 "[T]each the children respect. The children should not raise their hands so much." — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 65. METHODS How They Try to Do It by Roger Rawlings including The Pernicious Role of Imitation by Grégoire Perra Might the methods used in Waldorf schools actually work, at least sometimes? Sure. But any such successes would be largely accidental and would have nothing to do with the occult purposes that Rudolf Steiner pronounced and his followers pursue. I’ve had the disconcerting experience of discussing Waldorf education with old friends who took a very different path in life than I’ve taken: They became Waldorf teachers. Sometimes they have insisted that Steiner really saw to the core of various educational issues. Sometimes they have told me that when they took Waldorf teacher training, they focused on Steiner’s pearls of wisdom while tuning out all the occult stuff. The problem is that the occult stuff is the very essence of Steiner’s educational doctrines. Waldorf schools are not really meant to educate children — they have mystical goals, such as nudging the kids toward clairvoyance, helping them to incarnate their invisible bodies, assisting them with their karmas, preparing them for future spiritual evolution, and the like. All Waldorf “educational” methods aim at these goals, which are elements of the schools' overall purpose of spreading Anthroposophy, Steiner’s new-age religion. As for the Three R’s — these are far, far down the list of Waldorf priorities.  INDICATIONS: Context for Methods We should begin by sketching the context of Waldorf teaching, the vision that Waldorf teachers have of themselves and their profession. We will then consider some of the specific approaches Waldorf teachers adopt as they seek to realize their vision. (To go straight to the specific approaches, scroll down to "PARTICULARS", below.)
To do this, Waldorf teachers need to develop "the Waldorf teacher’s consciousness," which is "hardly present anywhere else in the world." — Ibid., p. 21. This unique consciousness will restore "what humanity has lost in the last three or four centuries." — Ibid., p. 21. What has been lost? As Steiner often explained, modern humankind has lost the old, intuitive clairvoyance.
"Spiritual thinking" is clairvoyance.  A large German Waldorf school, built in a typical Anthroposophical style.
PARTICULARS: Methods Individual Waldorf teachers are usually given great latitude in deciding how to operate in the classroom. Their training often focuses more on spiritual doctrines than on nuts-and-bolts classroom skills. Still, we can sketch an overall description that should hold true in most schools within the Waldorf universe. [1] Waldorf schools keep academic pressures low. Trying not to push kids too hard, they leave plenty of time for play and creativity, imagination and whimsy. Art and beauty are stressed. [2] Indeed, Waldorf teachers are generally expected to present every subject in an artistic manner. All of this is quite nice, if less than overwhelmingly original. Few educators, after all, think that kids should be pushed to the breaking point, or that schools should be unpleasant and ugly. But the real question about Waldorf methods is whether they work — that is, whether the kids receive a good education. The demands placed on Waldorf teachers are great. The teachers are expected to create attractive drawings and designs on the class chalkboard, sometimes creating a new, original piece of art every few days. Likewise, Waldorf teachers are expected to deliver from memory virtually all of the material presented to the students. With few exceptions, the teachers are not to read from texts. Instead, they should deliver oral reports to the children, keeping everything as lively and apparently spontaneous as possible. Even if the material simply consists of fairy tales or myths, the teachers tell these stories rather than reading them. Especially in the early grades, the teachers are expected to address the class using a sweetly rhythmic, declamatory tone of voice that can have an hypnotic or inspiring effect on the kids, depending on a teacher's talents and the dispositions of the students. [3] The musical/spiritual concept of rhythm is important in Waldorf schooling, especially in the lower grades. Because in Waldorf belief all things are deemed to be alive at some level, and infused with living spirit, all things are deemed to function rhythmically, as in the intake and release of breath. Individual classes are meant to be rhythmical (so that, for instance, solemn moments alternate with lighter moments, in a fixed pattern). Likewise, the school day as a whole is meant to have a rhythmic form, as are the week as a whole, the semester as a whole, and the year as a whole. In practice, this becomes largely theoretical, but nonetheless the teachers aim for this pattern. Thus, the school year is punctuated by seasonal festivals meant to sensitize the students to the rhythmic pattern of the yearly cycle. [4] Textbooks are rarely used. The teachers write on the chalkboard or simply dictate to the students, who transcribe the teachers' remarks in the "class books" that the students create. In effect, the class books are the textbooks for the class, created by the students themselves, under the direction of the teachers. The illustrations in the books are often the students' copies of illustrations created by the teachers, just as the text is usually a verbatim copy of the the teachers' words. [5] The authority of Waldorf teachers is very great. [6] Outside authorities and sources are rarely used; almost everything the children are exposed to comes from their teachers, all of whom usually represent a single point of view, the Anthroposophical point of view. The most influential teacher for any group of students is the "class teacher." Ideally, a Waldorf class — that is, a group of children of approximately the same age — forms in kindergarten and then proceeds as a unified group from grade level to grade level, all the way through high school. One teacher guides the students for most if not all of this journey. That teacher, the class teacher, delivers all of the most important lessons for the class, in all subjects, year after year. In many respects, the teacher rather than the student is the central figure in Waldorf education. The Waldorf school day usually begins with a "main lesson" — the longest and most important lesson of the day. [7] The class teacher delivers this lesson, in whatever subject has been selected for a particular portion of the year. Thus, the same teacher may teach the kids math, history, geography, English — any and all subjects, in rotation. (The students receive shorter lessons from the class teacher or other teachers during other parts of the day.) A class teacher may get to know the students in his/her class quite well (within the terms of understanding set out by Anthroposophy), and obviously that teacher may exert great influence over the children. This may or may not be good. The Waldorf system ensures that many subjects will be taught by unqualified instructors, since no class teacher can truly master all subjects at all grade levels. [8] Main lessons usually stick with one subject only for a few weeks — three weeks is typical. Thus, for three weeks the students will study history, then for three weeks another subject, and then for three weeks yet another. This is part of the rhythmic structure of Waldorf schooling. The students may not return to any given subject for many weeks or months. The effect can be that no subject is studied in depth, and much will be forgotten by the time any subject rolls around again. Students may be tested from time to time, and grades may be given — but tests and grades are minimized as much as possible. Many Waldorf schools do not issue report cards. The premise is that most of what happens in school, the interactions between students and teachers, cannot be reduced to simple alphanumeric grades. When report cards are issued, nonacademic factors may be emphasized (how well students are incarnating, how well they are developing imaginative powers, etc.), which may or may not be made clear to parents. One result is that parents may have special difficulties assessing the academic progress of their children. Little emphasis is placed on conveying facts or information to the students, especially in the lower grades. Far more important is the incarnation of invisible bodies. Knowledge of the ordinary world may be largely neglected, since modern science and scholarship are generally rejected by Anthroposophists. Young children are thought to have memories of the spirit realm where they existed before Earthly life, so efforts are made to leave the children alone, allowing them to retain their sacred memories. Academic pressures are low and playtime plentiful. Kids are given lots of free time, with little or no exposure to the 3R's (reading, writing, and 'rithmetic) until at least age seven or eight. Intellect especially is downplayed, since children are thought to be unable to formulate rational concepts until high school. Thus, Waldorf students often lag behind students at other schools until well into their high school years, but an effort is then made to bring the students up to speed. [9] Whether these efforts succeed is a point of contention, and undoubtedly varies from child to child. Creativity and imagination are emphasized but also directed and channeled by the teachers. The thinking behind Waldorf schools hinges on belief in clairvoyance. Waldorf teachers often think that they are clairvoyant, and clairvoyance is considered the true form of cognition. Imagination, inspiration, and intuition are believed to be stages of clairvoyance, so development of these "faculties" is thought to represent progress toward true intelligence. But because ultimate "truths" are thought to be found in Rudolf Steiner's teachings, imaginative creations that veer from Anthroposophical doctrines are discouraged. [10] As I mentioned earlier, art and beauty are given great importance. Teachers attempt to present all subjects beautifully, because spiritual beings (gods) are believed to enter Earthly life through beauty (music, colors...), and art is thought to transport humans into the spirit realm. Teachers often spend a great deal of time creating elaborate, colored drawings on blackboards, and the students often copy these carefully. The creation of beautiful hand-drawn class books can become a central objective, sometimes superseding actual instruction: The lessons propounded by the teachers may pass directly from the blackboard to the class books, leaving little trace in memories of the students (this is especially so when testing, and studying for tests, is minimized). [11] The Waldorf approach can be characterized as slow learning. High-pressure, fast methods are abjured. Teachers rarely present much information in any