Choosing Waldorf Steiner Education - I need the truth!!

[aletina]

My son currently attends a home based Waldorf inspired kindergarten program and we are really happy. We are beginning to investigate schools and have been considering a Waldorf school. Have recently been reading literature on www.waldorfcritics.org  and feel uncertain now as it talks about anthrosophy as a cult, beliefs in the occult and reincarnation etc. It mentions how none of this is expressed in school information packs but that this is what is underlying the teaching methodology.

I am open minded however I'm not comfortable with teachers having these beliefs and sharing them with my young impressionable children (perhaps even subconsciously). I personally don't believe in reincarnation but have formulated this belief system as an adult and not been influenced for or against. We recently attended a beautiful Spiral walk evening which this website also says is part of their cult - now I'm thinking is it or isn't it??

We are so attracted to the community, gardening and arts focused learning but really need the TRUTH !!

[zoebird]

Really, you'll only know "the truth" by getting involved in the community and seeing what is. Each community is different, based on it's members. There's no express standard, beyond the general relationship to steiner's philosophy of education. 

But, for fun, lets go through some definitions first. 

the term "cult" comes from the latin "to cultivate." The catholic church calls itself a cult (in much of it's own literature) under this definition of terms.

in modern times, a cult has referred to an organization that employs various levels of mind control and abuse in order to get slave-like dedication from it's followers, often ruling with fear and other psychological manipulation.

Now, for more fun, it's important to understand what Anthroposophy is. 

Anthroposophy is a philosophy that was designed or started by Steiner. Steiner was part of the Theosophical society in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The Theosophical society was founded in the US by a Russian woman (later naturalized american) and American man who studied eastern philosophies and brought it into a modern context. Their process was largely to form an ecumenical society. Steiner's break with the society occurred because while the Theosophical society wanted to focus on eastern traditions, Steiner wanted to integrate both easter and western traditions in the spiritual process.

The underlying philosophy of anthroposophy is that it wants to use the spiritual practices and spiritual observational tools of intuition, inspiration, and perceptive imagination as sensory tools -- like our physical senses -- to explore the divine reality. In a sense, it is a "spiritual science" -- wanting to use these tools to discover the common experience of the divine. Anthroposophy understands or asserts that individuals and communities would create their own descriptions -- hence the similarities between eastern/western thought. 

Anthroposophists, themselves, vary on what they believe. Some are very christo-centric. Others more eastern, and others more "pagan" depending upon how you look at and consider pagan. The point of anthroposophy is not to assert what others "should be" experiencing or believing, but rather supporting those disciplines and practices which will allow people to open themselves up to their own experience of the divine.

In addition, many people may be "hard" or "soft" anthroposophists. By this, I mean that some people are "really into it" and integrate as much anthroposophical ideology into their lives as they possibly can down to people who just take what they want and leave the rest. I consider myself a "soft" anthroposophist, but by the same token, I think several people would consider me a "hard" one based on my own practices. 

Steiner, himself, is viewed as everything from a charismatic leader to a philosopher to a prophet -- largely dependent on the individual. I know of no one, personally, who thinks of him as a prophet, and I think he denied this as well. He saw himself as a philosopher, I believe and for my own part, I consider him a philosopher. But, it really depends upon the individual.

Teachers who choose to learn and teach steiner methodology can be any sort of anthroposophist. At the most basic level, the teacher believes in Steiner's method of education, and with this, his perspective on child development and what a child needs to develop into a full person in their first 3 cycles of life (7 yr cycles). The emphasis is not just on intellectual development -- which is important -- but on developing the full person, their personality, and their spiritual person. And doing so in a community setting, as community is also important for self knowledge, understanding, and a sense of place.

In the educational format, anthroposophy is not taught, but lived. The philosophy of education is designed to apply the principles of anthroposophy in education -- in child rearing. It is designed around steiner's perspective of how children grow and develop.

How that, in turn, is applied also depends upon the school, teacher, and community. Each waldorf school is independent, different from the next. It is rare -- in my understanding -- that a "hard" anthroposophical teacher will bring that to bear in the class, because the class is already designed to be anthroposophical, as determined and designed by Steiner. Most of them are quite happy with the educational process "as is" so to speak.

