Mothering Forum banner

Dishonest/evasive waldorf teacher...

14K views 185 replies 32 participants last post by  lauren 
#1 ·
I've wanted ds to go to Waldorf, but now i'm having really big second thoughts because of the experience we're having with one of the teachers right now. She's lied to me once, and it seems like every time ds's dad or i try to talk to her that she's very evasive and just wont give a straight answer about anything (re starting kindercottage in sept). There are a few things that are weirding me out right now, and i'm having serious doubts. I mean, really, if the teacher cant be honest and straightforward with the parents, then what kind of role model is she going to be for young impressionable children? I'm wondering if this is just our experience with this one person, or if all waldorf teachers are so evasive? There are so many things about waldorf that i love, but i'm getting really turned off by the secrecy and lack of communication.
 
#153 ·
I just read all of this thread, and I feel compelled to respond. Before I do, I just want to give a little info about myself. I'm a college student studying to become an early childhood teacher. Last winter I interned for two months at a Waldorf elementary school because I was curious about their arts-inclusive curriculum and the 'magical' feel so many ascribe to the classrooms. My experience was mixed, though not because I felt that crucial secrets were being kept or students endangered.

First, additional (((hugs))) to those who have come forward here. I don't think these stories are unique to Waldorf schools, but the private school legal situation and community/cult feeling certainly seems to amplify things.

It's been my general gut feeling with Waldorf that most of Steiner's results (arts being given a key role, the beauty of the classrooms, instilling in children a healthy respect for nature) are wonderful, if you can get past his anthroposophical explanations
for why they should be that way.

Seeing Waldorf from a teacher/observer's perspective was really illuminating. A lot of the secrecy at the school I interned for seemed to stem from enrollment issues. The school desperately needed increased enrollment and the tuition that would come with it. Being brutally honest with prospective parents about the occult aspects of anthroposophy that affect the teachers and their treatment of students, if not the lesson plans, would likely drive away families they could not afford to lose. Unfortunately, the private school is a business that needs tuition to continue to run. Businesses tend to be selective in what they tell stockholders. Of course, this does not excuse endangering students' lives or subjecting them to abuse of any kind, but it does explain (again, but not really excuse) teachers' reluctance to give a reason for denying children black crayons.

I seriously considered going for Waldorf teaching certification after college, but I've decided against it, because anthroposophy just doesn't go with my gut. I hope that none of us forget the dream of Waldorf, the vision we had when we first looked into the schools. We all seem to have thought it was something similar, and there's validity to that vision. Let's hold on to it.

(((more hugs for all))) Thanks for letting me say my piece, and best of luck to you all, especially those who are having school troubles right now!
 
#154 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by blackestduckest

I seriously considered going for Waldorf teaching certification after college, but I've decided against it, because anthroposophy just doesn't go with my gut. I hope that none of us forget the dream of Waldorf, the vision we had when we first looked into the schools. We all seem to have thought it was something similar, and there's validity to that vision. Let's hold on to it.

Thanks for joining the discussion, blackestduckest.

I haven't yet added my general views of private schools based on my own experience there, too. It is my opinion that private schools often have more obscurity as to their motives/agendas precisely because they can since they are private. It is one of the privileges inherent in making the school a private one. So private Waldorf schools sometimes combine what appears to be a double-layer of obscurity.
 
#155 ·
Thanks blackestduckest for joining in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackestduckest
Seeing Waldorf from a teacher/observer's perspective was really illuminating. A lot of the secrecy at the school I interned for seemed to stem from enrollment issues. The school desperately needed increased enrollment and the tuition that would come with it. Being brutally honest with prospective parents about the occult aspects of anthroposophy that affect the teachers and their treatment of students, if not the lesson plans, would likely drive away families they could not afford to lose. Unfortunately, the private school is a business that needs tuition to continue to run. Businesses tend to be selective in what they tell stockholders. Of course, this does not excuse endangering students' lives or subjecting them to abuse of any kind, but it does explain (again, but not really excuse) teachers' reluctance to give a reason for denying children black crayons.
"Renewal - A Journal for Waldorf Education" - for those who don't know, is a Waldorf magazine sometimes distributed to families who are in Waldorf education. In the Spring/Summer issue, Volume 14, Number 1, p44 is an excellent article by Deirdre Johnson, someone who apparently "gets it". The article is called "Building Enrollment in a Waldorf School" and Ms. Johnson describes how important it is to fit the students to the school - and that by doing so, schools benefit and students benefit. Some students need to be turned away from Waldorf - some parents, it is clear, are not interested in what Waldorf really is. Ms. Johnson, while working as an enrollment consultant, took it upon herself to learn about other schools in the area and, after assessing a family's needs, in some cases, directed parents to a completely different school. The benefits were threefold (Steiner would have loved it). First, and most importantly, the children benefitted from being in the type of school the parents could wholeheartedly support. Second, the community benefitted from the service and the school's standing in the community was enhanced. And third, the school itself benefitted in that there were far fewer dissatisfied parents who criticized the school or the education they thought they were going to get but didn't. There is NO benefit to deceiving parents. From the article:

"I viewed my aim not as filling our own classes but as helping to find a good fit between family and school, putting the needs of the child foremost.

"This approach also benefits the school. Good word of mouth is the best advertising for a school. Having students for whom the school is a good fit, who thrive, and whose parents are happy with the school creates a positive image in the community. It does a school no good to have a child and family become part of the school and then to leave dissatisfied and disenchanted. Having students whose needs are not met creates dissatisfied parents and negative feelings toward the school. Bad word of mouth can really hurt a school, and it is very hard to counteract. Since each class has limited openings, it makes sense to fill them with students who will be well served."


This approach has my FULL support (as you can probably tell) and the approach of hiding the difficult aspects of the school in order to fill seats, only to see them empty again is simply dishonest.

Pete
 
#156 ·
AWSNA - the Association of Waldorf Schools in North America - provides information to prospective Waldorf parents. It is AWSNA that has trademarked the name "Waldorf" and restricts schools that do not meet AWSNA's requirements from using it. Is it possible that AWSNA is complicit in producing dishonest and evasive information that is intended to paint an easy-to-swallow picture of Waldorf education? From AWSNA's FAQ's:

Q: "What is Eurythmy?"

A: "Eurythmy is the art of movement that attempts to make visible the tone and feeling of music and speech. Eurythmy helps to develop concentration, self-discipline, and a sense of beauty. This training of moving artistically with a group stimulates sensitivity to the other as well as individual mastery. Eurythmy lessons follow the themes of the curriculum, exploring rhyme, meter, story, and geometric forms."

Four sentences? That's all they give to Eurythmy - a subject that children will have every single year through
high school? Note that there is no mention of Anthroposophy, no mention even of "spiritual" activity. Is that not being evasive? Let's recall what Steiner said:

"In this respect anthroposophy was broadened in its third phase through the introduction of eurythmy. No one can ever claim that eurythmy is based on anything other that the sources of anthroposophy. Everything is taken from the sources of anthroposophy."

Eurythmy IS anthroposophy. There is no such thing as non-anthroposophical Eurythmy. Yet AWSNA chooses to deliberately hide this fact - refuses to even acknowledge a connection to Anthroposophy or any other spiritual processes. Anthroposophists use Eurythmy for everything from curing headaches to straightening crooked teeth. It's not just an art form to them - so why not say so?

If AWSNA is also complicit in the deceptive behavior of the Waldorf movement, then there is little hope for honesty in advertising of Waldorf. AWSNA needs to set a much higher standard and be a shining example of what Waldorf schools should aspire to. When misinformation is allowed to continue at the highest levels of the Waldorf movement, dishonest, evasive behavior is to be expected at the lower levels.

Pete
 
#157 ·
Another Q&A from the AWSNA FAQ Web page:

Q: "Are Waldorf schools religious?"

A: "Waldorf schools are non-sectarian and non-denominational. They educate all children, regardless of their cultural or religious backgrounds. The pedagogical method is comprehensive, and, as part of its task, seeks to bring about recognition and understanding of all the world cultures and religions. Waldorf schools are not part of any church. They espouse no particular religious doctrine but are based on a belief that there is a spiritual dimension to the human being and to all of life. Waldorf families come from a broad spectrum of religious traditions and interest."

Tiptoeing around the truth is not helpful to parents. When we read Steiner's own words:

"Never call a verse a prayer, call it an opening verse before school. Avoid allowing anyone to hear you, as a faculty member, using the word 'prayer.'"