one lesson, and demands on the students' memories are kept low. [12] Teachers lecture, but in an informal manner. Students may take notes, but sometimes they are told to lower their heads onto their desks and just listen. Students are expected to accept what the teachers say with little or no argument. Questions from the students are usually not welcomed, and they may be answered not with statements of fact but with leading questions — generally leading to a mystical interpretation of reality. Discussions are not encouraged, at least until late in high school, and even then teachers may dominate any open forums. Questions, when permitted, should be kept brief, and they should be disposed of quickly. As Steiner said, "[W]e need to create a mood, namely, that the teacher has something to say that the children should neither judge nor discuss. That is necessary, otherwise it will become trivial. An actual discussion lowers the content. Things should remain with simply asking questions. The children even in the tenth and eleventh grades should know that they can ask everything and receive an answer. For questions of religion and worldview, we need to maintain that longer. The religion teacher needs to retain a position of authority even after puberty.” [13] Religious and/or spiritual meaning is implied in all lessons, if only subtly. As Steiner said, "It is possible to introduce a religious element into every subject, even into math lessons. Anyone who has some knowledge of Waldorf teaching will know that this statement is true." [14] Computers and other technological devices are largely shunned, although limited use may be made late in high school. Anthroposophists believe that modern technology falls under the sway of the terrible demon Ahriman. [15] Thus, even television viewing is discouraged. Waldorf teachers will rarely if ever show a TV program or a film in class. Certainly there is little instruction in computer technology, and computer-aided instruction is mainly ruled out. This begins to change somewhat toward the end of high school (indeed, the entire curriculum becomes a bit more conventional at that stage), but the underlying distaste for modern technology remains dominant. The individuality of the students is, in theory, respected. An effort is made to tailor instruction to each student's capacities and personality. However, this often means categorizing students by "temperament" and race, which undercuts the effort. [16] Because children who fall into various categories (e.g., all children who are deemed to be phlegmatic) are thought to be significantly different from children who fall into other categories, teachers will — within the limits of their time and capacities — use differing approaches for the different groups. This is offset, however, by the deeper Waldorf belief that all children of a given age are fundamentally alike. The Waldorf curriculum is keyed to the notion that children evolve through the same stages that humanity as a whole has undergone, and thus all children of a particular age stand at a particular level of spiritual/emotional/mental development. Therefore, Waldorf schools operate on the premise that there is one and only one right time to present certain materials to the students: All 7-year-old kids should be taught certain materials, all 8-year-olds should be taught different age-appropriate materials, etc. The individual interests of individual children are largely disregarded. Overall, the Waldorf approach is largely anti-intellectual. The intellect, like technology, is viewed askance. Indeed, use of the brain is considered potentially wayward and wrong. Steiner taught that the brain is not involved in real thinking or knowledge acquisition. “[T]he brain and nerve system have nothing at all to do with actual cognition.... ” [17] Therefore, much class time is given over to non-brain activities. In the lower grades, children do a lot of handcrafts such as knitting and crochet. Later, math classes may entail drawing and coloring elaborate geometric designs, while science classes may be given over to hands-on projects of dubious value, such as piecing together an antique dynamo. Contemporary science is largely downplayed. [18] These are perhaps the key Waldorf methods; they used in almost all Waldorf schools. The value of such methods is questionable. There is much evidence that Waldorf students learn less than kids in other types of schools and often Waldorf students emerge unprepared for life outside the Waldorf community. [19] Bear in mind that the Waldorf approach often breaks down. Only rarely will a class form in kindergarten and then remain together for the next fourteen years with absolutely no students leaving or other students entering. Indeed, this may never have happened. Frequently, as in most other types of schools, students drop out (or are expelled) and new students join the group. This is another way in which the Waldorf system proves to be impractical when put into practice. The benefit for students and the schools is that the potentially damaging effects of Waldorf schooling can be greatly decreased when students do not receive the full Waldorf treatment. THEORY AND PRACTICE Here are some pointers on Waldorf methods as related by Richard Blunt in his book WALDORF EDUCATION - Theory and Practice (Novalis Press, 1995). Note that Blunt, while extremely sympathetic to Waldorf schooling, is not formally associated with Waldorf education or Anthroposophy.
The "reading" often relies on clairvoyance — see "The Waldorf Teacher's Consciousness." Waldorf teachers use their "psychic powers," dreams, and even horoscopes to get to "know" their students. As for a child's "whole being", see "Holistic Education".
Waldorf teachers assume that young children want to imitate; the teachers try to be worthy (morally, spiritually, in all ways) of imitation. They hold themselves out as ideal models for the children to follow. (Arguably, the expectations Waldorf teachers create for themselves are as extreme — and perhaps unrealistic — as those they create for their students.)
Waldorf schools usually postpone reading and writing until the students are at least seven years old — by which time the etheric body is thought to have incarnated. Like most other subjects, writing should begin artistically, and pictorial thinking (i.e., imagination) and emotion are given priority over whatever capabilities the children may have for rational thought. Steiner taught that truth comes through imagination and emotion, not use of the brain.
Eurythmy is a spiritual form of dance invented by Rudolf Steiner. [See "Magical Arts" and "Eurythmy".] It is a required activity at most Waldorf schools. Like other arts, it is thought to have spiritual effects, but perhaps to an even greater degree than any other art. As Steiner said, "In having people do eurythmy, we link them directly to the supersensible [i.e., spiritual] world.” [19] This is the objective behind all of the attractive art in Waldorf schools: to draw children into contact with the spirit realm. As for "the will" — this is deemed a capability that must be developed, and young children are thought to live primarily through the will. [See "Will".]
Waldorf teachers subscribe to an outmoded, false view of temperament: children are either choleric, sanguine, phlegmatic, or melancholic. [See "Temperaments".] Having determined the temperaments of all the children in the class (probably by using "clairvoyance"), a Waldorf teacher may make special assignments for the children in each group. According to Waldorf belief, cholerics have a special affinity for division, sanguines for multiplication, phlegmatics for addition, and melancholics for subtraction.
Science instruction is often weak at Waldorf schools because Waldorf teachers believe that rational, scientific thinking is "dangerous." The Waldorf approach involves using imagination to modify scientific observation — in effect, you project your preferred subjective "reality" onto the phenomena you observe. This is what is often called "Goethean science," and it has little true scientific value. But it is what Waldorf schools promote. [See "Science" and "Goethe".]
This is surely the most attractive component of the Waldorf approach. Waldorf schools are full of art, and all children are encouraged (indeed, required) to participate in virtually all forms of art. This is arguably commendable. Bear in mind, however, that at Waldorf schools the arts are believed to be spiritual; studying various kinds of art means being led into many forms of contact with the gods and other invisible beings that, according to Waldorf belief, hover around us at all times. As Steiner said, “This is what gives art its essential lustre: it transplants us here and now into the spiritual world.” [20] Bear in mind that Steiner did not say such things metaphorically — he meant them literally. He taught that the gods come down to us through colors and musical notes, for instance. At Waldorf schools, the arts are part of the subjective, imaginative, clairvoyant mindset that alienates students from the real world and the rational use of the brain. [See "Magical Arts" and "Steiner's Specific".] Think long and hard before subjecting a child to the Waldorf treatment. ON THEIR OWN Waldorf teachers usually operate independently. Each teacher is expected to find the best ways to reach the students in a particular class. Thus, a teacher may use different methods with different groups, and colleagues may offer little guidance. Indeed, Waldorf teacher training often dwells more on what to believe (Steiner's doctrines) than on how to function in the classroom. In this sense, we might say that there are no Waldorf teaching methods, as such. Rather, there is a Waldorf vision of humanity, and Waldorf education grows from it. The chief unifying principle is that all children are thought to develop according to a basic pattern (there are three seven-year-long periods of development), so teaching must reflect and reinforce this pattern. Here is how Waldorf teacher Roy Wilkinson puts things in his book COMMON SENSE SCHOOLING (Henry Goulding, 1975):
ON THEIR OWN (HELP) Each Waldorf teacher operates more or less alone, conducting classes as s/he sees fit. On the other hand, there are numerous Waldorf teachers' guides, and many Waldorf teachers rely on these heavily. This is almost inevitable, since the Waldorf system requires class teachers to present a wide array of subjects at different class levels. No teacher is truly qualified to do this, so most teachers look around for help. Teachers' guides often serve to fill this need. Unfortunately, this can drain much of the spontaneity and originality from Waldorf classes. Here are some pertinent comments by Keith Francis in his book THE EDUCATION OF A WALDORF TEACHER (iUniverse, 2004). Francis served on several Waldorf faculties, and he was Faculty Chair at the Rudolf Steiner School in New York City.