It is unusual that specific topics are taught in the way that things are taught in other spiritual schools. For example, in a Catholic school, you would absolutely be exposed to the idea of the Blessed Virgin Mary and her Perpetual Virginity. This is a core component of catholic belief and practice, and therefore children in catholic schools are taught this. They are also taught the 10 Commandments, and the Sermon on the Mount. They are taken to church regularly, and often go to confession as well. People send their non-catholic children to these schools for the education, knowing that this information will be included. Others avoid it knowing this information will be included.

Waldorf education is different. Steiner philosophy espouses the importance of regular feasts and holidays -- the body and spirit of human beings and communities need celebration. Thus, seasonal celebrations are included in Waldorf education. This gives a child a sense of rhythm, of a time for festival and celebration as well as "ordinary time." Many schools focus just on the seasons -- without a specific religious story or context, while others might connect it to a near-by holiday such as Michaelmas -- the celebration of the feast of St Michael the Archangel. This story would be told in class -- among many others, and are taught in a rather "jungian" way (for lack of a better way of describing it on my part). If it's simply seasonal, seasonal stories are told that have a similar "jungian" bent.

By Jungian, I mean this: philosopher and psychologist Carl Jung believed that fairy tales, stories, legends, and so on were really stories of the psyche. That, not only did they impart many levels of entertainment, social cues and ties, and other more mundane elements, but that there were archetypal elements at play in the stories, that reflected the archetypes within the psyche of human beings. The exploration of these archetypes -- through stories -- allowed our minds to find peace, allowed us to heal whatever fissures of psyche we might have.

Steiner takes on this information, and the methodology of anthroposophy, and adds that these are also spiritual archetypes, and that when we are raised with these stories, we are also raised *by* these stories. As a young child, St Michael is a real angel, physical and actual as Fred the Cat (you know, if you had a Cat named Fred), and that this deed did, indeed and actually happen. Ultimately, we realize that this is an archetype, and that the story archetypal, and that it is Actual, even while it may not be "factual" in the scientific, mundane world sense. 

The steiner educational system is really founded on stories. Most schools begin with this curriculum -- each year being a different cultures mythos wherein the children explore their own emotional experiences. Stories from east, west, north and south are shared, given to the children. What they believe from them, how they experience them, is their own.

It is, of course, not the only course of study. But it is how they reach the developmental, spiritual space of the child -- the children MAY explore the issues and questions of reincarnation, heaven/hell, Hel and Valhalla of the norse, and many other culture's descriptions of the afterlife. They may also never speak of the afterlife at all. Depending upon the school, teacher, and community.

In addition to these studies, they study the natural world -- through gardening, building, woodworking -- these are the basis of maths and science. There is also eurhythmy, which is a form of dance, and many "curative" elements to waldorf education --- meant to heal any emotional, spiritual, or psychological wounds a person (any person, not just a child) may have. These elements are also highly important to anthroposophy, but never taught as being absolutely necessary for that child. No one thing is -- in my experience -- particularly overvalued. It is really just to integrate the human being into the fullest self.

You will of course, need to explore anthroposophy and also the anthroposophical community behind waldorf education -- your particular school and community -- to determine whether or not waldorf education is right for you and your family. It may be. It may not be. But it not being so doesn't mean that it's a cult, or evil, or whatever.

And yes, people struggle. It is a close knit community, and when you're on the "outs" of it, it is emotional. bad things do happen in communities, even those with the best intentions. 

[aletina]

A heartfelt thankyou,  Zoebird,  for your comprehensive reply, I really appreciate the time, thought and effort that has gone into your response. It was a pleasure to read!

Yes, I do need to read much more about Steiner and his philosophies but your response has been so helpful. To be honest, the thought of it being a cult (as a contemporary definition) never occurred to me until I read some of the information on that website. For example, I know a bit about the principles of biodynamics and it makes sense to me - I don't think it is weird as some do.

You mentioned Catholic schools - you know that religion will be taught from a Catholic perspective before you enrol - no surprises. For me, the fact that each individual Waldorf school may be different is what I am grappling with - how 'full on' will it be??? Until my children actually attend, I'm not sure how easily I could delve into the curriculum and community of the school. We attended the Spring Fair last year which again we enjoyed. I have the school prospectus and we are booked in to attend an 'open day' so I guess I'll follow my intuition! 

[zoebird]

Well, and this is just my take on it btw, "full on" has a lot of different directions.

