Waldorf
Waldorf. Let’s talk about Waldorf. See, there’s a lot that’s very appealing about these schools; and a lot that’s very off-putting.
PRO: They provide a calm and beautiful environment for children.
The aesthetics of Waldorf are one of the first things that draws prospective parents. Trust me, I realize exactly how much my class background is showing when I start to enthuse about the natural hand-crafted everythings; it doesn’t change the fact that this is exactly what I want for my kids. Waldorf educators believe that children’s toys should be very simple, so as to encourage imaginative play, but of the highest possible quality: so hand-made dolls; simple wooden play structures and bright-colored silks (real silk, natch, hand-dyed and hand-hemmed) that can be turned into anything from a stage curtain to a superhero cape to a princess skirt; genuine beeswax crayons and paints made from natural plant pigments; handcrafted wooden toys; and so forth. Everything is hand-made from natural materials. The food served to the children is organic and often grown on premises. Yadda yadda.
CON: They are weirdly proscriptive about how children are supposed to use the provided materials.
For instance, they remove the color black from the crayons provided to the younger kids (black is too harsh for their delicate spirits). They don’t allow the kids to paint houses and stick figures in their watercolors, but instead lead them through a series of abstract watercolor shapes that are supposed to represent the developing soul. Yes, you’re seeing a flash of the woo-woo behind the Waldorf.
PRO: They spend a lot of time outdoors, emphasizing our connection to the natural world and learning about the changing seasons.
This is a good article about Waldorf’s commitment to outdoor learning. There’s really no con to this aspect of Waldorf; I’m wholly in favor. There’s some woo-woo here too but it’s far enough backgrounded that I don’t care.
PRO:For young children, they don’t attempt to do academic drills, but rather immerse the children in an environment of storytelling, music, art, dance, and imaginative play. They are really serious about the arts.
Waldorf educators believe children should experience live performances rather than just recorded ones, and similarly, that teachers should tell stories rather than simply reading from books (the idea being that kids learn more about the fundamentals of language when they are engaged in the process of storytelling rather than hearing the same words recited over and over). These stories are often Grimm fairy tales—the originals. Can you fathom how rare it is to find teachers who are telling the original fairy tales, not the Disneyfied versions, to kids these days? I think that’s awesome.
The Waldorf dance program is called Eurythmy and it incorporates some stuff that’s sort of similar to yoga.
CON:Again, the woo-woo. Eurythmy isn’t just a performing art, it’s—like yoga—a spiritual exercise. I’m more or less okay with this, except I don’t like how the newage spiritual content is being disguised as pedagogy. They’re not up front about it at all.
PRO:Waldorf preschools and kindergartens create a delightful, magical environment for small children.
The teachers often tell stories about gnomes: little felt gnomes are common in Waldorf classrooms, and when they go on walks the children are encouraged to look for gnome-homes or evidence of gnomish passage. This is adorable.
CON:It’s very likely that the teacher actually believes the gnomes are real.
“Our lead kindergarten teacher is very upfront that she believes in gnomes,” responded [a Waldorf] parent. “Before their weekly walk in the forest, the kindergartens ask the gnomes (who, after all, live there) for permission to enter.”
“But do they really believe in gnomes?” persisted the first parent.
“Trust me, they believe it,” Diane Winters asserted. She’s a former Waldorf classroom aide in Philadelphia and now a vocal critic of Waldorf education because of her growing concerns with the schools’ philosophy.
“Do you believe in gnomes?” I asked Waldorf parent Leah Spilchen at an Ottawa Waldorf school open house last spring. “Yes, I do,” answered Spilchen unequivocally. “But I don’t believe that they would look like what we think of as gnomes because they are spirits, and we can’t see them.”
I received similar responses from the half-dozen other Waldorf supporters whom I queried on the topic. Ernst Von Bezold, who represents Waldorf schools on the board of directors for the Ontario Federation of Independent Schools, believes gnomes are “nature’s spirits” and says he is open to believing that some people have seen them. He claims he has seen angels.
“Steiner [Rudolph Steiner is the founder of Waldorf] taught that if you didn’t make spiritual progression over successive lifetimes, you come back as a gnome,” explains Philadelphia’s Diana Winters.
Source: http://www.religionnewsblog.com/1213
PRO:These Waldorf people are so nice.
CON:These Waldorf people are crazy.
Here’s the thing: Waldorf educators believe in almost everything I do when it comes to early education. An emphasis on free play, art and storytelling, and outdoor time—check. Simple but high-quality classroom materials—check. Child-led learning—well, not so much, because they have a secret agenda.
