In plain English -- how does anthrosophy affect what kids are taught - Page 3

[Pete]

Originally Posted by waldorf teacher

[You've completely missed my point, I suspect. I respect that we have different "truths" as you call them - I would call them "beliefs". But Waldorf does not get a free ride when they don't explain that their beliefs make up the curriculum and that children will be taught those beliefs. If you understand that your "truths" are different than my "truths" then what in the world justifies that you would teach your "truths" to my child without my permission or knowledge?

Maybe I missed it.
You know me (sort of), and you know very well that I am a strong advocate of disclosing what goes on at Waldorf school, but something as simple as time and resources prohibits this...you know that.

I'll tell you what... Why don't you join me in advocating that AWSNA produce a clear and concise statement on their website that discloses what goes on in Waldorf schools? That statement should be prominent on their website. Additionally, the statement could and should be copied onto every Waldorf school's website. But if this is too much to ask, at least most Waldorf schools link to AWSNA and parents would have the statement available to them.

With regard to time and resources - I think it takes less time to not imply that Anthroposophy is not in Waldorf schools than it does to imply it. Parents who have to ask are concerned about this. Suggesting it is there takes no more time than suggesting it isn't. Parents have a right to have their questions answered honestly.

How long would it really take to let somebody know everything that goes on in 12 years at a school. Come on.

Again, how about we just start with not misrepresenting what goes on in the first place. How many times have you heard, or perhaps said yourself, "Anthroposophy is not taught to the children" - knowing that there is really a lot more to that answer? How many times will parents be dismissed with "Steiner is difficult" instead of "Steiner said a lot of things that we Anthroposophists have found to be without substance or basis - and we do not stand behind those assertions - in fact we denounce those things"?

Find out what the play is like before you buy a ticket, and if it turns out to be intolerable, grab your hat and go...but don't ruin it for the people who want to stay, or for those who may want to go in the future.

But this is not a play we are talking about. It's an educational system and a lot more is at stake than the price of a ticket - and finding out what it is about is not so easy - especially if people who actually know what it is about are asked to grab our hats and go so that others may continue to buy their tickets. The only people who are ruining it for others are the ones who are advertising it as a musical comedy when it's a drama. That's why critics review plays.

And try not to assume that your 'disclosure' bugaboo is a problem outside of your very limited experience in Waldorf; or with the VAST majority of Waldorf families.

People keep trying to suggest that my experience with Waldorf is very limited. I would suggest otherwise. I can see I'll have to spend more time on the Waldorf Resources thread, pulling up Waldorf website after Waldorf website, to expose how widespread the "disclosure bugaboo" really is.

First you, yourself, have suggested that you advocate that Waldorf disclose more of its true nature to parents. Then you suggested time and resource restraints are the reason they don't. And finally you arrive at - it is only me who has experienced this problem - and maybe if I grab my hat and leave, the problem will go away. You represent yourself as "Waldorf Teacher" - are we to assume all Waldorf teachers would use these methods to arrive at their desired results in a conversation with a parent? The reason I ask is because this is, in my experience, how most conversations between Waldorf teachers and parents transpire - first they sympathise, then they explain why what the parent is asking cannot be done - and if the parent doesn't acquiesce, they are invalidated as the only complainer and even asked to leave.

It is my understanding that Steiner himself said that POF would be his most enduring work.

I'm not aware of this but it wouldn't surprise me. When did he say this?

I know you are aware of it, but have you ever read it and worked with it?

I've read parts of it and it's on my reading list. What's your point? That one has to read Steiner's POF to arrive at "truth"?

Pete

[lauraess]

Originally Posted by Pete

From WordWeb dictionary:

Truth:
1) A fact that has been verified
2) Conformity to reality or actuality
3) A true statement
4) The quality of nearness to the truth or the true value

From Websters:
True:
1) Conformable to fact
2) Not false or erroneous
3) Free from falsehood

There really is no wiggle room for truth as in "your truth" vs "my truth". But I understand that what people who talk of truth here are really saying is "belief".