When you join a waldorf school, it becomes a way of life -- much like, in many ways, Mothering does. I mean, you might be very normal, mainstream, and only start here for the breastfeeding info, and many people discover that while they might not go in for the No Vax or Unschooling, they are more open to a midwife or cosleeping or whatever. What I mean is, that your community starts to influence and impact you in positive ways, and, perhaps, in negative ways too.

With a waldorf school, there is a  lot of involvement. Most people find this to be "cult like." parents are called on to participate a lot -- just as they would be in any school, particularly private, but in a waldorf school, it's different. If your child is going to the catholic school, you might be asked to make something for the pot luck, or if they go to a private school, something for the athletic team's booster club. But, at a waldorf school, you might be called on to craft until your fingers bleed for the annual festival, or cook 90,000 biodynamic rutabegas until your kitchen is on fire. 

You understand, of course, that I am exaggerating with a bit of humor. :)

At our steiner play group, we are encouraged to "live" in a steiner way at home. Of course, there's no dictation, but most of the families don't even own TVs for example. Many will keep their toys extremely minimal (at least here in NZ, though I think I am the most extreme one of my friends). People will incorporate school activities into their homes -- songs before meals, candle ceremonies, etc. This is to help maintain the rhythm, to keep the child more or less integrated. There are festivals, crafting groups, discussion groups (on things like gentle discipline, the ages and stages of a child, basic handwork for those of us -- like myself -- who never learned to knit). We fund raise, we have play dates, and usually these are the kids you invite to your kid's birthday party because -- quite honestly -- a bag of shells picked up at the beach, tied with a bow made from finger-woven wool yarn isn't that cool to a mainstream-schooled child, but to other waldorf kids, living this life, well, that's a GIFT! :D

End of the day, what we find is that everyone gets really into the process. many of us come to it because we are already there at some level. Something is resonating, and for many of us, we are anthroposophical. But, for others, it doesn't matter at all. They aren't at all anthroposophical.

So, it's not so much that you get saturated with the spiritual/religious stuff (though that is there), but that where other values intersect (particularly with generally "crunchy" people), people might find resonances. 

And then something happens. You join the "commune" -- that's it. My kid doesn't watch tv either. I like gardening. The arts focus is cool. I love the jungian approach to stories. Waldorf is a good fit. Now i'm in the crafting group. now i'm in the discussion group. Now i'm cooking 90,000 rutabegas. I'm here. We are in.

Then something happens. You decide one day that -- as per your values -- it's totally cool that your kid is learning spanish out of sequence, or has taken up ukulele a year earlier than normal for that school, or that in fact, everyony sucks at eurhythmy, so you don't make your kid study it. 

tsk tsk goes the hard anthroposophist person in your crafting group. ooooh, that's BAD says the rather misinformed non-anthroposophist who doesn't want to be on hard anthro's bad side this week, as she gets tsked every other week. Teacher calls you in and says "why is your kid playing the ukulele? what is going on in your home? don't you know that his teeth aren't properly formed for the ukulele?" and you're wondering, WTF is going on?

Well, at this point, you've run into the issue. It's not that the school is going "Hail mary, with properly formed teeth, hallowed is your ukulele!" But rather that some schools take the teeth-grown-in-before-reading thing *very* seriously, and others don't really care. And how much the school does or doesn't follow that determines how the community *reacts* to whatever is unique in your family. Perhaps your child is scary gifted at ukulele, and you are seen as that pushy mom who forces your child to play the ukulele endlessly while you craft until your knuckles bleed for the annual fair. Oh no no no no no. that's not right, that's not what we do, that's not Steiner.

Now, as they say on project runway -- one day you're in, and the next day, you're alienated.

People get upset. here was this beautiful school. this beautiful community. And now, because of ukulele excellence -- which should be celebrated -- i'm being ostracised! Haven't I made enough woolen slippers? have no not cooked enough rutabegas? where, oh where did I go wrong?

Yeah, that's the funny thing. It may be that at that point, steiner *isn't* a good fit. And not because they taught or didn't teach reincarnation, but because sometimes the school is a bit buttoned up about this or that philosophy, and when and where they are, and where your family may stray *may* have an impact.