Why does this happen? Waldorf teachers are expected to teach too many subjects with too little preparation. The best they can do, often, is to quickly memorize some material, write it on the board, attach an illustration, and then have the students make copies. If the teachers have limited knowledge of their subjects, these limitations are passed along to the kids in the form of unrecognized errors. This arrangement ensures that children will be misinformed by faculty who are unqualified in many of the subjects they teach.
In general, Waldorf teachers rely on teachers' guides written by fellow Waldorf teachers. They copy from other Waldorf teachers and then ask their students to copy from them. In this sense, copying becomes a serious Waldorf problem.
Francis comments that one problem with this approach is that it gives little indication of whether a student has actually mastered a subject. An industrious, dutiful child can create a lovely (copied) notebook, but s/he may have learned very little, and neither the child’s teacher nor her parents may recognize this. Look! A beautiful notebook! My, isn’t little Sally doing well in school? Teachers, parents, and students may be misled into thinking that children have learned far more than they really have. [22] GENIUSES Rudolf Steiner put his finger on a central flaw in the Waldorf system — while denying, of course, that the flaw counts for much.
But Waldorf teachers often do not get the support they need. And because very few Waldorf teachers (like very few people in general) are geniuses, the Waldorf system breaks down. Ordinary Waldorf teachers, having ordinary capacities, are unable to fulfill the high-flown objectives outlined by Steiner. Fundamentally, the Waldorf system is unrealistic. It is disconnected from reality at many levels.
THEORIES OF AN EDUCATIONALIST Here is an item adapted from the Waldorf Watch "news" page:
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: Whenever descriptions of Steiner Waldorf education omit references to occultism, you know that much is being concealed. Rudolf Steiner was an unapologetic occultist, and his educational doctrines all derive from his occultism. [See “Here’s the Answer” and “Occultism”.] Arts and creativity are emphasized because Steiner said the arts provide direct avenues to the spirit realm [see “Magical Arts”], and he said that imagination is a preliminary stage of clairvoyance [see "Steiner's Science"]. Emotion is emphasized because Steiner downplayed the importance of the reasoning brain. [See “Steiner’s Specific”.] True cognition, Steiner taught, is clairvoyance [see “Clairvoyance”], and Steiner Waldorf schools try to steer children toward developing it. The path to clairvoyance runs through our feelings and emotions — Steiner taught that we should trust our hearts more than our brains. Through our feelings, Steiner said, we can reach the gods.
To summarize briefly: The government of the United Kingdom is contemplating giving state funds to schools that minimize actual intelligence while seeking to promote an occult system based on a wholly fallacious psychic power. Perhaps some second thoughts are in order. QUICK REVIEW By Rudolf Steiner's standards, the test of Waldorf methods is not whether they give a child a good education, in the normal sense. It certainly has little to do with the brain, since Steiner taught that
It has little to do with giving the kids knowledge — the sort of stuff that can be found in libraries — since this is the realm of the demon Ahriman:
In general, it has little to do with the intellect, which is so damaging:
By Steiner's standards, the test of Waldorf methods is whether they boost a child's clairvoyant potential, help with karma, facilitate incarnation, lay the groundwork for future spiritual evolution, and the like. In other words, the test is occult, and it is keyed to Anthroposophical religious doctrines. Here's how some Waldorf educators have framed the matter. (Note that none of them says that the goal of Waldorf education is to provide a good education.)
BACKGROUND As a sort of postscript, here are some of Steiner’s comments about education earlier in human evolution. Perhaps some Waldorf teachers are able to ignore such comments. But parents who are thinking of sending their children to Waldorf schools probably should think carefully and hard about such comments.
— Compilation and commentary by Roger Rawlings  Art and beauty have spiritual potency, according to Waldorf belief. Here is some Waldorfish art created by a Waldorf alumnus. [R.R., 2014.] NO SUCH THING The differences between Waldorf schools, arising in part from the flexibility in Waldorf methods, has suggested an ingenious line of argument to some Waldorf proponents. There is an almost infinite array of possible teaching strategies for Waldorf teachers to adopt, so maybe there is no sharp line between Waldorf schools and other kinds of schools. Indeed, maybe concerns about Waldorf education are unfounded. Maybe there is really no such thing as "Waldorf education" as a distinct category. This line of argument is has certain obvious benefits for those who want to defend Waldorf. Waldorf schools cannot be criticized if there are no such institutions as Waldorf schools. Right?
This is clever, but it is also nonsense. Waldorf schools are deeply different from other schools, and they share a particular identity. They are based on Anthroposophy. Some are more true to Anthroposophy than others. Some strive hard to follow Rudolf Steiner's directives to the letter, while others cut themselves some slack, and still others have wandered far off into their own notions of sound educational practice. But, except for schools that wander so far that they cease to be Waldorf schools in any discernible sense, all Waldorf schools trace their lineage back to the first Waldorf school, and to Rudolf Steiner, and to Rudolf Steiner's teachings, which are the substance of Anthroposophy. Writing a book about Waldorf education while denying, in that very book, that there is such a thing as Waldorf education — this is clever, but it is wholly unconvincing. It is, in fact, a typical Anthroposophical exercise in denial, obfuscation, and self-contradiction. It is, one is tempted to say, disingenuous. (And Sagarin — who is Faculty Chair of a Waldorf school — knows it. To give him credit, he says
But then Sagarin adds,
So Sagarin doesn't really mean it. Except that he does.) Go back to what we heard from Wilkinson: He acknowledged that there is great variety within the Waldorf movement. But he also said that there is really just one right way to educate the child: the Waldorf way.