And here's how Steiner said anthroposophical religious instruction could be brought to the children:

"In the lower four grades, we will attempt to discuss the things and processes in the human environment, so that a feeling arises in the children that spirit lives in nature. We can consider such things as my previous examples. We can, for instance, give the children the idea of the soul. Of course, the children first need to learn to understand the idea of life in general. You can teach the children
about life if you direct their attention to the fact that people are first small and then they grow, become old, get white hair, wrinkles, and so forth. Thus, you tell them about the seriousness of the course of human life and acquaint them with the seriousness of the fact of death, something the children already know.

Therefore, you need to discuss what occurs in the human soul during the changes between sleeping and waking. You can certainly go into such things with even the youngest children in the first group. Discuss how waking and sleeping look, how the soul rests, how the human being rests during sleep, and so forth. Then, tell the children how the soul permeates the body when it awakens and indicate to them that there is a will that causes their limbs to move. Make them aware that the body provides the soul with senses through which they can see and hear and so forth. You can
give them such things as proof that the spiritual is active in the physical. Those are things you can discuss with the children."

[FACULTY MEETINGS with Rudolf Steiner September 26, 1919 Page 83 ]

How about AWSNA's statement about "Waldorf schools are not part of any church." But Waldorf schools are part of the Anthroposophical movement - no question. And within the Anthroposophical movement, there are, in fact, churches - they are called the Christian Community Church - they are churches for Anthroposophists.

"They espouse no particular religious doctrine but are based on a belief that there is a spiritual dimension to the human being and to all of life."

That's not correct either. Anthroposophy is a religious doctrine! And Anthroposophy is based in Christianity. The problem that most parents have in recognizing this (other than teachers insisting they are not religious despite Raphael's Madonna and Child on the wall) is that Steiner's view of Christianity is rather different than what most people are accustomed to. The holy trinity for Anthroposophists is Lucifer, Ahriman and Christ. Waldorf schools celebrate Christian traditions and festivals and while they might slip a Kwansa song in a student performance once a year, there is no doubt Waldorf schools are very influenced by Christianity, albeit very warped Christianity.

Again, I believe AWSNA should make some effort to be honest about how they describe and present Waldorf education. It is dishonest to make glib statements like the one above and to tiptoe around the truth. Again, AWSNA needs to lead the way if Waldorf shools are going to recover from what is coming to light through public awareness as a scandalous and deliberate attempt to betray the public trust.

Pete
 
#158 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
Tiptoeing around the truth is not helpful to parents. When we read Steiner's own words: "Never call a verse a prayer, call it an opening verse before school. Avoid allowing anyone to hear you, as a faculty member, using the word 'prayer.'"

Anthroposophy is a religious doctrine! And Anthroposophy is based in Christianity.
In fairness, that quote could be interpreted as Steiner defining the difference between prayer and verse - prayers as 'religious' and verses 'spiritual'. Steiner I believe considered anthroposophy a 'spiritual' movement - not religious at all.

Yet the manner in which many anthroposophists approach anthroposophy is unquestionably religious, again something Steiner may have been trying to warn against and avoid. And that's the history of human philosophical thought: one leader's personally-inspired envisioning becomes the religious doctrine and dogma of his/her followers.

And Anthroposophy isn't based on Christianity: it is Christianity. Steiner believed Anthroposophy was the new path to Christ. So, no point tiptoeing around the truth. Yes, "they educate all children, regardless of their cultural or religious backgrounds". But they're educating those children using a curriculum, child development principles and a community development model all of which are completely founded on and permeated with esoteric Christian tenets and principles. And not 'Buddhistic' tenets and principles or 'Islamic' tenets and principles or what have you. They are 'Christian' tenets and principles.

One could even say this is why Steiner schools exist: to promote Steiner's new path to Christ. Personally, I don't see much difference between Christian missionaries and many Steiner teachers I've come across.
 
#161 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by alanoe
In fairness, that quote could be interpreted as Steiner defining the difference between prayer and verse - prayers as 'religious' and verses 'spiritual'. Steiner I believe considered anthroposophy a 'spiritual' movement - not religious at all.
I would agree with that interpretation. However, the fact that Steiner had to correct the teachers demonstrates that at least some teachers, even back in 1919, saw the morning verse as a religious activity. I agree with the rest of what you said too...