Once one blurs the line between "belief" and "truth" as Steiner did, then we have a situation, as in Waldorf schools, where one's beliefs replace the truth. When we think about how this affects our children's education - especially when it is applied without parent's knowledge, I would suggest that all the composting in the world won't make up for this error in judgement and ethics.

Pete

Ahhh you are probobly right, In Fact all the vain attempts to save our world through composting and such wont make up for an error in judgement that you claim is of utmost importance. All parents should have the information shown to them, told to them that Anthroposophy has a large part in all that happens in the school-- but when it is not you might have faith that how the childs education is affected might be acceptable, even favorable since It is not an occult of evil-worshippers or power-mongers . Math is taught, language is taught, science, arts and yes: Respect for the people and the earth, a spirituality that has lacked sorely for so long. Could you even have faith that lots of the parents seeking out Waldorf are doing so because they are searching for something else besides the same old Fact-based education and that they might be able to reasonably intuit whether or not Waldorf is for them and for their child- even with it's blurred disclosures?

[Serena Blaue]

It seems to me to be rushing to judgment to assume that schools offer parents misleading information about Waldorf Ed. Unless one personally visited and spoke with school personnel, how would one know this? In a previous post, I listed the numerous opportunities parents at my local W school have to get to know about Waldorf Ed and anthroposophy. Relatively few are interested, as a matter of fact, though conferences featuring Joseph Chilton Pearce (who supports WE) are always well-attended.

The majority of Waldorf school websites have links to AWSNA, SpiritWorking, the E-library, the Anthroposophical Society website and so on. A simple internet search will bring up thousands of links, including many to the Critics' websites or message boards.

In this day and age it is simply impossible to hide anything about Waldorf Ed -- no school can prevent parents from finding information (and sadly, misinformation) about Waldorf Ed or anthroposophy.

Serena

[Pete]

Originally Posted by lauraess

Ahhh you are probobly right, In Fact all the vain attempts to save our world through composting and such wont make up for an error in judgement that you claim is of utmost importance. All parents should have the information shown to them, told to them that Anthroposophy has a large part in all that happens in the school-- but when it is not you might have faith that how the childs education is affected might be acceptable, even favorable since It is not an occult of evil-worshippers or power-mongers .

I'm not sure what you have said above, but it sounds like an attempt at sarcasm. And no, I have no faith in Waldorf other than a faith that any trust I put in them will be violated.

Math is taught, language is taught, science, arts and yes: Respect for the people and the earth, a spirituality that has lacked sorely for so long.

Fine - but it's not OK to slip spirituality into the mix without telling the parents. It's dishonest.

Could you even have faith that lots of the parents seeking out Waldorf are doing so because they are searching for something else besides the same old Fact-based education and that they might be able to reasonably intuit whether or not Waldorf is for them and for their child- even with it's blurred disclosures?

Well, even a broken watch is right twice a day. Sure some parents might feel fine when they discover what they have stumbled into. The blurred disclosures are huge red flags, however, that say "We are willing to lie to parents" - and as I said, no, I don't have faith in Waldorf. And if you think Waldorf is nothing more than a simple alternative to a fact-based education, I would suggest you do some research on your own. If you are representing Waldorf as an alternative to a fact-based education knowing that it is a spiritual education based in Anthroposophy then I would suggest you are adding to the deception.

Pete

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue

It seems to me to be rushing to judgment to assume that schools offer parents misleading information about Waldorf Ed.

No rushing - I've taken my time coming to this conclusion. And my conclusion has been confirmed by countless others.

Unless one personally visited and spoke with school personnel, how would one know this?

Verification from people who HAVE visited and spoken with school personnel.

In a previous post, I listed the numerous opportunities parents at my local W school have to get to know about Waldorf Ed and anthroposophy.

As I recall, almost all of these were available to parents, not prospective parents.