The understanding Wilkinson spoke of arises from Anthroposophy. According to Rudolf Steiner and his followers, Anthroposophy is the "science" of human wisdom, the ideology that gives us the true picture of human nature. [See "Oh Humanity".] No, we cannot close our eyes and wish away the Waldorf phenomenon. There is indeed such a thing as Waldorf education, and there are such things as Waldorf schools. The question is what to make of them. We will not arrive at a sensible answer if we deny that the existence of the very subjects that are under discussion. ————————— If you would like to assure yourself that there is such a thing as Waldorf education (pace, Sagarin), one place to start would be the series of books published by the Anthroposophic Press in the series "Foundations of Waldorf Education." The editors of the press wasted a lot of ink (as well as their own toil and time) if they put out a series about something does not exist. Here is what the editors call an "almost complete" list of of the books in the series [see http://steinerbooks.org/p.php?id=8]: BALANCE IN TEACHING THE CHILD'S CHANGING CONSCIOUSNESS DISCUSSIONS WITH TEACHERS EDUCATION AS A FORCE FOR SOCIAL CHANGE EDUCATION FOR ADOLESCENTS THE EDUCATION OF THE CHILD THE ESSENTIALS OF EDUCATION FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, Vol. 1 FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, Vol. 2 THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE THE GENIUS OF LANGUAGE HUMAN VALUES IN EDUCATION THE KINGDOM OF CHILDHOOD THE LIGHT COURSE A MODERN ART OF EDUCATION PRACTICAL ADVICE TO TEACHERS THE RENEWAL OF EDUCATION THE ROOTS OF EDUCATION RUDOLF STEINER IN THE WALDORF SCHOOL SOUL ECONOMY THE SPIRIT OF THE WALDORF SCHOOL THE SPIRITUAL GROUND OF EDUCATION WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 1 WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 2 There are plenty of other books about Waldorf education, but these would give you food for thought. TIPS FOR PARENTS Lois Cusick's WALDORF PARENTING HANDBOOK (Rudolf Steiner College Press, 2005) is uncommonly candid about Waldorf purposes and approaches. Here are some of points Cusick makes about Waldorf methods: Actually, Waldorf class teachers do not always stay with one group of children for eight years. The period varies from school to school. Still, the system of having one teacher take primary responsibility for a group for many years is generally characteristic of Waldorf education. We may wonder, however, whether this provides "teaching that is always new and changing" or just the opposite, a sameness from year to year, with one teacher having inordinate influence over children who rarely are exposed to alternative points of view or alternative teaching methods. Actually, Waldorf teachers often use teacher's manuals, such as those written by fellow Waldorf teachers Roy Wilkinson or Charles Kovacs. The "yellow book" — THE EDUCATIONAL TASKS AND CONTENT OF THE STEINER WALDORF CURRICULUM — is also widely used. (We will peek into this presently.) In Waldord education, even basic content is suffused with occultism. Thus, for instance, vowels are "singing color letters," and all letters convey "soul moods" (they have inborn spiritual essence). Waldorf pedagogy assumes that math reflects the spiritual design and intentions of the gods. [See "Mystical Math".] Even more than reading and writing, introductory math in the Waldorf curriculum is an introduction to Anthroposophical mysticism. "Forgetting" material may not be the best basis for a sound education, but it is actually structured into the Waldorf system. (The goal is generally to purge the mind, flushing away the facts and information that may block imaginative/clairvoyant insight.) Whether children can later recall or relearn what was previously forgotten becomes a key issue — do the students advice, or do they continually return to square one and need to restudy material they should have learned previously? For the Waldorf attitude toward computers and other modern technological tools, see "Spiders, Dragons and Foxes"; for an overview of eurythmy (the odd dance form practiced in Waldorf schools), see "Eurythmy". Whether the Waldorf conception of rhythmic instruction makes sense is, clearly, debatable. [See the entry for "rhythm" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.] Note that rhythm is closely allied to repetition, which can produce boring, repetitive instruction. Boredom is rarely conducive to stimulation and learning, but it is a constant hazard in the Waldorf approach. Waldorf education is fundamentally religious, although this is often denied. The religion that underlies Waldorf schooling bears some resemblance to Christianity, but it is actually the amalgam of many religions pieced together by Rudolf Steiner: It is Anthroposophy. [See, e.g., "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?", "Was He Christian?", and "Schools as Churches".] A large number of occult Waldorf beliefs are touched upon here. ]To explore just a few of them, see, e.g., "Magical Arts", "Mystical Colors", "Lesson Books", and "Mystic Lesson Books".] The main thing to recognize is that esoteric and occult doctrines undergird virtually everything that happens in Waldorf schools, even in such apparently innocuous activities as arts and crafts. MORE ON (AND BEHIND) WALDORF METHODS Here are additional items from the "news" page: 1.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: From time to time, proponents of Waldorf education allude to studies that, the proponents say, show the value of Waldorf educational methods. Usually, however, if we look closely, we find far less than initially meets the eye. What do the studies referred to here actually affirm? 1) Children need to play. OK. Very few people would deny this. Students in Waldorf schools are given opportunities for “free, unstructured, imaginative play” — but so are students in many other kinds of schools, if only during recesses, and virtually all children have opportunities for such play outside school hours. 2) A study indicates that children should play more and work less. But other studies show precisely the opposite. Indeed, many studies show the great value of early childhood education, beginning academic work as early as possible. This is precisely the antithesis of the Waldorf approach. 3) A study finds that excessive use of computers and other “screen media” is harmful. Sure. Excessive use of anything is harmful — that is what the word “excessive” means in the context of children’s well-being. But there are also plenty of studies that show the benefits of computer use by children. 2.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response:
◊ * Postponing instruction in reading and math until children turn seven does not doom the students to educational failure. In Finland, which has a public school system generally judged excellent, reading and math are postponed until age seven. But Finnish schools are in most other ways wholly unlike Waldorf schools. The occultism at the basis of Waldorf education is wholly absent from the Finnish system. Indeed, the Finnish model (secular, public, rational, and scientific) is virtually the antithesis of Waldorf, and its success provides virtually no evidence supporting the Waldorf approach overall. The methods employed in Waldorf education may sometimes be sensible, but their value is greatly diminished — and perhaps eliminated — by the senseless rationale on which they are based: Anthroposophy. 3. From the publisher’s description of SOUL ECONOMY (Anthroposophic Press):
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response:
With few exceptions, all nine-year-olds exhibit the hallmarks of the next stage:
And so forth. 4.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: The worldview underlying Waldorf education is loopy — it consists of Rudolf Steiner’s occult fantasies. But often the students attending a Waldorf school do not receive explicit instruction in Steiner’s doctrines. Advocates of Waldorf education often make a point of this. Waldorf schools, they say, base their programs on Anthroposophy but they do not teach Anthroposophy to the students. How reassuring is this? If you learned that a certain school based its program on voodoo but refrained from teaching voodoo to the kids, would you send your child there? It is also important to realize that even if a Waldorf faculty tries to keep its beliefs more or less under wraps, kids will pick up plenty of clues and suggestions. I attended a Waldorf school. Looking back, it seems to me that I came away having absorbed at least the following Anthroposophical beliefs: ◊ the natural world is a place of illusion (maya) ◊ unseen spirits are numerous and busy around us ◊ spiritual phenomena are real; physical phenomena are not ◊ science is faulty and unreliable ◊ the arts have spiritual — even magical — powers ◊ intellect and the brain generally do not bring us truth ◊ imagination and intuition are preferable to rational thought ◊ ESP or clairvoyance is probably real ◊ the stars and planets have esoteric powers (astrology) ◊ humans are evolving, but not in the way Darwin described ◊ modern technology is wicked ◊ various forms of "earth spirits" or "nature spirits" probably exist ◊ there are deep and significant differences between races ◊ the ancients were wiser than modern humans ◊ dreams can be reliable sources of knowledge ◊ it is possible to commune with spiritual beings and with the dead ◊ we are subject to karma or fate or destiny, which we make for ourselves ◊ we probably lead multiple lives in succession (reincarnation) ◊ Christ is extremely important, but churches generally misrepresent him ◊ virtually all authorities aside from Waldorf authorities misrepresent virtually everything ◊ some people develop special powers that give them access to hidden (occult) knowledge ◊ Waldorf teachers often have these powers ◊ Waldorf schools are unique, pure refuges in a nasty, violent world. I absorbed at least these beliefs and probably more. (Concerning the “seven” bodies: Steiner taught that we incarnate various invisible bodies as we age. The process is often thought to end at age 21, by which time a human being will have a physical body, an etheric body, an astral body, and an “I.” However, Steiner taught that the process of incarnation continues at least through age 42 as additional spiritual members — the sentient soul, the mind soul, and the consciousness soul — develop. If we count these latter three forms of soul as "bodies" — a debatable proposition — then. yes, in Waldorf belief we wind up with seven bodies. [See “What We’re Made Of”.]) 5.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: Advocates of Waldorf education offer many rationalizations. Most Waldorf schools are indeed small, and indeed there may be advantages in schools of limited size. Students will usually receive more individual attention, for instance. Discipline may be better. A sense of belonging — a feeling of communal involvement and identity — may be fostered. On the other hand, small schools may have serious shortcomings. Facilities may be very limited. There may be few truly qualified faculty to teach many subjects. There may be little or no exposure to varying viewpoints. Because all the students at the school may come from similar backgrounds, the school’s culture may be intensely insular. Combining classes can accentuate some of these problems. If, let us say, the first three grades all meet in the same room under the same teacher(s), none of the classes may really function at the appropriate grade level. Parents considering a small Waldorf school should consider some additional factors as well. If the teachers at the school are, as Rudolf Steiner stipulated, “true Anthroposophists,” the insularity of the school will likely mean that children are reared in an Anthroposophical environment with minimal consideration given to non-Anthroposophical perspectives. Also, because a small Waldorf school will necessarily have a small faculty, the influence on the children exercised by this small band of teachers may be enormous. This can be exacerbated when — as often happens at Waldorf schools — a single teacher remains the primary instructor for a class in virtually all subjects, year after year. At some Waldorf schools, a “class teacher” begins with a group of children in first grade and stays with these children through fourth or fifth grade; at other Waldorfs, a class teacher may stay with the group through eighth grade or even longer. The children will emerge having been molded to an extraordinary degree by this teacher — who may, in fact, supplant the students' parents as the most important influence in the children's lives. A small Waldorf school with a tiny faculty of devoted Anthroposophists will, in all probability, immerse the students in an intense atmosphere of Anthroposophical attitudes, approaches, and doctrines (although the latter may mainly be conveyed indirectly). After all, Anthroposophists believe that their worldview is true, and teachers naturally want to lead students to the truth. Parents should select a Waldorf school for their children only if they think that Anthroposophists do indeed possess the truth. 6.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: I wonder if the reporter got this quite right ("bi-weekly handwork class"). Kids at most Waldorf schools engage in some form of handwork — knitting, crocheting, and so forth — almost every day. Outsiders are often surprised that handwork forms such a large part of the Waldorf curriculum. The schools give all sorts of justifications for such activities, some of which make perfect sense. What the schools usually do not admit is the occult reason for handwork. (If you are new to the Waldorf world, the following will seem surpassing strange. But that, in and of itself, is a useful insight to acquire about Waldorf thinking.) Rudolf Steiner, the ultimate authority for all things Waldorf, taught that handwork has a spiritual effect on the teeth. (I kid you not.)