Now, the communities that i've been a part of -- outside of school at this point -- this has only been a marginal problem. This may be because I am a particularly stubborn PITA who doesn't know how to knit, and may or may not care that she doesn't know how to knit. End of the day, while I might be entirely warped to a hard anthroposophist, if the education is working for me, my son, and our family, well, she can eat her knitting needle for all I care. 

but, i've never really run into the problem. I have had issues where I have concerns about the community overall -- usually when we are in a transition. I discovered that -- as stiener often talks about -- communities go through growth together. When my son jumped into a new constellation of being, some children around his age were left behind. Some were too young and in the right space and wanted the space to stay the same for their children (understandable). There were questions around how i was parenting, what i might be "doing" that "created" this problem. But the reality is that I wasn't doing anything, and that in fact, DS had just gone through a normal jump, just early (as he is apt to do), and that their children were fine and so were mine, and in the next week or so, we were able to develop a new understanding and balance around how our community should function -- inclusive of this change -- and how we could move forward together.

And we have.

So often, people can be pushed out -- the pressure to conform in any community can be very intense. but if we take a rather spiritual approach to community -- not take things too personally, try to see a larger, global picture, try to work away from a space of blame and just observe what is arising, we can go "right, ok, I see what is happening here." and we -- as individuals -- can either move on or come to peace with it. 

I had a dear friend who has two beautiful sons. both sons started at the steiner school -- one of the best in the US. it was impressive, this school. Their younger son, a lovely boy, has special psychological needs, which impacts *how* he is educated. The steiner school did their best to support him, but ultimately told the parents 'i'm sorry, we simply cannot meet his needs." thus, they sent him to public school. One son in steiner, one in public (with specialized education around that). Because they were encouraged to be waldorf/steiner at home -- for the sake of both boys, but particularly the one in the school, they did their best. Unfortunately, it didn't work well for them. They discovered that they didn't have many intersections with steiner ways of being, and it was difficult to balance out the needs. Over time, they discovered that the schooling differences were too extreme to balance, and ultimately found themselves alientated from the steiner community for being simply "too mainstream." 

Parents are, often, choosing steiner because they want to avoid mainstream influences -- such as television before the age of 9 or 10, and many want to be tv free. So, the fact that you have one child who goes to school with other children who watch tv, and one who doesn't, and you -- yourself -- watch tv and don't see it as a problem, it means that IF your child is watching TV (this particular community was particularly strong about this), then he's unlikely to be invited to play because play is impacted by TV, and the parents do not want tv-influenced play.

It has nothing to do with the inherent value of the child. Everyone agrees that the child is profoundly wonderful (and truly, both children are), but that, ultimately, it was a great difficulty to get the family's way of life balanced against the way of life of the other families. They ultimately decided that public school was a better choice for both boys.

Coming to this, though, from a position of power helped. They disagreed with the steiner school on this point. Yes, no media is a good idea, but they didn't consider the small amount of media per day or per week to be "that big" of a deal. In their family, media is ok. So, it is OK. From an anthroposophical perspective, one can even say "yes, it is ok." it is what they have discerned for themselves. BUT, it is the antithesis of certain aspects of the philosophies around child rearing, education, and a child's developmental needs as well. It is, in fact, both.

So, they were able to say -- This works for us. We are Ok with us. Time to take our leave. Good-bye, and Thanks For All The Fish. 

So, they leave the community unscathed. It wasn't without difficulty, but they are less likely to write -- now anyway -- on this site about recovering from waldorf, and so on.

And, btw, it's important to read that thread. I don't know where it is located, but it might be "Life After Waldorf." And you'll see that the largest experience is *not* the issue of religious (antrhoposophical) education, but truly communal problems. Problems in the WOL between people who are adhering to the steiner philosophies and seeking to socially police others vs those people and communities who really aren't as strict about it.

Here in NZ, i would say that it's less strict. I joked that we have our interview with the steiner school tomorrow, so we better to our anthroposophical aerobics in order to be in tip top shape for our weigh in at the athroposophometer. this didn't go over well with the anthroposophists in the room, because -- quite honestly -- religion is rather frowned upon here. In addition, they believe that they offer a "healthy alternative" to other educational options, and so they "encourage" parents to follow the philosophies, but they do excommunicate people for watching dora the explorer. The educators here are *particularly* sensitive to the idea that anthroposophy NOT be brought up in the education AND that it's not seen as you must be X to attend this school.

But, of course, many people DO become X when they go to the steiner school because, hey, you have to cook all of those biodynamic rutabegas, so you might as well invite over the other mom's from the year 3 class to help out. At least you'll be more likely to get the kitchen fire out in time if you do, and besides, then everyone can marvel at your child's immense ukulele skills.