Relatively few are interested, as a matter of fact, though conferences featuring Joseph Chilton Pearce (who supports WE) are always well-attended.

He's lecturing at my kid's school next week. I won't be attending. Anyone is able to fall for the superficial view of Waldorf. Howard Gardner, for example, talked highly about Waldorf and then retracted his support. I don't have the link handy, but I'd be happy to provide it.

The majority of Waldorf school websites have links to AWSNA, SpiritWorking, the E-library, the Anthroposophical Society website and so on. A simple internet search will bring up thousands of links, including many to the Critics' websites or message boards.

Any links to PLANS or Waldorf Critics that you know of?

In this day and age it is simply impossible to hide anything about Waldorf Ed -- no school can prevent parents from finding information (and sadly, misinformation) about Waldorf Ed or anthroposophy.

That's why I'm here. To help Waldorf reveal itself to parents.


Pete

[Serena Blaue]

Originally Posted by Pete

He's lecturing at my kid's school next week. I won't be attending. Anyone is able to fall for the superficial view of Waldorf. Howard Gardner, for example, talked highly about Waldorf and then retracted his support. I don't have the link handy, but I'd be happy to provide it.

Pete

Pete, you are not correct here; Howard Gardner is still supportive of many of the ideas/methods of Waldorf Ed.

He added a caveat only after being lobbied by PLANS, which misinformed him that Waldorf educators were squashing discussion about WE methods. Dr. Gardner has no direct knowledge of this, only the misinformation that PLANS has fed him.

See http://www.waldorfcritics.org/

In fact, Waldorf educators are very happy to speak about Waldorf methods; look at all the conferences and internet forums about WE throughout the US and the world.

However, educators (and parent/grandparent supporters like myself) object to the current hate/smear campaign that attempts to defame and destroy WE by implying there is a connection between Hitler and Steiner and that one can find Hitler's sources for the Holocaust in anthroposophy. Or that WE sets out deliberately to "convert" children and their parents to anthroposophy.

All of the parents on this board who have children who are happy in their Waldorf school or preschool are injured when false claims like this are broadcast on a public board. I am one of these parents (or a grandparent to be exact). For example, your sentence above implies that we parents are/were duped or deficient because we supposedly "fell for the superficial view of Waldorf."

I would like to see some respect for us parents who have made the decision to place their children in Waldorf schools and who are satisfied with this decision and -- even with the usual ups and downs of school life -- are delighted with what we see in our children and grandchildren.

Serena

[lauren]

Cynthia Mosher, the board administrator has requested the following:

So, until we can do this, and we will try to do so as quickly as possible, we are closing and/or removing some threads for review and asking for a pause on debate and discussions with a critical tone.

If anyone has not seen her Attention Please post, please see it now:

http://69.20.14.30/discussions/showthread.php?t=350003

This thread will also be locked if this continuing debate between a small circle of members continues.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue

Pete, you are not correct here; Howard Gardner is still supportive of many of the ideas/methods of Waldorf Ed.

I think if you will look closer you will see that the methods he supports have nothing to do with Waldorf ed - but some of them run parallel to Waldorf ed.

He added a caveat only after being lobbied by PLANS, which misinformed him that Waldorf educators were squashing discussion about WE methods. Dr. Gardner has no direct knowledge of this, only the misinformation that PLANS has fed him.

:LOL Perhaps someone should email him and let him know.

See http://www.waldorfcritics.org/

In fact, Waldorf educators are very happy to speak about Waldorf methods; look at all the conferences and internet forums about WE throughout the US and the world.

How many of them that are hosted by Waldorf or Anthroposophists groups allow critical discussion?

However, educators (and parent/grandparent supporters like myself) object to the current hate/smear campaign that attempts to defame and destroy WE by implying there is a connection between Hitler and Steiner and that one can find Hitler's sources for the Holocaust in anthroposophy. Or that WE sets out deliberately to "convert" children and their parents to anthroposophy.