Pete
 
#163 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by alanoe
And Anthroposophy isn't based on Christianity: it is Christianity. Steiner believed Anthroposophy was the new path to Christ. So, no point tiptoeing around the truth. Yes, "they educate all children, regardless of their cultural or religious backgrounds". But they're educating those children using a curriculum, child development principles and a community development model all of which are completely founded on and permeated with esoteric Christian tenets and principles. And not 'Buddhistic' tenets and principles or 'Islamic' tenets and principles or what have you. They are 'Christian' tenets and principles.

One could even say this is why Steiner schools exist: to promote Steiner's new path to Christ. Personally, I don't see much difference between Christian missionaries and many Steiner teachers I've come across.

Many, many traditional Christians would disagree with this, but that would be the subject of another thread, in another forum!
 
#164 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbow Brite
Whoa, just read this entire thread. I've been researching into the idea of Waldorf, and will certianly be examining things a lot closer. I'm also a public school teacher. If ANY teacher is dishonest, regardless of the type of school, it's cause for concern. Teachers shouldn't refuse to meet with parents- regardless of their personal feelings for them- that just seems suspicious to me. As for Pete possibly posting stuff online and invading privacy- I see none of that. I have no clue who he is, who his kids are, what schools he is talking about. I would be more concerned about what the parents don't know, then what is shared online here.

Pete has spoken about his school at length and it is easy to find out which school his children go to if one reads the Waldorf Critics list that is open to the pubic. Certainly, the school itself is aware of Pete's voluminous posts about the experiences and individual people who have raised his ire.

I am just pointing out that Pete's son's teacher is put into a precarious legal position when asked to have a conversation about a disputed incident and this conversation is with the very person who publicly stated that this incident was worthy of a civil suit.

What would your school ask or expect you to do under similar circumstances? How would you react to being asked to have a talk in which information could either be used against you in a civil tort and/or broadcast over the Internet? Just wondering...because I am not too surprised about Pete's son's teacher's lack of response. Under the circumstances it makes some sense.

Serena
 
#165 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue
Pete has spoken about his school at length and it is easy to find out which school his children go to if one reads the Waldorf Critics list that is open to the pubic. Certainly, the school itself is aware of Pete's voluminous posts about the experiences and individual people who have raised his ire.
I came here simply using my first name. It was the individuals here who were eager to connect me to other lists - remember? And yes, the school is aware of my opinions and that I share them freely on the internet - as is my right to do.

Quote:
I am just pointing out that Pete's son's teacher is put into a precarious legal position when asked to have a conversation about a disputed incident and this conversation is with the very person who publicly stated that this incident was worthy of a civil suit.
Yeah, what that teacher really wants to do is to ignore my requests to settle things and get off on the right foot for the coming year. I'm assuming, BTW, that this teacher is either on vacation or hasn't received my request. I think perhaps people are making a bit too much of it.

Quote:
What would your school ask or expect you to do under similar circumstances? How would you react to being asked to have a talk in which information could either be used against you in a civil tort and/or broadcast over the Internet?
Ya know - the school has threatened to sue me too. I'm half expecting they will try it some day. It doesn't stop me from coming in when they ask me to and trying to cooperate with them in everything I do. Unlike them - anything they ask of me, in the way of information, I supply them with. Unlike them, I have nothing to hide.

Quote:
Just wondering...because I am not too surprised about Pete's son's teacher's lack of response. Under the circumstances it makes some sense.
I really don't think it has anything to do with anything you've mentioned here. It's summer - people go on vacation - I'm sure he has other things to do. If I don't hear from him - I'll meet up with him as school starts. I would hate to think that anyone is hiding from me.

Pete
 
#166 ·
Once again, we have gotten off topic here. I'm tired of reading here and elsewhere how people have been treated dishonestly in Waldorf environments. New people seem to be "coming out" every day.

The question that always surfaces is the teacher's perceived connection to the child that is, according to Anthroposophy, a karmic connection that, in the opinions of some Waldorf teachers (and Steiner BTW) may be stronger than the parental bond itself. This connection, in the eyes of some, must be established and maintained and this justifies the dishonesty and evasive behavior - to them. The teachers and the children are the "US" and the parents are the "THEM".