[Jane93]

"You mentioned Catholic schools - you know that religion will be taught from a Catholic perspective before you enrol - no surprises." 
 

I think most Catholic educators would say that not only is religion taught from a Catholic perspective, but that the entire educational system is based on a Catholic perspective, that English, math, science, extra-curriculars, etc. are all coming from a Catholic-centered foundation.   The purpose of this is to raise adults that are coming at the world with a Catholic belief system and a Catholic approach (to problem-solving, interpretation, culture, frame of reference, etc.)

My feeling is that Waldorf is the same, that the art, pe, classroom discipline, not reading until 7, etc. are generally coming from a Steiner-centered foundation.  In other words, Waldorf is not just a particular way of teaching English (for example) but rather that what is taught about English and the manner in which it is taught has a specific "ulterior" purpose beyond merely the educational.

Only you can decide whether Steiner's beliefs are acceptable to you.

[zoebird]

right, it is certainly putting for a particular world-view.

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by Jane93 

Only you can decide whether Steiner's beliefs are acceptable to you.

One of the things, though, about Waldorf, is that such is teaching so out of step with every other style of education in America, is that if school isn't a good fit *for your child,*  they end up very behind when you leave the school.

A child in a Catholic school who just isn't fitting in or the non-catholic parents decide the school is just too catholicy or whatever, can walk into any public school (or other private school) and be on target for reading, writing, and math.  With Waldorf, there's an extra risk.

[aletina]

I see where you're coming from - I think if Waldorf is chosen it should definitely be seen as a long term committment as the adjustment to mainstream may be quite challenging. Not too sure about the same teacher for 7 years either!

[aletina]

Zoebird you have presented so many ways of looking at Waldorf - I will read the thread you mentioned - if I can find it. 

There are so many issues to consider - I want my children to have a 'childhood' and not be influenced and defined by mass marketing, commercial tv etc.

It's hard when my childrens' cousins are readily and without any hesitation exposed to all this and come over to 'play'.

Asking them to put away their hand held computer games is another forum in itself!  In a sense, as I have these views, I feel somewhat isolated from my extended family.

Once again, many thanks!

[zoebird]

i would say that "very behind" is really relative. 

i think if you're talking about the earliest grades (first, second, third), then yes, there might be more of a learning curve for the child (depending upon the child). If you're talking about children heading into higher grades, jr high, and high school, then it appears not to be that big of a deal. and it's no issue at the university level (in fact, many waldorf students are often considered the 'best' students in a uni because of their love of learning). 

in the earliest grades, the pedagogy is completely different from a mainstream school. so, it is true that children will not be taught to read (via phonics, etc as in a mainstream school). The method is simply completely different. So, a child going from a first grade waldorf classroom to a second grade mainstream classroom *will* be behind *unless* s/he has already "unlocked the code" of reading.

As another mother here posted recently, there are early readers in her child's waldorf school -- children reading at age 6 and 7 -- and then some take longer, up to age 9 or 10 on average. In waldorf education, this is ok. In other forms of education, probably not so much! 

Here in NZ, the waldorf kindy is pretty popular for ages 3-5, but then most children go right into mainstream schools. they don't know what other children know -- alphabet, numbers, whatever, but they do have many other skills that carry them through and they learn quickly once they are in school. Most people just like the "magical childhood" aspect of the pre-schooling kindy that waldorf provides, but then want their child mainstreamed. So, if your children are very young, then you can easily keep them in the kindy and make connections with families with similar values for play dates, etc, so that they have a circle of friends who are -- in some ways -- more like them.

Does that make sense?

[Jane93]

FYI -- Life After Waldorf can be found in the TAO subforum -- it was moved there from this subforum when this subforum was more hardcore Waldorf and Waldorf questioning, etc. couldn't co-exist peacefully here.  I don't know how active that thread is anymore, but it was very active at one point and does give a pretty good idea of the range of issues some parents have experienced with the Waldorf system.

[Jane93]

Actually -- I misremembered and its in Personal Growth -- Life After Waldorf -- A Support Group and was started by beansavi.

[zoebird]

I completely agree that it's a good thread for understanding the range and common issues that may crop up. Definitely worth a read, even if it is inactive.