Now, teeth are very important in the Waldorf worldview. Steiner taught that human beings are born four times: once when the physical body is born, again when the invisible “etheric body” is born, a third time when the invisible “astral body” is born, and a fourth time when the invisible “I” is born. [See the “Index” for the scoop on the three invisible bodies.] Waldorf teachers believe that the etheric body is born or incarnated at about age seven. They usually refrain from teaching their students reading and arithmetic until the kids’ etheric bodies arrive. And how do Waldorf teachers know when this invisible (indeed, imaginary) event has come to pass? They use "clairvoyance" and other techniques, but mostly they study the kids' teeth. The etheric body announces its arrival through the replacement of the kids’ baby teeth by adult teeth. (Or so Waldorf teachers believe.) This silliness is actually fundamental to the Waldorf approach.
Note that Waldorf education is based on these weird concepts. 7.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: Do islands float in the sea? Do goblins exist? Is the moon a fortress, a colony of spirits who once lived on earth? Do the planets travel in line with the Sun instead of orbiting it? Did we once live on Atlantis, and before that on Lemuria? Did we evolve from Saturn to Sun to Moon to Earth? Are some races more highly evolved than others? On such questions, Rudolf Steiner's teachings have received no scientific validation. Most of what Steiner taught is unsupported and, indeed, it is obvious nonsense. [See "Steiner's Blunders".] On a few matters, Steiner seems to have gotten things right, but generally these are matters on which, really, there is no argument. Is art good for the human mind and soul? Of course — no one disputes this. Should educators try to engage children — that is, get them involved and interested? Of course — no one disputes this. Clutching at straws, Steiner's followers often grab any bit of evidence that may conceivably justify Steiner's teachings. But usually these "justifications" are insipid truisms. Arguing that art is inspiring and that children should be engaged, and offering these ideas as "proof" of Steiner's teachings, is typical. No one disputes the value of art or the need to engage children, and non-Anthroposophical schools certainly do not stand for the opposite propositions (i.e., that art is deadly and children should be bored). What Anthroposophists call "materialistic science" is simply science — that is, real knowledge. It does indeed trace causes and effects. To not do so would be foolish. But such foolishness is indeed central to Waldorf schooling. Waldorf teachers use interesting, high-sounding, inspiring rhetoric — "the whole child," "the spiritual view," and so on. Behind this rhetoric, however, we often see intellectual emptiness paired with a fervent embrace of Steiner's occultism. Thus, the "artistic" approach used in Waldorf schools is actually meant to transport children into the hidden spirit realm that Steiner described.
If you like what Steiner said, Waldorf schools may possibly suit you and your children. But if Anthroposophical/Waldorf rhetoric strikes you as hot air — if you do not accept Steiner's occult doctrines — you should send your children to other sorts of schools (schools that believe, for instance, in cause-and-effect rationality). [See "Magical Arts".] 8. Waldorf teachers are expected to teach too many subjects with too little preparation. The best they can do, often, is to quickly memorize some material, write it on the chalkboard, work up an illustration, and then tell the students to make copies. If the teachers have limited knowledge of their subjects, these limitations are passed along to the kids in the form of unrecognized errors. This arrangement ensures that children will be misinformed by faculty who are unqualified in many of the subjects they teach.
9.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: There are many different forms of "thinking," ranging from logic to fantasizing. Waldorf schools emphasize "thinking" that is close to, if not synonymous with, fantasy: imagination, inspiration, and intuition. Ultimately, they place their hope in clairvoyance. Rudolf Steiner taught that no real thinking occurs in the brain. Real thinking occurs outside the physical body; the brain merely reflects the thoughts that come in from invisible, higher parts.
Like other Anthroposophists, John Gardner deplored logical or "critical" thinking.
The Waldorf curriculum is designed to keep children young and uninformed for as long as possible. [See "Thinking Cap" and "Thinking".] Use of the brain is de-emphasized; instead, the young child is immersed in fairy tales, myths, and religious teachings. The purpose is to bring the child into the occult fold, leading her/him to internalize Anthroposophical beliefs or attitudes. [See "Spiritual Agenda".] Then, when the child has become a junior occultist, intellectual thought is gradually and minimally developed in high school. Such mild "intellectual thought," however, is not meant to be critical — the child should use intellect only to rationalize the beliefs s/he has embraced. The goal, in other words, is to raise children who "embrace enthusiastically what [they have] come to understand." What do they "understand?" The beliefs and attitudes carefully cultivated in them by their Waldorf teachers. Waldorf schools are appropriate only for families who want an occult, mystical, irrational "education" for their children. Remember, "You will injure children if you educate them rationally....” — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 61. [See, e.g., "Beat", "Steiner's Specific", "Criticism", and "Curriculum".] ◊ Disclosure statement: I knew John Gardner. I attended the The Waldorf School of Garden City, which in those days had a different name. (The school changed its name after a scandal nearly tore the school apart — see "Scandal".) My mother was John Gardner's secretary. I remember at least one occasion when Mr. Gardner told me not to think with my brain. [See "I Went to Waldorf".] Douglas Gerwin attended the same school. His class was behind mine; I did not know him well. 10.