Glad all this could be tied together somehow... Why are you bringing these things into this thread when you know other threads have been locked up over this type of debate?

All of the parents on this board who have children who are happy in their Waldorf school or preschool are injured when false claims like this are broadcast on a public board.

I'd like to withdraw any claims that I have made that are demonstrably false. Can you point them out to me?

I am one of these parents (or a grandparent to be exact). For example, your sentence above implies that we parents are/were duped or deficient because we supposedly "fell for the superficial view of Waldorf."

That's not what I said at all. Every parent with a child in Waldorf may have done all the necessary research and wants their child in exactly the Waldorf school they have chosen. I have no way of knowing this. All I said was that people even at the highest levels of education can be (and have been) duped. I'm not making any remarks against parents here who have their children in Waldorf.

I would like to see some respect for us parents who have made the decision to place their children in Waldorf schools and who are satisfied with this decision and -- even with the usual ups and downs of school life -- are delighted with what we see in our children and grandchildren.

I have nothing but respect for these parents - especially knowing how difficult it is to make the right decision and ride the roller-coaster of school life. I have never said that parents who have thoroughly researched Waldorf shouldn't put their kids in Waldorf. If I have said this, please show me where and I will retract my statement.

Pete

[Pete]

Originally Posted by lauren

So, until we can do this, and we will try to do so as quickly as possible, we are closing and/or removing some threads for review and asking for a pause on debate and discussions with a critical tone.

Thanks Lauren. I don't know how to answer the question "How does Anthroposophy affect what kids are taught?" without it sounding critical to some people. I'm trying to be as civil as I can be.

This thread will also be locked if this continuing debate between a small circle of members continues.

I'll step back if it will help keep discussion open.

Pete

[LizD]

Back to the OP:


I have seen firsthand that some teachers could be considered "anthroposophists," and use many of Steiner's teachings in all aspects of their life, including how they approach teaching. I have also seen that some are Waldorf-trained and aren't necessarily as dedicated to using anthroposophy in their personal lives, though they follow the method of Waldorf teaching, obviously.

*Never* did I see that anthroposophy was, as one of the earlier posts asked, like Scientology; *never* did anyone have the impression that people were recruiting for a creepy cult. And most teachers were quite open and wry about how some of what Steiner said must be dismissed as the mistaken notions of someone who lived a long time ago, and was running around with Blavatsky and Krishnamurti. I have only found an attitude almost identical to that of La Leche League: take what you like and leave the rest. Plenty of us joked that Steiner was as nutty as a fruitcake, but hey! this guy could whip up a dolly out of a hanky in the middle of a lecture- gotta love that!

What I have seen in my experience at Waldorf schools, and Rudolf Steiner college, is respect for the child and family that I have never seen anywhere else- and I've lived a lot of places, and tried a few schools for my child- and that the teachers truly *love* the children, and are unafraid to do so. Even the "problem" kids, and even when there's bureaucratic nonsense going on as at any other school.

*That's* how anthroposophy affects what the kids are taught. Not in terms of curricula (which is constantly evolving, as I saw at Rudolf Steiner College) or proselytising to the children or parents. My daughter felt loved at that school, even by the older children, and by the teachers of upper classes. There was an atmosphere of joy and love that I have never felt at any other elementary school.

[lauraess]

Originally Posted by Pete

I'm not sure what you have said above, but it sounds like an attempt at sarcasm. And no, I have no faith in Waldorf other than a faith that any trust I put in them will be violated.

Not an attempt, just most likely sounding like it since often i am.  I do think parents should have things very clear in this situation and AT THE SAME TIME understand  composting to not make up for even half the trashing of our world, but the value it teaches is more important to me than the pedagogy at waldorf. 