[karne]

I would encourage you to listen to some of Eugene Schwartz's material, if it's available. He was a waldorf teacher, and I believe he ran into trouble because of his candid discussions. You most likely won't find a waldorf school or teacher to really explain the role of anthroposophy in the school, and with regard to the teaching of the children because it's generally not advertised or explained to novice parents.

The outward trappings really have little meaning without a solid understanding of your child and their learning needs and style.

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by Jane93 

Actually -- I misremembered and its in Personal Growth -- Life After Waldorf -- A Support Group and was started by beansavi.

here's a link and I bumped it up

http://www.mothering.com/community/forum/thread/683104/life-after-waldorf-a-support-group/1060#post_16498256

[zoebird]

i agree that it is not advertised now explained to novice parents.

part of the reason that it is not explained is because it is actually difficult to explain. when we are in the community, they explain the world view. this is how we see these years, this is what is important, this is what we feel is less important in these years. but, they don't explain *why* or *where it came from*.

Anthroposophy is a *massive* philosophical system that lead to many different kinds of things -- biodynamic agriculture, waldorf education, anthroposophical medicine (with strong homeopathic leanings), and a variety of other "systems" of how to do things, how to live and be. Each of these systems has many layers. At one level, you can say that biodynamic farming/gardening is about lunar planting. At another, crop rotation and organic gardening, at another, a whole lot of woo-woo spiritual stuff that is difficult to understand (and has leanings or relationships to homeopathy). 

Underneath each of these practices is anthroposophy -- that's what ties it together. But what is anthroposophy? To really understand it, *read steiner*. Honestly, it's the beginning and the best you can do. His first work, Philosophy of Freedom, outlines the basics in the most basic way, but it's *chewy* and can be tough to get through. He was also a prolific writer, so if you keep on going with what he wrote, you'll be busy for several years. We were first introduced to anthroposophy nearly a decade ago and still *barely* understand it, though we have incorporated many elements into our lives when they resonate and we can figure out how it all works for us.

Another element worth considering is meeting older steiner-educated children. Meet 10 yr olds. Meet 14 yr olds. Meet recent graduates. Meet people who went to the steiner school themselves. Get a sense of these kids/people. Ask them questions.

When we were first curious (and suspicious) of waldorf education, we were really looking at a lot of different educational practices -- public schools with different academic focus, private schools of all kinds, democratic, unschooling based (with no more than 3-6 students in any given age group), and so on. All over the map, and blessed that we lived in such a rich and diverse area for it. 

What really struck is is how really *different* the waldorf kids seemed. Not in a negative way, mind you. In fact, there were two groups of kids that *really* impressed us with their self awareness and knowledge, their self actualization, their excitement and involvement in life, their spiritual endeavors, their general knowledge, and just all around awesomeness: Quaker educated and Waldorf educated.

Now, other kids were great, to be sure. Great kids. Loved them. Baby sat for us eventually, you know? Good people all around. Smart, loving, and, well, normal in every way you can imagine. Few go awry, truly. 

But these quaker and waldorf kids, just something else altogether. Really aware. Particularly of themselves. Strong sense of identity, of place, of community, and really, of who they were and where they wanted to go -- more or less. some had no idea about the future, but knew that they could do whatever they set their mind to.

To me, these children seemed less scarred. My personal perspective on it is that it came from the focus of the teaching. Most other schools are focused on pouring knowledge into a kid's head. In these two schools, the focus is on kids having a sense of place, a voice, and personal (spiritual) autonomy. After that, you learn math. I found it is less so with other forms of schooling.

So, kids come out of these schools more luminous. 

Granted, this is just my experience. There are many many many luminous young people coming out of *every* school, and I know many of them personally. I know that even if I send Hawk to public school here, he'll be fine, truly. Education will not miss him. 

I just want him to have the best time at it. And that means finding the right place for him -- learning style being part of it.

At our kindy interview (stiener kindy) yesterday, we were asked "what do you want to get out of this kindy? what are your goals for your child?"

Well, it's not academics -- he's 3. but there is something that I want.

Hawk is vibrant. He is incredibly passionate, boots and all, rush into it with joy and acceptance. He's delightful, friendly, cheery to the max. He's a strong leader. He is strong minded and strong willed. He is just this really BIG personality. 

And that is what makes him amazing.