Pete
 
#167 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
Once again, we have gotten off topic here. I'm tired of reading here and elsewhere how people have been treated dishonestly in Waldorf environments. New people seem to be "coming out" every day.

The question that always surfaces is the teacher's perceived connection to the child that is, according to Anthroposophy, a karmic connection that, in the opinions of some Waldorf teachers (and Steiner BTW) may be stronger than the parental bond itself. This connection, in the eyes of some, must be established and maintained and this justifies the dishonesty and evasive behavior - to them. The teachers and the children are the "US" and the parents are the "THEM".

Pete

Come again? Who on this board has complained that the teacher or school made it clear that they (the teacher or school) had a stronger karmic connection to the child than the parent(s)? Once again, I have to say that I have never heard of this being taught in WE training or practiced in a Waldorf School.

Can you point us to where Steiner said that teachers should work out of the assumption or knowledge that they could/should have or aim for a karmic connection that trumps the parents' connection to the child?

That said, in the life of every growing child there will (hopefully) be people
to whom he or she looks up to, admires, etc. Perhaps one or the other will be a teacher, or perhaps a friend of the family, an older relative, or someone who is doing exactly what the child aspires to do. I recently heard a wonderful story on NPR about a specialist in ants who told the story of that moment when he (as a child) finally met the man at the museum who was in charge of all the ant collections. When he was finally able to meet with him and help him one summer it changed his life and he is now himself a scientific authority on ants.

Serena
 
#168 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue
Come again? Who on this board has complained that the teacher or school made it clear that they (the teacher or school) had a stronger karmic connection to the child than the parent(s)? Once again, I have to say that I have never heard of this being taught in WE training or practiced in a Waldorf School.
Once again, I have to say your experience is different than mine.

Quote:
Can you point us to where Steiner said that teachers should work out of the assumption or knowledge that they could/should have or aim for a karmic connection that trumps the parents' connection to the child?
Sure...

"In the second stage, that is, the four upper grades, we need to discuss the concepts of fate and human destiny with the children. Thus, we need to give the children a picture of destiny so that they truly feel that human beings have a destiny. It is important to teach the child the difference between a simple chance occurrence and
destiny. Thus, you will need to go through the concept of destiny with the children. You cannot use definitions to explain when something destined occurs or when something occurs only by chance. You can, however, perhaps explain it through examples. What I mean is that when something happens to me, if I feel that the event is in some way something I sought, then that is destiny. If I do not have the feeling that it was something I sought, but have a particularly strong feeling that it overcame me, surprised me, and that I can learn a great deal for the future from it, then that is a chance event. You need to gradually teach the children about something they can experience only through feeling, namely the difference between finished karma and arising or developing karma. You need to gradually teach children about the questions of fate in the sense of karmic questions. You can find more about the differences in feeling in my book "Theosophy." For the newest edition, I rewrote the chapter, "Reincarnation and Karma", where I discuss this question. There, I tried to show how you can feel the difference. You can certainly make it clear to the children that there are actually two kinds of occurrences. In the one case, you feel that you sought it. For example, when you meet someone, you usually feel that you sought that person. In the other case, when you are involved in a natural event, you have the feeling you can learn something from it for the future. If something happens to you because of some other person, that is usually a case of fulfilled karma. Even such things as the fact that we find ourselves together in this faculty at the Waldorf School are fulfilled karma. We find ourselves here because we sought each other. We cannot comprehend that through definitions, only through feeling. You will need to speak with the children about all kinds of fates, perhaps in stories where the question of fate plays a role. You can even repeat many of the fairy tales in which questions of fate play a role. You can also find historical examples where you can show how an individual's fate was fulfilled. You should discuss the question of fate, therefore, to indicate the seriousness of life from that perspective."

[From "Faculty Meetings with Rudlof Steiner" -September 26, 1919 Page 86]

I apologize for the long quote - the text of which was retrieved from the public domain - but some people have been receiving criticism lately for splitting up long quotes and removing Steiner's frequent wanderings off the topic.

Personally, I also find it a little concerning that teachers would be instructed to discuss these types of things with children AT ALL. I wonder how many parents have been told that these types of discussions occur in Waldorf schools.

