough to have one till age 14.
There was no contemporary art /literature in my childs class.
There was a lot of praying/various verses/candles every morning.
Instead of listening to some Gospel music on CD/Youtube her teacher had to sing it ( very very unlikely he attended a Gospel church !) as recorded music is not allowed.
The class were given a lesson on gnomes and how they are human's little helpers !
No football till 14 and no explanation why.
The class had 4 teachers in 2 years.
Bullying was left unchecked.

Mostly I am extremely pissed off that the school sold itself as arty and relaxed ,broadminded and inclusive but the complete opposite is true.
Janni I see you had a similar experience and I think a huge number of families enrol in the school expecting one thing and gradually ( or suddenly like us ! )realising what its all about.
Also I think you can be in the community and still not truelly get it unless you start researching on the Steiner online library or going to lectures etc.
Basically Anthroposophy is there to save humanity from falling into 'the abyss',sounds like other religions but I didn't want a religious school for my child especially one that said it wasn't religious when it was and one whose religion has the reincarnation through races at its core.
Its a lot more damaging than wooly jumpers and cords unfortunately and thank fek Gove saw sense !
I've really enjoyed this thread some fab comments and names too ! :)

RC church statement on the doctrines of theosophy from 1919 'Whether the doctrines, which today are called theosophical, can be in harmony with Catholic doctrine; and thus whether it is permitted to join theosophical societies, attend their meetings, and read their books, daily papers, journals, and writings.--Reply :In the negative in all cases.'

I think the basic problem is that theosophy created god in its own image. It is preoccupied with ideas about god as transmitted through human history but averse to knowing God through revelation. From the Catholic Encyclopedia: "Theosophy is a term used in general to designate the knowledge of God supposed to be obtained by the direct intuition of the Divine essence. In method it differs from theology, which is the knowledge of God obtained by revelation, and from philosophy, which is the knowledge of Divine things acquired by human reasoning."

I personally don't think flippancy ('woo') is an appropriate response.

For a more well founded description of anthroposophy, see Wikipedia. After an arbitration some years ago, only reliable sources are allowed for it.

For an overview of some of the pupils that through the years have gone to a Steiner waldorf school, like the African American CEO of American Express and the present Prime Minister of Norway, see Waldorf alumni.

According to independent research on all pupils in Germany some years ago, Steiner Waldorf pupils are the least racist pupils of all.

Sorry, that should have been: "For a well founded description"

I have a few friends who are completely obsessed with their child's steiner education, and have mildly put the pressure on us in the past to send our kids there.

I also have good friends, who in the beginning were all for it and had their kids on waiting lists etc, but the more they learnt about it, and got involved, the more they got slightly scared, and withdrew.

From my experience, and obviously you cannot generalise, but the people I know who are heavily involved with it, are a little bit hypocritical (like a lot of religious hardnuts) and are very intense, and very opiniated, and not that relaxing to be around.

I also have a couple of friends who went through the steiner system themselves and hated every minute of it - and are very resentful towards their parents for putting them through it.

Personally it most definitely is not for us.

The same demands regarding reliable sources also holds for the Wikipedia article on Steiner Waldorf education and all other related articles.

The other kids were compliant because they're used to the routine of it (it's the same format every week) and they may have been doing it since they were a lot younger. In my experience, when children first come to a Steiner playgroup it takes them a couple of weeks to settle especially when they are 2 and used to playgroups where you run around a lot. I'm not trying to indoctrinate you into the cult (of which I'm happily a part) just trying to reassure you that your son's reaction is totally normal and you should never be made to feel like a failure.

It all sounds too ridiculous and pretentious for words - good on your ds for voting with his feet lol

"compliant" in a playgroup? At the age of two?