I fear that in a normal school setting, this would be an active, bad boy. Too much excitement. Too much movement. Too much moving on too quickly or not quickly enough. Too much leadership. Too much cheeriness.

I absolutely do not want this squelched. His temperament and personality is amazing. Yes, he has intellect. Like i said, education won't miss him. He'd be easy to unschool if I could manage the social aspect -- his social needs (my failing, not his!). I want a place where *he* will be valued, not considered bad becuase he is a boisterous, happy boy. 

So, for now, we send him to the kindy. We have him on the waiting list of the local steiner school. in 3 years, we'll see where we want him to go. Maybe by then I'll be able to unschool (which I would prefer). But until then, well, this is our second choice, and our third choice being the local public school (which we flip flop back and forth to on a regular basis. LOL). 

end of the day, I just want him to be happy. I want him to be valued by the people around him for who he is, not whether or not he sits in the chair properly, is quiet when asked, is speaking up when asked, and basically "good" for doing what a mainstream classroom expects. RHythm works well with him, and i'm sure he'd be fine in a mainstream classroom (it's a strong rhythm), but will he be valued for who he is? I don't know.

Anyway, rambling now.

[Jane93]

Zoebird -- I find your description of your son and choosing Waldorf to be a little counterintuitive.  Much of the Life After Waldorf thread points out that Waldorf tends to favor the "dreamy"/compliant child, and active children (particularly active, physical boys) are disfavored.  Also, Waldorf is most definitely teacher led, and your post seems to indicate a desire for child lead learning (where your child will not be "squelched" also your personal favoring of unschooling).

So, I find that a little confusing as to how you are making these different things work together?

[zoebird]

I can see why that experience would be common, particularly when looking at specific communities.

In this community, there seems to be emphasis on understanding and integrating the different temperaments. What I have experienced so far from the educators here (mind you, toddler and kindy -- which is ages 3-6) is an emphasis in understanding and working with the different temperaments. Not only in school, but also in families -- helping families identify the temperaments of the different family members to create a cohesive, peaceful family environment. The point is to allow for the "dream-like state" for this age of the child. 

So, the perspective that I'm seeing here is that there is this understanding of the first 7 years having a certain "dreamy" tone, and that within this, each temperament has it's own way of being "dreamy." Then, they move into tone over the next 7 years, again taking it in their own way based on their temperament.

In the kindy, the playgroup's leader speaks closely with the teachers to discuss the temperaments, and when moving toward the school, the kindy teachers do the same. I am told that this is so that the teachers can choose a "constellation" of children whom they feel will work well together -- different temperaments playing off each other nicely for those next 7 years together.

I'm also observing and told that the individual teachers then choose and create rhythms that balance out the unique needs of this "constellation" of children and their temperaments. This way, each temperament's needs are met.

In my reading of waldorf educational materials, this seems to follow right along the theory behind the pedagogy. 

That also being said, I have really only the experience of two schools -- Kimberton Waldorf and also the schools here. My experience of Kimberton waldorf school (teachers, etc) is that they were "more strict" on the reading issues (that is, they didn't want children reading early or any sort of non steiner reading education), and that the community (parents, etc) was rather strict about no-tv. But, their process was also about balancing temperaments -- in so far as I understand it. I admit, I only know from graduates.

While I prefer a child-led education, I know that choosing to not unschool (full time, at the moment) means that I'm now forgoing *any* child-lead option. My options then are montessori, waldorf, and state school. at this age, kindy age, there's really not a focus on academics at all -- that is usually handled in day care, oddly (what they call creche), but not all day cares do this. Though, some kindys are more academic than others if you want that. But, we want to avoid academics at this point. 

Likewise, I do actually "believe in" anthroposophy, so it is a good fit for us at that level. 

I can explain more later, but I don't think it's really necessary. I'm hungry and it's time for lunch. 

[honeybunmom]

I think zoebird has provided some wonderfully thoughtful and insightful responses.  Thank you!

I am still early on my journed of really understanding the pedagogy of Waldorf that we have embarked on for our children.  I have just started reading Rythms of Learning Selected Lectures by Rudolf Steiner - What Waldorf Education Offers Children, Parents and Teachers.

One of the statements in the introduction that really helped to contextualize all the different experiences people have with this education is this:  There is no governing body of Waldorf education which begins each school.  Each school (and I am assuming this is elementary and beyond, not necessarily Early Childhood programs) is born out of a collective of parents who come together because they desire a Waldorf education for their children, yet there is no Waldorf school in their community.  Wow!  Of course then there are going to be as vast a range of experiences as there are people!