Quote:
That said, in the life of every growing child there will (hopefully) be people to whom he or she looks up to, admires, etc. Perhaps one or the other will be a teacher, or perhaps a friend of the family, an older relative, or someone who is doing exactly what the child aspires to do. I recently heard a wonderful story on NPR about a specialist in ants who told the story of that moment when he (as a child) finally met the man at the museum who was in charge of all the ant collections. When he was finally able to meet with him and help him one summer it changed his life and he is now himself a scientific authority on ants.
That's not what we're talking about here Serena. Nobody is saying teachers shouldn't be role models. What I've proposed is that teachers take Steiner's words, above, and from other sources and truly believe they are connected to the child through karma - and that this connection, to them, rivals the connection of the parents and yes, I've heard it described as more significant than the child's connection to their own parents by teachers.

Pete
 
#169 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
Once again, I have to say your experience is different than mine.Pete
Pete, I didn't realize you were only speaking about your own experiences when you wrote "I'm tired of reading here and elsewhere how people have been treated dishonestly in Waldorf environments. New people seem to be "coming out" every day."

You quote Steiner:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
"In the second stage, that is, the four upper grades, we need to discuss the concepts of fate and human destiny with the children. Thus, we need to give the children a picture of destiny so that they truly feel that human beings have a destiny. It is important to teach the child the difference between a simple chance occurrence and destiny. Thus, you will need to go through the concept of destiny with the children. You cannot use definitions to explain when something destined occurs or when something occurs only by chance. You can, however, perhaps explain it through examples. What I mean is that when something happens to me, if I feel that the event is in some way something I sought, then that is destiny. If I do not have the feeling that it was something I sought, but have a particularly strong feeling that it overcame me, surprised me, and that I can learn a great deal for the future from it, then that is a chance event. You need to gradually teach the children about something they can experience only through feeling, namely the difference between finished karma and arising or developing karma. You need to gradually teach children about the questions of fate in the sense of karmic questions. You can find more about the differences in feeling in my book "Theosophy." For the newest edition, I rewrote the chapter, "Reincarnation and Karma", where I discuss this question. There, I tried to show how you can feel the difference. You can certainly make it clear to the children that there are actually two kinds of occurrences. In the one case, you feel that you sought it. For example, when you meet someone, you usually feel that you sought that person. In the other case, when you are involved in a natural event, you have the feeling you can learn something from it for the future. If something happens to you because of some other person, that is usually a case of fulfilled karma. Even such things as the fact that we find ourselves together in this faculty at the Waldorf School are fulfilled karma. We find ourselves here because we sought each other. We cannot comprehend that through definitions, only through feeling. You will need to speak with the children about all kinds of fates, perhaps in stories where the question of fate plays a role. You can even repeat many of the fairy tales in which questions of fate play a role. You can also find historical examples where you can show how an individual's fate was fulfilled. You should discuss the question of fate, therefore, to indicate the seriousness of life from that perspective."

[From "Faculty Meetings with Rudlof [sic] Steiner" -September 26, 1919 Page 86]

I apologize for the long quote - the text of which was retrieved from the public domain - but some people have been receiving criticism lately for splitting up long quotes and removing Steiner's frequent wanderings off the topic.

Personally, I also find it a little concerning that teachers would be instructed to discuss these types of things with children AT ALL. I wonder how many parents have been told that these types of discussions occur in Waldorf schools.Pete
Pete, unless I am mistaken, teachers are not having frank talks with children about destiny and karma -- this seems to have fallen by the wayside in the evolution of WE and I question whether it was ever practiced. However, I can imagine that a child's sense for destiny and karma can come indirectly through stories, fairytales, etc. -- just as it does for us as adults. For example, the recent movie "Crash" is a karmic folktale for adults -- one I really enjoyed by the way.

Of course, if there are Waldorf grads or those who have trained in WE and know otherwise from experience, I will stand corrected. This would certainly be interesting to find out about. However, as much as I scrutinize the text, I really can't find anywhere where Steiner says (according to you)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
Pete: the teacher's perceived connection to the child that is, according to Anthroposophy, a karmic connection that, in the opinions of some Waldorf teachers (and Steiner BTW) may be stronger than the parental bond itself. This connection, in the eyes of some, must be established and maintained and this justifies the dishonesty and evasive behavior - to them.