Their agenda is Anthroposophy, Rudolph Steiner’s wacky religion. Anthroposophists believe that an evil entity called Ahriman is close to manifesting in the world (he can already influence it through television and other electronic devices). To fight Ahriman, humanity must be raised to its highest spiritual level—Anthroposophists believe that a person who is sufficiently spiritually developed can manifest psychic powers. As far as I can tell, Waldorf schools are kind of a secret training camp in this holy war, and their true purpose is to create psychic soldiers who will be able to fight Ahriman when the time comes.
Now, I frankly find this kind of awesome, but you can see how I’d be reluctant to hand a kid over to these people.
And the thing is, Waldorf educators will deny that anthroposophy forms a basis of the curriculum, but only because Steiner told them to say that.
[W]ith these things the outer form is of the utmost importance. Never call the verse a “prayer” but a “school opening verse.” Do see to it that people do not hear the expression “prayer” used by a teacher. This will go a long way towards overcoming the prejudice that this is an anthroposophical school.
We must worm our way through…[I]n order to do what we want to do, at least, it is necessary to talk with the people, not because we want to, but because we have to, and inwardly make fools of them.
Steiner, Rudolf (1920). Conferences with Teachers of the Waldorf School in Stuttgart, 1919 to 1920, Volume One. Forest Row, East Sussex: Steiner Schools Fellowship Publications, 1986. Quotations sourced from waldorfcritics.org
So, okay. Waldorf is run by newage woo-woo types. Their intentions are good, and their methods are mostly good, but they actively seek to deceive parents about the occult basis of some of their pedagogy, which is double-plus ungood.
On the other hand, because they have a commitment to keeping this anthroposophy stuff secret, they also don’t foist it on the kids. All the kids know is that they’re supposed to make these shapes in the watercolor, or lift their arms in a certain way in the dance: they don’t have any idea that it’s because these exercises are supposed to unlock their latent psychic powers. Most Waldorf graduates come out of the school without any initiation into the occult basis of Steiner education, most go on to do well, and most look back fondly on their hippie-crunchy school experience. But some feel that they were harmed by the experience: “The effects of Waldorf’s educational program gradually accumulated in our heads and hearts. After I had been at the school only a few years, the notion of trying to see the world clearly had lost almost all meaning for me. Everything seemed to me symbolic rather than concrete—although what the symbols stood for was vague.”
Also, although I do believe that modern Waldorf schools, especially those in liberal cities like San Francisco, have mostly rid themselves of this baggage, Rudolph Steiner was very racist and there’s a lot of racism coded into anthroposophy.
All in all, I would consider Waldorf for preschool and maybe kindergarten, but no farther than that. I would ask a lot of questions of the teachers in the specific school I was considering. I would keep a very close eye on what kinds of things were going on the classroom. Waldorf schools do a lot of things right, and they actually seem to work pretty well—in terms of producing happy and successful adults, at least. Their success in producing psychic warriors seems minimal.
February 5th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
I’ve had some concerns about Waldorf for a while, but this is the best explanation I’ve read for what’s wrong with it (and what’s right with it). Thanks!
Another thing that I find odd, from what I’ve heard about our local “Waldorf-inspired” schools, is that children have to learn things on their own, and can’t be “helped along;” thus, one local Waldorf day care/preschool won’t help toddlers learn to walk by holding their hands, and another school won’t teach children to read unless they seek it out (I’m not sure what this entails, exactly)–hence, a second-grader who cannot read at all. (I don’t know if she went on to learn how to read the next year, or if she still cannot read.) I agree with everything you wrote before about not rushing the academic stuff, but that seems like a bit much to me.
They do have great dolls, though. 🙂
February 5th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Second graders who can’t read are very common in Waldorf — I think third grade is when they introduce reading.
I didn’t mention this because when I came across it I simply thought, “oh, well, I’d teach Robin myself.” Reading was such a great pleasure for me as a child (and through life, obviously) that I don’t want to delay Robin’s entry into that world.
That said, I don’t think the delayed reading thing is a big drawback for Waldorf. It’s mostly only a problem for parents who want to transfer their kids into another school before they’ve learned to read. The kids who stay in Waldorf seem to catch up pretty quickly — after all, with all the storytelling and verbal engagement they do in the early years, they’ve already laid a lot of the groundwork for facility with language. Waldorf doesn’t do yearly assessment tests, but a very high percentage of their graduates go on to college, and they seem to produce a fair number of writers and journalists and so forth.
Honestly, I’d be much more concerned about the science curriculum in a Waldorf school. Some of them are literally still teaching about the four humors, and not in a “people used to believe this” way, either.
February 5th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Yup, super good summary!
And, as for the reading, we considered sending our kids to the Silicon German School for exactly this reason. They also don’t focus on reading until around 2 grade (but encouraged it for those who wanted the skill earlier). As far as I can tell, this is in line with age appropriate development for many kids- and in line with many education systems in the Western world.