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: Students who attend Waldorf schools often report favorably on the experience; they typically like these schools. I liked the Waldorf school I attended. /1/ Waldorf schools usually keep academic pressure low. They often provide plenty of free time for play, or artistic pursuits, or self-guided studies. They usually avoid subjecting the kids to standardized tests, and they generally do not use standard textbooks — or any textbooks at all. /2/ Classes are often small — especially when the schools themselves are small — and all the kids tend to know one another, having been together as a group for years. (If a Waldorf school were run according to the Waldorf ideal, a group of children would come together in preschool and remain together through the end of high school.) The schools are often physically attractive, adorned with much artwork, and there is usually a pleasant if vague spiritual tenor pervading most classes and activities. Green values are stressed, there is usually an organic garden on the grounds, nature walks are frequently organized, and care for the Earth's flora and fauna is emphasized. All in all, attending a Waldorf school can be pleasant on many levels. Whether Waldorf schools provide a sound education may, however, be a different story. In any case, it is important to understand the overall Waldorf model, avoiding the temptation to generalize too much on the basis of what you observe in a single Waldorf school. Thus, at least some of the things Ms. Abram reports are not actually typical of Waldorf education generally. Ms. Abram is right that Waldorf schooling is “based on ‘main lesson’ blocks.” But, typically, the same Waldorf teacher will prepare and deliver most if not all of the main lessons for her/his group of students: history for a few weeks, then geography for a few weeks, then literature for a few weeks, and so on. (Usually, a main lesson runs for an hour-and-a-half or two hours, with each subject studied for three weeks before being dropped so the next subject can be taken up.) This system places an enormous burden on the teachers, who are expected to master all these subjects at all grade levels, as the students advance from subject to subject and from grade to grade. Whether any teacher can possibly do this well — that is, whether the students can possibly get a good education under this system — is doubtful. The extraordinary expectations placed on Waldorf teachers was noted at the first Waldorf school, as reported by Rudolf Steiner himself:
The issue of textbooks also deserves some consideration. Rudolf Steiner discouraged Waldorf teachers from using textbooks (and in Waldorf schools, Steiner’s word tends to be nearly sactosanct). Thus, for instance, Steiner once told Waldorf teachers this: “I have nothing against using a textbook, but all of them are bad.” /4/ There’s nothing wrong with textbooks, he said, except that they are all bad. The underlying reason for the Waldorf aversion to standard textbooks is that such publications tend to contain standard, accepted knowledge about the real world — and the Waldorf belief system, Anthroposophy, rejects much of this knowledge. /5/ So, instead of studying textbooks, Waldorf students typically create their own “class books” or “lesson books.” These are generally attractive notebooks, full of drawing and paintings, and they contain the "information" the students have “learned" from their Anthroposophically inclined teachers. /6/ The result is that Waldorf students are usually exposed to just one point of view, their teachers’ Anthroposophical point of view. The kids learn little of what actual experts say about history, geography, literature, and so on. Instead, they learn what their Waldorf teachers want them to believe. Often, the students’ class books or lesson books wind up reproducing material written on the blackboard by the teachers; and the artwork in the books is often copied from drawings made on the blackboard by the teachers. A prominent Waldorf teacher — a former headmaster at the Rudolf Steiner School in New York City — has pointed out some of the drawbacks to this system: Pretty notebooks are produced. But have the students been given — and have they learned — real, verifiable information? Have they, in other words, received a real education? /8/ There’s much more we could say in response to Ms. Abram's opinion piece, but this may be sufficient. Ms. Abrams is certainly entitled to her opinions, and if she says says Waldorf has been her favorite educational experience, we must accept this. But if you, dear reader, want to form a rounded assessment of Waldorf education, you may want to look further. You might, for instance, consider “The Waldorf Curriculum” and “Methods”. There you will get my own views, which you may or may not find convincing. The final call, of course, is yours to make. • ◊ • Waldorf Watch Footnotes: /1/ See “I Went to Waldorf”. /2/ See “Lesson Books”. /3/ Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), pp. 443-444. The burden is arguably greatest on Waldorf teachers in elementary and middle school — there, the teachers are expected to teach most main lessons, as I have described. The burden lifts a bit in high school, when — as Ms. Abram indicates — specialists may take responsibility for at least some main lesson blocks. /4/ Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 284. /5/ See, e.g., the entry for "Anthroposophy" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia. /6/ To consider how Waldorf teachers are trained, and what bearing Anthroposophy has on their work, see, e.g., “Teacher Training”. /7/ Keith Francis, THE EDUCATION OF A WALDORF TEACHER (iUniverse, 2004), p. 132. /8/ Anthroposophical "information" tends to be mystical and unverifiable. [See, e.g., "Mystic Lesson Books" — a continuation of “Lesson Books”. Also see "Indoctrination" and "Sneaking It In".] In responding to news items, and elsewhere, I often generalize about Waldorf schools. There are fundamental similarities among Waldorf schools; I describe the schools based on the evidence concerning their structure and operations in the past and — more importantly — in the present. But not all Waldorf schools, Waldorf charter schools, and Waldorf-inspired schools are wholly alike. To evaluate an individual school, you should carefully examine its stated purposes, its practices (which may or may not be consistent with its stated purposes), and the composition of its faculty. — Roger Rawlings  SETTING TEACHERS FREE
Steiner seems to be saying that Waldorf teachers are wholly free to do as they think best. No "principles," "systems," or "precepts" hem them in. But probe a little deeper. Waldorf teachers must have "a knowledge of the human being that takes them into life itself and considers whole persons in a living way." This is clearly both a principle and a precept. Moreover, it stands upon a system — Anthroposophy, which is what gives Waldorf teachers "knowledge of the human being." (The word "Anthroposophy" literally means knowledge of the human being.) Notice, too, that Waldorf teachers must aim for particular goals. Overall, they must have spiritual wisdom that they put into practice, both possessing and inculcating "religious feeling" and "religious thinking." They must aim to inculcate the former in their students during the first stage of child development (up to the age of seven), and they should do this by encouraging their students to imitate them. Then, during the second stage of child development (from ages seven to fourteen), they must seek to foster religious thinking through the mechanism of "moral judgment." (On other occasions, Steiner made it clear that teachers should serve as moral authorities during this phase of education.) So, Waldorf teachers are meant to be free — but they are also meant to operate within a certain worldview, accepting a certain theory of child development, and employing certain approaches. In sum, Anthroposophy should prevail at a Waldorf school, and the teachers should be guided by Anthroposophy in all of their actions. "As Waldorf teachers, we must be true anthroposophists in the deepest sense of the word in our innermost feeling.” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 118. The teachers "must" be Anthroposophists. They must not be anything else. So much for their freedom. TEACHER TRAINING AND TEACHERS' GUIDES The training given to new and aspiring Waldorf teachers is often long on Anthroposophical doctrine and short on practical how-to-teach guidance. [See "Teacher Training".] One result is that Waldorf teachers often lean heavily on suggestions they receive from fellow teachers who are no better trained than themselves. Waldorf teachers often simply copy what others have done previously, whether or not what was done previously worked particularly well. Waldorf teachers are supposed to be creative and original, but in practice their modus vivendi generally boils down to copying. Among the chief Waldorf teachers' guides is THE EDUCATIONAL TASKS AND CONTENT OF THE STEINER WALDORF CURRICULUM (Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship, 2008) — often called the "yellow book." Other important resources are two series of teachers' guides, one written by Roy Wilkinson (Rudolf Steiner College Publications) and the other by Charles Kovacs (Floris Books).  The "yellow book".  One of the many guides authored by Roy Wilkinson.  One of the guides written by Charles Kovacs. Of course, most teachers in most kinds of schools use teachers' guides. The issue becomes whether they use sensible, reliable guides — guides that present real knowledge and proven educational approaches — or not. The Waldorf guides are based in Anthroposophical mysticism; they contain little real knowledge and few useful methods. Thus, for instance, the "yellow book" describes the stages of childhood development as outlined — without any factual basis — by Rudolf Steiner. [See pages 16-18.] The courses discussed for each grade level are essentially those prescribed by Steiner, all based on his occult conception of human nature and evolution, originally keyed to his vision of the German national/racial mission. [See "Curriculum" and "The Good Wars".] The authors and editors of the Waldorf guides tend to be true-believing Anthroposophists who hold beliefs that almost no other educators in the world accept. To get a taste of Roy Wilkinson's views, see, e.g., "Temperaments" and "Fairy Tales". For a taste of Charles Kovac's thinking, see, e.g., "Sneaking It In". A WALDORF LIFE Once more, an item from the "news" page:  Play frame [A Waldorf Home].