With that in mind, yes, asking questions on a forum like this will give you some insight into what you could reasonably be able to expect and find in a Waldorf school.  Yes, the early childhood classroom can be expected to be set up in a certain way with a common set of surroundings and the days, weeks and months will follow a particular rhythm.  Yes, your child will have the same teacher in grades 1-8.  But, in my view, it is absolutely no substitute for fully exploring and investigating your local Waldorf school.  Does your school bring in assistants so that students who need additional help get that help?  Be it in reading, math, therapuetic eurythmy, etc?  Or so that a child who is excelling in a particular area has the opportunity to move at a faster pace - his or her pace?  With what I've read in these forums I was very taken aback to find that this was available in our local school.

Waldorf is not a strict pedagogy in that there are tenants as rigid as the 10 Commandments.  In reality, it is a set of principles.  But those principles are only going to be as evolved as the individuals manifesting them.  Which is why community involvement is so fundamental and basic to the education.

Since I'm still so early in my journey of understanding, I think I should stop here for now.

[zoebird]

it is very true. you need to know your community.

i had concerns when my son had a massive growth jump -- physically, physical capacity, language jump, etc. he went through a huge change -- caught up with a friend about 6 months older, and jumped well away from kids his own age (some a few months older, some a few weeks younger). Before, they'd been all about the same, with a deep observation for the older child, making sure her needs and those of the younger children were met.

when my son made the jump, things went a bit haywire. suddenly, there were two children in our group in a different style of play -- which is fine for their age and so on -- and then shortly there after, a boy who is slightly older than my son made the same jump. then 3 of 8 children were up, and then there were 2 who were younger than DS (a couple of weeks), and then the little ones (2.5 yrs and younger). So, there was a concern about whether or not this new constellation of temperaments PLUS the fact that they were now playing in a different way/level would impact the group's dynamic. Of course it would, btu the question was how to balance it all out.

Now, it only took a week. one week of stress for the parents -- some wanting to make sure it didn't age up, and so a sort of veiled criticism of the older kids (particularly since hawk seemed to instigate the jump) and their parents, and then a rather defensive position for those parents (myself included), and then also those parents "on the cusp" not knowing which way things were going to go.

The change was in the rhythm of the group -- lead by the leader. she simply "divided" the group into two for certain parts. the first, second, and third parts of the rhythm were shared; then the fourth part was split -- older kids out while little ones in (free play for both), then trade. It worked out fine, and everyone found their balance again.

What i learned from this experience is that when the jump happens, it changes the constellation. It's not a problem, it's just that the whole community has to adapt, and most importantly, the teacher has to facilitate that process (in this instance, since the teacher is the leader/authority). if the teacher is under stress, it's harder for him/her to balance out the new needs of the constellation -- which could include changing the rhythm, or sort of keeping the elder child in the rhythm, etc.

In addition, i learned about myself as a parent. First, I can take what i like from the situation and accept that there will be limitations. The fact is -- or at least, my experience so far -- is that there are a lot of limitations in things. Where I may feel fine with my son doing X, the swimming pool has a rule against it. So, we follow that rule, even if i think it's bunk. When at the beach, rule doesn't apply, kwim?

so, there's a certain point where if a group is going one way, then I have to decide if I want to go that way. It may be worth it when you are going to a group once a week for 2-3 hrs. It may not be worth it if it's 5 days, 8 hrs a day. This, of course, is beyond the academic side of things.

I am independent and strong minded. I'm not afraid to leave a group if it doesn't work for me -- steiner or otherwise. I might be disappointed if I have to leave, but it's not the end of the world for me. I was considering leaving and going with public schooling anyway -- just based on community groundedness (DS being super-duper social and school being within 2-3 blocks walking distance which would be K (age 3) through until "college" which is at age 11 (i think). Then, he has options again -- waldorf, wellington boys, and wellington high. and a few other private schools (catholic, private non-catholic, anglican, etc). since all of those are "out of town" (not within walking distance) he could go anywhere, really. Or maybe we'll be unschooling by then.

I suppose i see the whole process as fluid. Learn about the local community and see if it's going to be a good fit. If it's not, then that's ok. you'll be able to find the right thing elsewhere.