I absolutely loved the school (and location) since it didn’t do the academics in the early years AND wasn’t hippiedippy but the extended day preschool was too expensive for us for two kids (I think something like 1,600 per month for 3, 4 and 5 year olds) especially considering the effort of adding another language.
Once the German mandatory-school-age kicks in, the school gets subsidies from the German government and is more doable. Still, English or possibly English/Spanish makes more sense for us.
February 6th, 2010 at 2:20 am
Thank you for such a thoughtful piece – my feelings echo yours entirely. There are so many great things about Waldorf but this rigid adherence to Steiner’s anthroposophy is quiet scary. It can also be damaging, using the belief in karma, medieval temperaments, incarnation problems and etheric forces to dictate choices about children is a path which is open to so much interpretation and danger.
Another point I would add, is the way the supporters/followers/anthroposophists use legal threats to stop people discussing this on public forums. These people go to great lengths it seems to stop people like us finding out the “cons” of the education. They have their own websites which give the picture they want the world to see. (I wouldn’t be surprised if someone turns up soon, linking to various sites promoting waldorf…)
The historian Peter Staudenmaier has researched anthroposophy extensively, and his work is well worth reading on the subject.
February 6th, 2010 at 9:07 am
Thanks, Cathy and the Other Robin’s Mom!
The Silicon German School sounds great. But yes, $1600 a month would be out of our range too.
I don’t mind if a Waldorf supporter would like to chime in with their perspective. Having been a journalist for many years, however, I’m pretty clear on free speech laws and I’m not easily intimidated by legal threats!
February 6th, 2010 at 12:03 pm
I’m so glad you wrote this up — since you alerted me to The Weird I’ve been trying to get a sense of the magnitude of the problem, and you put it all in excellent perspective. Very useful (and entertaining).
February 6th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Yes – it would be interesting if a genuine supporter put their side.
I often wonder though how much these people know or want to know? The schools answer questions with how complicated Steiner is, and foster such a strong sense of community (which is good) but it makes it hard to get out of, and to take on board the aspects which are…suspect.
February 7th, 2010 at 11:58 am
In the case of the particular second grader I know, the delayed reading didn’t strike me as a good thing at all. But again, I agree in general that delaying academics is no big deal. I’d rather delay worksheets, standardized tests, grading, math problems, handwriting lessons, and spelling tests than *reading*, however. But of course, you could teach that very well at home.
The scariest part by far is the anthroposophy, though, and particularly the racism. Thanks for all the details on that–I had no idea it was so weird and extreme.
February 13th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
When I first started interviewing preschools the Waldorf people wouldn’t let me just come and observe the school; they had touchy-feely ‘get to know Waldorf’ seminars you had to go to first. The one I went to felt cultish and creeped me out pretty badly.
October 19th, 2010 at 2:12 am
I am a Waldorf supporter: Waldorf mom of two since 1986, in the midwest and on the west coast; Waldorf-inspired preschool operator for 6 years and Waldorf charter school teacher for Grades 1 thru 3. As a hippie of the ’60’s, new-age Christian of the ’80’s, and now more conservative Christian, I can be pretty open to a lot of things but still struggle with the reincarnation part. Having done much of the Waldorf training I have seen “weird.” But I have followed a fellow Christian’s advice all along: “You don’t need to throw the baby out with the bath water.” I still think Waldorf education is the best thing out there. My first son didn’t read until the middle of 4th Grade when I got him to participate in a readathon. In 6th Grade he was reading “Watership Down” on his own. He is now a software engineer with a computer science degree.
October 19th, 2010 at 10:02 am
Thanks for your comment, Barbara. It does seem that Waldorf works well for the majority of its students.
June 4th, 2014 at 8:12 pm
Hi Shannon, I stumbled upon this at just the right moment. My children are entering 1st and 3rd grade and we are moving from phoenix to sacramento in a matter of days. We had planned to attend the waldorf charter there but after years of attending parent child through 2nd grade in private and public schools in portland and phoenix, these concerns that you mention are all bubbling up and many more from our experience. I just can’t fathom the alternatives and wonder if you have any advice. I called the local community school to find they have no art, little music, no foreign languages, etc. my daughter would be heartbroken to not have art. But still, waldorf is freaking me out frankly and I can’t figure which is the lessor of two evils.
Help! Thanks for your article.
Kathy
June 4th, 2014 at 9:43 pm
Oh Kathy, you have all my sympathy but unfortunately I have no concrete advice. I do think that if the school is a good fit for your kids socially and emotionally, you can probably counteract the woo-woo stuff with some low key conversations at home. It is soooo hard trying to pick a school, especially when you have the stress of moving and everything. Maybe just go with whatever school feels best to your gut — if it doesn’t work out, you can always transfer to a different school next year once you’ve had more time to research the local options. And I do believe that the most important factor in education is what happens at home.
Good luck! And welcome to California 🙂