Pete
I haven't seen this discussed in WE literature anywhere; if you have found modern WE literature that discusses why the teacher's connection to the child should trump the parents' connection, that would be interesting for us, I'm sure!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
That's not what we're talking about here Serena. Nobody is saying teachers shouldn't be role models. What I've proposed is that teachers take Steiner's words, above, and from other sources and truly believe they are connected to the child through karma - and that this connection, to them, rivals the connection of the parents and yes, I've heard it described as more significant than the child's connection to their own parents by teachers.

Pete
Pete, you are referring to what I wrote about how childen usually find other people who become mentors, role models, or leaders who inspire imitation.

If we agree with Steiner that as human beings we seek certain people out, then these special people may indeed be part of a child's fulfilled karma, leading them further along in their lives. My daughter has many people who have played this important role for her; I can as a parent decide to feel diminished or left behind -- or I can rejoice in the wisdom of her karma that she found the right people at the right time as she travels her life path. In the end, she is the one who knows the significant people in her life. And that no relationship is the same as those she has with her mother and father.

Serena

PS: I apologize if the quotes are messed up: I am just learning how to do this.
 
#170 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by lauren
Many, many traditional Christians would disagree with this, but that would be the subject of another thread, in another forum!

Hi,

I assume you're referring to my statement: "And Anthroposophy isn't based on Christianity: it is Christianity. Steiner believed Anthroposophy was the new path to Christ."

True. On the other hand, many, many spiritual students of esoteric Christianity would no doubt agree with my assessment, although most certainly wouldn't limit the knowledge boundaries of esoteric Christianity to Steiner and his philosophy.
 
#171 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Serena Blaue
Pete, unless I am mistaken, teachers are not having frank talks with children about destiny and karma -- this seems to have fallen by the wayside in the evolution of WE and I question whether it was ever practiced.
I would agree with that assessment. Much of what was documented in Steiner's many lectures to teachers has fallen by the wayside, no doubt (and from my experience and from what I've seen). There hasn't been and isn't a whole lot of transformation in the Waldorf movement since Steiner's day, but there has been some, certainly.
 
#172 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by alanoe
I would agree with that assessment. Much of what was documented in Steiner's many lectures to teachers has fallen by the wayside, no doubt (and from my experience and from what I've seen). There hasn't been and isn't a whole lot of transformation in the Waldorf movement since Steiner's day, but there has been some, certainly.
I would also agree. Frank talks - probably not, but certainly there is a lot of this type of thing brought into the children's consciousness through stories, activities and such. Do Waldorf kids learn about karma and reincarnation? Absolutely! Do they learn about destiny? Absolutely! Do they learn that they have a karmic connection to their teacher? I can say that each of my children was told this (very frankly, I might add) by their teachers - some by several teachers. You bet they get this - maybe not always in the frank way Steiner describes (and reading the context of what I posted, this is what he described for the older children) but certainly in any number of other ways.

Pete
 
#173 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete
Do Waldorf kids learn about karma and reincarnation? Absolutely! Do they learn about destiny? Absolutely! Do they learn that they have a karmic connection to their teacher? I can say that each of my children was told this (very frankly, I might add) by their teachers - some by several teachers. You bet they get this - maybe not always in the frank way Steiner describes (and reading the context of what I posted, this is what he described for the older children) but certainly in any number of other ways.
Good points, although I wonder what you're referring to when you say they learn about karma and reincarnation through 'stories'? I'm not aware of specific stories that are taught with the intention of introducing children to these ideas. And are you saying introducing these things to children is wrong, or that parents need to be fully informed as to what exactly is being taught?
 
#174 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by alanoe
Good points, although I wonder what you're referring to when you say they learn about karma and reincarnation through 'stories'? I'm not aware of specific stories that are taught with the intention of introducing children to these ideas. And are you saying introducing these things to children is wrong, or that parents need to be fully informed as to what exactly is being taught?
Stories like the Rainbow Bridge. And yes, I'm saying parents need to be informed (and usually aren't) that these concepts are being taught.

Pete
 
#175 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by alanoe
Good points, although I wonder what you're referring to when you say they learn about karma and reincarnation through 'stories'? I'm not aware of specific stories that are taught with the intention of introducing children to these ideas. And are you saying introducing these things to children is wrong, or that parents need to be fully informed as to what exactly is being taught?
Lots of other stories too - Mother Holle (karma), and reincarnation is, of course, in the butterfly themes of the kindergarten.

Pete
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top