Fine - but it's not OK to slip spirituality into the mix without telling the parents. It's dishonest.
<I simply have not seen this in my experiences.>Lauraess

Well, even a broken watch is right twice a day. Sure some parents might feel fine when they discover what they have stumbled into. The blurred disclosures are huge red flags, however, that say "We are willing to lie to parents" - and as I said, no, I don't have faith in Waldorf. And if you think Waldorf is nothing more than a simple alternative to a fact-based education, I would suggest you do some research on your own. If you are representing Waldorf as an alternative to a fact-based education knowing that it is a spiritual education based in Anthroposophy then I would suggest you are adding to the deception.

Pete

I Do not think anything simple about Waldorf education actually.  For me personally it's beyond words that i can explain why it works for us and what it is to us.  I'm not a representative but Do think Waldorf as an alternative to other educations is valid as there are both fact and spiritual aspects taught. 


[sntm]

LizD, thanks for your comments. That's relieving. I had started to get the impression that Steiner's word was treated as gospel, but it sounds like some of the schools at least take the positive and leave the negative. There are certainly other famously influential people who had a few really awful/stupid beliefs (I say living in Thomas Jefferson land) so as long as the teachers appear to recognize that, I'll give it consideration.

Part of my problem was the first time I went to see the school, I was a little intimidated and didn't ask my usual barrage of high-maintainance-parent questions, so I left with warm fuzzies and a lot of uncertainty. I just need to be upfront with them about my questions/concerns, and if it makes them uncomfortable, well, then I'll know that we aren't meant to be there.

[Rhonwyn]

Originally Posted by LizD

Back to the OP:


I have seen firsthand that some teachers could be considered "anthroposophists," and use many of Steiner's teachings in all aspects of their life, including how they approach teaching. I have also seen that some are Waldorf-trained and aren't necessarily as dedicated to using anthroposophy in their personal lives, though they follow the method of Waldorf teaching, obviously.

*Never* did I see that anthroposophy was, as one of the earlier posts asked, like Scientology; *never* did anyone have the impression that people were recruiting for a creepy cult. And most teachers were quite open and wry about how some of what Steiner said must be dismissed as the mistaken notions of someone who lived a long time ago, and was running around with Blavatsky and Krishnamurti. I have only found an attitude almost identical to that of La Leche League: take what you like and leave the rest. Plenty of us joked that Steiner was as nutty as a fruitcake, but hey! this guy could whip up a dolly out of a hanky in the middle of a lecture- gotta love that!

What I have seen in my experience at Waldorf schools, and Rudolf Steiner college, is respect for the child and family that I have never seen anywhere else- and I've lived a lot of places, and tried a few schools for my child- and that the teachers truly *love* the children, and are unafraid to do so. Even the "problem" kids, and even when there's bureaucratic nonsense going on as at any other school.

*That's* how anthroposophy affects what the kids are taught. Not in terms of curricula (which is constantly evolving, as I saw at Rudolf Steiner College) or proselytising to the children or parents. My daughter felt loved at that school, even by the older children, and by the teachers of upper classes. There was an atmosphere of joy and love that I have never felt at any other elementary school.

This is been my experience too. I have yet to see teachers running around saying 'What would Steiner do?' or sporting bumperstickers that say 'WWSD'. If they do have bumperstickers they say things like 'Save Mother Earth!'

Our 4th grade teacher has repeatedly said that she is continually reading many different sources and gleaning from them things that she feels helps her work with the children. She doesn't just read Steiner. She reads other philosphers, mainstream texts on education, and other materials. Our 2nd grade teacher often brings in articles for parents to read from many different sources. Some are Waldorf but most are mainstream publication studies on TV, computers, etc.

[Serena Blaue]

Originally Posted by lauren

Cynthia Mosher, the board administrator has requested the following:

So, until we can do this, and we will try to do so as quickly as possible, we are closing and/or removing some threads for review and asking for a pause on debate and discussions with a critical tone.

If anyone has not seen her Attention Please post, please see it now:

http://69.20.14.30/discussions/showthread.php?t=350003

This thread will also be locked if this continuing debate between a small circle of members continues.

Lauren,

I wonder if I am the only poster who is puzzled. During the last two days, one member in particular has posted over 7 messages with a highly critical tone directed at Waldorf education & Waldorf teachers -- but you haven't commented on them at all, even when one post came in after your warning. It feels somehow off kilter to me that one person is allowed to post highly negative comments but when I respond (especially to misinformation) I am scolded.

We really need some clarity and guidance here, please!

Serena

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue

Lauren,

I wonder if I am the only poster who is puzzled. During the last two days, one member in particular has posted over 7 messages with a highly critical tone directed at Waldorf education & Waldorf teachers -- but you haven't commented on them at all, even when one post came in after your warning. It feels somehow off kilter to me that one person is allowed to post highly negative comments but when I respond (especially to misinformation) I am scolded.

We really need some clarity and guidance here, please!

Serena

Perhaps a review of your earlier post that preceeded Lauren's admonishment might help clarify and guide you:

"However, educators (and parent/grandparent supporters like myself) object to the current hate/smear campaign that attempts to defame and destroy WE by implying there is a connection between Hitler and Steiner and that one can find Hitler's sources for the Holocaust in anthroposophy. Or that WE sets out deliberately to "convert" children and their parents to anthroposophy."

Maybe, if you can't resist reproducing these negative and inflamatory remarks and characterizations on every thread, you could at least post an in front of them. You're upset that anyone would disagree with your assessment of Waldorf - I think we all get it.

Pete

[Pete]

Regarding Sarcastic tone:

Originally Posted by lauraess

Not an attempt, just most likely sounding like it since often i am.

OK, but it's against the rules here - I thought you might like to know.

I do think parents should have things very clear in this situation and AT THE SAME TIME understand composting to not make up for even half the trashing of our world, but the value it teaches is more important to me than the pedagogy at waldorf.

Not interested in debating the merits of composting here.

I Do not think anything simple about Waldorf education actually. For me personally it's beyond words that i can explain why it works for us and what it is to us. I'm not a representative but Do think Waldorf as an alternative to other educations is valid as there are both fact and spiritual aspects taught.

I don't disagree with anything you have said above (even what you couldn't put into words .

Pete

[Serena Blaue]

Originally Posted by Pete

Perhaps a review of your earlier post that preceeded Lauren's admonishment might help clarify and guide you:

"However, educators (and parent/grandparent supporters like myself) object to the current hate/smear campaign that attempts to defame and destroy WE by implying there is a connection between Hitler and Steiner and that one can find Hitler's sources for the Holocaust in anthroposophy. Or that WE sets out deliberately to "convert" children and their parents to anthroposophy."

Maybe, if you can't resist reproducing these negative and inflamatory remarks and characterizations on every thread, you could at least post an in front of them. You're upset that anyone would disagree with your assessment of Waldorf - I think we all get it.

Pete

I get the joke! :LOL

Thing is, if those horrible connections had not already been made on Mothering Board, I wouldn't feel the need to respond to them, would I?

We still need some clarity and guidance.

Serena

[Pete]

Originally Posted by LizD

Back to the OP:
I have seen firsthand that some teachers could be considered "anthroposophists," and use many of Steiner's teachings in all aspects of their life, including how they approach teaching. I have also seen that some are Waldorf-trained and aren't necessarily as dedicated to using anthroposophy in their personal lives, though they follow the method of Waldorf teaching, obviously.

I have seen a few of these too.

*Never* did I see that anthroposophy was, as one of the earlier posts asked, like Scientology; *never* did anyone have the impression that people were recruiting for a creepy cult.

It's funny - the Scientology comparison came up in discussions on another list. I am leaning toward the notion that Anthroposophy is really quite close to Scientology (but perhaps less organized). The doctrine of Scientology doesn't seem any more strange than that of Anthroposophy. And I'm not trying to say anything "negative" here - one needs to consider how they *would* feel if they enrolled their child in a school only to find out later it was run by Scientologists. I'd suspect most people know more about Scientology than Anthroposophy.

And most teachers were quite open and wry about how some of what Steiner said must be dismissed as the mistaken notions of someone who lived a long time ago, and was running around with Blavatsky and Krishnamurti.

I don't know that Steiner was "running around" with them - although he may be now...

I have only found an attitude almost identical to that of La Leche League: take what you like and leave the rest.

Oh, if only that were true world-wide.

Plenty of us joked that Steiner was as nutty as a fruitcake, but hey! this guy could whip up a dolly out of a hanky in the middle of a lecture- gotta love that!

Steiner is not someone you ridicule in Waldorf environments. I'd be surprized if this happened very often.

What I have seen in my experience at Waldorf schools, and Rudolf Steiner college, is respect for the child and family that I have never seen anywhere else- and I've lived a lot of places, and tried a few schools for my child- and that the teachers truly *love* the children, and are unafraid to do so. Even the "problem" kids, and even when there's bureaucratic nonsense going on as at any other school.

This is quite the opposite from my own experience. Not trying to invalidate your experience, but suggesting that it is not universal - any more than mine is.

*That's* how anthroposophy affects what the kids are taught. Not in terms of curricula (which is constantly evolving, as I saw at Rudolf Steiner College) or proselytising to the children or parents. My daughter felt loved at that school, even by the older children, and by the teachers of upper classes. There was an atmosphere of joy and love that I have never felt at any other elementary school.

Yes, I would agree that this exists in the children - even in some very troubled schools. But again, the "what kids are taught" part of the question certainly implies at least some focus on curriculum. Do kids grow up to be good citizens in Waldorf? Some do, some don't. That's the real story.

Pete

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue

I get the joke! :LOL

Thing is, if those horrible connections had not already been made on Mothering Board, I wouldn't feel the need to respond to them, would I?

We still need some clarity and guidance.

Serena

Nobody is suggesting you shouldn't respond to them, but I'm suggesting they don't need to be responded to in every thread. Those "horrible connections" are off topic here - but hey, have fun!

Pete

[LizD]

Another thing that I found in terms of positive effects of Anthroposophical thinking on how the children are taught, to continue with my thougts on the children feeling loved, is the very detailed attention paid by teachers, IME, to how they appear to the children. I haven't met many, if any, other teachers who really talk about how the children *feel* and how very young they are, and how very gentle teachers need to be with them. So even though a discussion on whether or not kindergarten teachers should wear trousers, or whether elementary teachers should wear black, may sound cuckoo, it comes from the idea that even these things- appearances- contribute to the child feeling safe and loved and nourished in his class environment, and therefore how receptive he and the teacher will be to each other and the work that needs to be done (I mean math and science and all that). That was the spirit that I have yet to see elsewhere. There were two teachers I thought could be real pills at faculty meetings; but the children loved them. My remark about upper class teachers should be elaborated thus: I remember at my own elementary school, and at other schools my child has attended, children would often be frightened by teachers of upper grade students or the assistant principal or even their own teacher! My daughter's impressions as a kindergartener and first grader were that Mr so-and-so and Mrs such-and-such were nice, warm, loving people. They greeted everyone with smiles and real love. Discipline, when needed, was talking-to type discipline (like when a seventh grader wrote something obscene on the bathroom door once-the biggest scandal the school ever had!).

That's the value of those verses and meditations we teachers used. Some folks get freaked out that teachers are praying together or praying with the students, but it wasn't like that. How bizarre and defensive it feels to have to say, "it wasn't like that!" And I am quite an anti-religious atheist most of the time. It centered one and reminded one that there was really important work going on- like taking your shoes off when entering a temple or yoga studio or birth center. Sure, a lot of us fell short, but at least that's what we were trying to do, along with teaching real math and reading and music and history and everything else. Even if there are some nutty dedicated anthropops at your school, I can say that stuff is worth the exasperation for the great education your kids will get, if the school and teacher you have are good.