• ◊ • Waldorf Watch Response: Many people take inspiration from various elements of the Waldorf lifestyle. Waldorf schools and communities emphasize art, wooden toys, homemade bread, green values, play rather than academics, dreamy myths and legends, natural fabrics, and so forth. Some parents and teachers try to use Waldorf methods without first investigating the reasons for them — that is, Waldorf/Anthroposophical doctrines. There are multiple dangers. Full-out embrace of the Waldorf approach makes little sense without the foundation of the Waldorf ideology. For instance, Waldorf schools usually put off teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic until children turn seven. This deprives kids of the benefits of early childhood education, thus depriving them of instruction that research shows can confer lifelong benefits. At a fundamental level, Waldorf turns its back on the modern world, rejecting much that is wrong with contemporary society along with much that is good in contemporary society, such as modern knowledge. Of course, shielding children from the worst of modern culture (violence, graphic sex, excessive materialism, etc.) is obviously desirable. Certainly children need to be loved and protected. But the rejection of modern life can go too far, becoming a retreat into fantasy, an almost willful blindness. Children need to be prepared for fulfilling lives in the real world, not dream lives in fantasy worlds. The Waldorf approach is not simply an effort to give kids safe, "natural," play-filled childhoods. It is meant to preserve young kids' natural clairvoyant ties to the spirit realm and to assist the incarnation of the kids' "etheric bodies." Unless you believe in natural clairvoyance and etheric bodies, none of this makes sense. Adopting Waldorf methods means depriving children of real benefits (such as the advantages of early childhood education) in exchange for entirely fictitious, nonexistent benefits (natural clairvoyance and etheric bodies). Likewise, you should realize that the sweet myths told in Waldorf schools are, according to Waldorf belief, true accounts of the spirit realm, and the cute little creatures such as gnomes that surround Waldorf children represent, according to Waldorf belief, beings that really exist and that really surround us at all times. You may elect to tell your children Waldorf-style myths without intending to convey Waldorf beliefs, and you may surround your children with gnomes and other fantasy characters without intending to teach the kids that such beings really exist. And maybe this will work out for you and your children; maybe no great harm will result. But if you use materials supplied by Waldorf schools or Waldorf homeschooling services, etc., you may well be unintentionally introducing your child to an unearthly, occult viewpoint that can remain rooted in the child's heart and mind for many years, perhaps for a lifetime, with potentially debilitating effects. Waldorf focuses on "higher worlds," imaginary spirit realms, not the real world. The Waldorf approach often fails to prepare kids for real lives in the real world — and this can be a severe disservice to the children you love. [See, e.g., "Spiritual Agenda", "Methods", "Beings", "Thinking Cap", "Coming Undone", "Neutered Nature", "Incarnation", "Failure", "Occultism", and "Academic Standards at Waldorf".] (You should also know that many of the more appealing components of the Waldorf approach are offered to the general public with the intention of snaring the unwary. The Waldorf movement is quite prepared to co-opt all parts of your life and your family's life. You can, for instance, buy such books as THE WALDORF BOOK OF BREADS, THE WALDORF SCHOOL BOOK OF SOUPS, THE WALDORF BOOK OF POETRY, THE WALDORF ALPHABET BOOK, THE WALDORF SONG BOOK, THE WALDORF KINDERGARTEN SNACK BOOK, etc. There are Waldorf guides to parenting, the spiritual role of the wife, "common sense" education, spiritually acceptable toys, and the like. Tread carefully.) Grégoire Perra is a former Waldorf student and teacher. [See “He Went to Waldorf” and “My Life Among the Anthroposophists”.] Here is his account of some central teaching methods employed in the Waldorf schools he came to know so well. Not all Waldorf schools use these methods to the letter, but most use them to some degree, and indeed these methods may be classified among standard Waldorf approaches. Note that Perra was a student and teacher in France, and he has written in French. But the truths he reveals about Waldorf education apply to virtually all Waldorf schools in all countries. [To see his work in its original language, visit http://gregoireperra.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/ma-vie-chez-les-anthroposophes/. I am responsible for the following translation. Any errors in the translation are entirely my fault. — R.R.] The Pernicious Role of Imitation by Grégoire Perra Waldorf education subjects the children to very specific teaching practices and rituals without ever, particularly during early childhood, giving the students any explanations. For example, there is not a word about eurythmy [23] or its function. I remember that when we [students] performed eurythmic movements or figures, most of the time we had no understanding of why we moved from one point in the room to another, and we made arm gestures in the same state of mind. There was also not a word about the different "celebrations" (actually religious ceremonies) we observed or their purpose: We lit candles, sang, formed processions without any clear idea of the reasons for making these marks of devotions. I remember how on my first day in fourth grade [24], I found myself completely lost when attending the ceremony that received the new first grade students into the school — nothing had been said about the event. There was also no explanation for the emphasis put on foreign languages, although at that time it was a distinguishing characteristic of the school. A teacher came into the classroom and began his first lesson of the year without even specifying which language he taught. I remember well how, on my first day, an English language course was followed by a German course, and I had all the trouble in the world understanding the switch from one language to the next. None of the teachers gave an introduction or even presented lead-in material. They immediately started to tell stories in their languages. For homework, I had to attempt translations of a few sentences in each language. But I did not even understand the concept of foreign language, which I confused with the concept of "code"! So I looked in dictionaries to find how each letter of a German or English word could be replaced by a French letter (!). Ultimately, exasperated by my failures, my mother came to my rescue and explained the essential elements that should have been given to me by my teachers. It was the same for recorder lessons [25]: Throughout the year, I just had to do as the others did: cover the holes in my instrument and blow into it at the same time the other students blew. In this form of education, omitting explanations and contexts — having students copy without understanding — is what Anthroposophic teachers call "imitation," and it is used in all classes and all school activities: There is not a word of explanation about the technique of Lazure painting, [26] the need to use wax crayons, the rule against leaving blank spaces on the sheet when drawing, the nature of Bothmer gymnastics (which is actually where gymnastics got its name) [27], the prohibition against playing ball [28], the importance of rhythm, the meaning of ceremonies such as Advent, St. John, etc. It's not that I missed explanations that had been previously given, before I started at Waldorf in the fourth grade. Such explanations had never actually been given. And I was not the only new student from other schools to come into my class this year or the following year. But no explanation was given to them, either. Waldorf educators take pride in claiming that this practice brings their teachings into the psyche of children without stimulating the intellectual center [29], passing primarily (or exclusively) through what they call the poles of rhythm and will. [31] This is based on the recommendations of Rudolf Steiner in his book STUDY OF MAN. [30] But this practice is in fact a violation of children’s awareness, short-circuiting their rational thinking. Required to obey instructions that have not even been explained, needing to imitate the teacher and the other children, Waldorf students learn not ask questions, they do as they are told, dissolving individuality in the will of the group. [32] The film LA VAGUE [33], for example, records an experiment in totalitarian submission conducted by a teacher at an American university; it can be helpful for understanding the pernicious and destructive effects of teaching practices such as this in Waldorf schools. In order to enable students to understand the nature of Nazism, the history teacher Ron Jones asks his class to imitate, without thinking, various gestures to create an atmosphere of psychological fusion of individuals into a group. This process, even though merely an experiment, almost always ends badly, because it is very easy for human beings to sink into such behavior [i.e., submitting passively to the group], and thus we can imagine the lasting damage that may be caused in a child. An inspectors’ report of a Waldorf school in Yonne says this:
In my opinion, the most problematic effect of this educational process, imitating group behavior without explanation or contextualization, occurs during lessons on legends and myths in the lower grades (primary school). Indeed, during a class on mythology, specifically Celtic mythology in the fourth grade, our Waldorf teacher began the class by telling us a myth without saying anything about its cultural and historical context. As Paul Ariès has written about this failure to contextualize myths:
I well remember that we students had an exchange during recess, after that first class, when our "master" told us the wonderful creation story from Celtic mythology. We debated for several minutes whether our teacher had been telling us what really happened during the creation of the world, or whether the story he told was just a "myth." We were unable to decide. In not giving young students help in comprehending legends and myths, does the Waldorf teacher realize that he is creating a serious confusion between the real and the imaginary, which may have devastating psychological effects on some children later? Indeed, those who are the least grounded — the most dreamy children — will sometimes suffer the consequence of being unable to find the line between the real and the imaginary in some circumstances, or they confuse their dreams with reality. Even worse, this practice may aggravate the plight of children with undetected mental disorders, such as unfortunately may exist in all classes. Generally, people who have not received their schooling in a Waldorf school do not realize how Waldorf students experience legends and myths. They think Waldorf students receive these tales as they themselves heard them during their own schooling, as stories you take much as you take stories about Santa Claus (that is to say, with skepticism) — "stories" in the sense that we typically say that someone tells stories. But the notion of stories in the sense of an imaginary tale does not prevail in Waldorf schools. The children become emotionally involved with the the gods and other characters from the myths and legends they are told! They love these characters! These characters are part of their lives, almost part of their families! I still remember being upset all day when my class teacher told us the story of the capture of the god Loki by the Aesir, during the section on Norse mythology in fourth grade. [35] That night as I fell asleep, I wept while replaying the tale in my mind, I was so attached to that god. This is why the sense of wonder surrounding the myths and legends is so strong in the memory of Waldorf students. They have indeed lived under these tales as emotional realities, not mere stories. The children do not necessarily believe that the gods exist, but they become attached to them like real people. [36] Moreover such narratives are not presented only in the study of mythologies, but in all parts of Waldorf education, even science, creating an emotional attachment to the subjective system that the teachers convey to their students. The inspectors report noted:
To be thorough, we should note that the method of omitting context and explanation, which I have attempted to describe, is considered valid only for the lower grades. The lower grades function, according to Rudolf Steiner, under the principle of authority, as he writes in STUDY OF MAN. But in the upper grades (high school) there is a different guideline. Then it is common for Waldorf teachers to begin providing some explanations. For example, myths and legends may be interpreted for the students, the symbolism of colors and shapes implemented in the decorations of the school environment may be examined, the reason for the presence of eurythmy and its alleged benefits may be explained, etc. Adolescents are often quite excited to receive such explanations, as I noticed when I was teaching in these schools. In fact, the students see these as a mark of newfound respect: Finally, something is explained, empowering the students to understand what they previously only received or listened to dreamily. I well remember my own excitement when our history teacher in ninth grade explained for us the Cathar [37] tale "The Man of Many Colors" (published by Editions Anthroposophic Iona in CONTES MERVEILLEUX DES PAYS DE FRANCE {THE FAIRY TALES OF FRANCE}). His interpretation outlined how each of the images in this story could be seen as a step in a process of initiation. [38] But in giving this explanation he was actually teaching us an Anthroposophic doctrine — young teens do not realize that what they experience as a mark of respect is actually a new way of influencing them, a more pernicious attack on their freedom of thought. Thus, Waldorf teaching occurs in two stages, the first — coming under the sign of authority — precludes any explanation or contextualization, while on the other hand the second provides explanations that have a covert Anthroposophical character. This is a method that violates students’ spiritual integrity and their inner freedom. One day we will probably realize that such practices have highly pernicious effects on the minds of children. No doubt such practices will be banned, because they will be understood as processes by which human beings are trained to abdicate their thinking. A habit is developed very early to accept group practices or to receive "stories" without thinking, without finding the need for thought. In addition, some of the practices or beliefs that are taught are those of the Anthroposophical religion. Students become accustomed to these as well, and they are led to accept without thinking (or to put this more strongly, in a thoughtless state) the rituals, customs, and lifestyle of Anthroposophy. A report by inspectors who visited the Waldorf School in Sorgue, in December 1999, expresses this criticism:
For now, society at large has not responded to these teaching practices. Not only are these practices not prohibited, but sometimes they are even subsidized. In my view, this is not only because of the clever concealment used by the schools that implement them. [39] It also stems from the fact that society has not fully understood or embraced the notion of the dignity of the individual mind. It is in fact only a few centuries since the West discovered the concept of "the subject," that is to say, the free individual who exercises his powers of reasoning. But it seems that we have not yet fully understood, at the societal level, that such a value imposes requirements on us. It is very sad that some individuals who have become adults deliberately decide to abdicate their reason and their freedom by entering groups and movements such as Anthroposophy, where freedom of thought is actually prohibited — as I myself experienced. But out of respect for their freedom, we must allow such individuals to abdicate their freedom. Because they have chosen to abandon the condition of the free subject. They have been misled to accept the alternative condition. If we are to respect free choice, we need to accept both distinct possibilities, that of preserving the condition of individual freedom and that of abandoning it. But Anthroposophy does not do this, instead claiming that it offers "free thinking," "living thoughts," "thoughts from the heart," so that you are drawn into practices and rituals that eventually darken, blur, and break your powers of thinking. [40] But it is up to each individual to be vigilant about the risks he takes in entering this or that group. And society must allow everyone to have available the information needed for this decision (as did UNADFI by publishing on its website my article about Waldorf schools [41]). But we should immediately condemn practices that precondition children to such an abdication of thought, or to the abandonment of the state of being a free subject. Therefore, we should not be surprised if one day such "education" is no longer tolerated. To visit other pages in this section of Waldorf Watch, use the underlined links, below.
ENDNOTES [1] In creating this description, I will rely partly on my own memories of Waldorf schooling, the accounts given me by friends who became Waldorf teachers, published accounts by others, Anthroposophical texts, and materials posted by Waldorf teacher training institutions. Because I am generalizing, and because individual Waldorf teachers are given so much leeway to create their own methods, I will not footnote every statement. You can glean indications on these matters, however, by going to such pages as "Teacher Training", "Advice", "Faculty Meetings", "Foundations", etc. Relevant publications include THE NEW ART OF EDUCATION, by Rudolf Steiner (Philosophical-Anthroposophical Publishing Co., 1928), PRACTICAL ADVICE TO TEACHERS, by Rudolf Steiner (Anthroposophic Press, 2000) and the other volumes in the Foundations of Waldorf Education series, THE EDUCATIONAL TASKS AND CONTENTS OF THE STEINER WALDORF CURRICULUM, by Martyn Rawson and Tobias Richter (Steiner Schools Fellowship, 2000), A HANDBOOK FOR WALDORF CLASS TEACHERS, by Kevin Avison (Steiner Schools Fellowship, 2004), WALDORF EDUCATION, by Richard Blunt (Novalis Press, 1995), and the teachers' guides prepared by Roy Wilkinson and, separately, by Charles Kovacs. [2] The arts, and all expressions of beauty, are thought to have spiritual powers. [See, e.g., "Magical Arts".] [3] Some of these matters are touched on in "Faculty Meetings". For accounts by teachers who have worked in Waldorf schools, see "My Life Among the Anthroposophists" and the pages that follow it. Emphasis on rhythm shows up in small ways, as well. Waldorf teachers often lead their students in rhythmic chants or call-and-response exchanges that are meant to facilitate memorization of certain material, such as multiplication tables. In general, Waldorf schools downplay memorization, considering it harmful. Converting a set of information into a chant, poem, or song can help kids internalize that material, and it may seem to do this viscerally rather than intellectually (the material presumably enters the guts or bones, not the brain). All of this accords with the basic Waldorf approach. Whether it actually works well may be another matter. (A Waldorf student attempting to do math may wind up chanting silently, and then finding the results of the chant difficult to conceptualize and employ.) [4] For more on festivals, see "Magical Arts". [5] See, e.g., "Lesson Books". [6] For indications about teachers' authority, see, e.g., "Spirit". [7] From the founder:
The schedule Steiner outlines here is not always followed precisely. The main lessons at some Waldorf schools last 90 minutes without a break, and each main lesson subject is "carried on" (i.e., dealt with) for three or four weeks before being dropped for another subject. Each subject is later renewed at a somewhat higher level, after a break that may be as long as an entire year. Overall, the sequence of main lessons is meant to follow a spiral pattern, emulating and perhaps enacting the upward movement — described by Steiner — of the soul climbing toward enlightenment. [8] Waldorf teachers usually undertake continuing professional development. However, most of this — like the teachers' initial training — usually occurs in special Waldorf/Anthroposophical training facilities where the primary focus is on Rudolf Steiner's occult doctrines. Waldorf teachers may know little about their subjects beyond what they have been told by more senior Anthroposophists. [9] See "Thinking Cap" and "Steiner's Specific". [10] See "The Waldorf Teacher's Consciousness". [11] See "Magical Arts", "Lesson Books", and "His Education". [12] "Too often a zealous attempt to impart information is substituted for the development of human faculties in modern education. This can lead to overexertion of memory and inner exhaustion of the student...." — Note by the editors of Rudolf Steiner's SOUL ECONOMY AND WALDORF EDUCATION (Anthroposophic Press, 1986), rear cover. [12] Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 494. [13] Rudolf Steiner, THE CHILD's CHANGING CONSCIOUSNESS AS THE BASIS OF PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICE (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 94. Also see "Mystic Math" and "Sneaking It In". [14] See "Ahriman" and "Spiders, Dragons and Foxes". [15] See "Humouresque", "Temperaments", and "Races". [16] Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 60. [17] See, e.g., "Science". The Waldorf belief system includes many occult notions that are played out in class. There is this, for instance:
Concerning use of the hands, Steiner taught that we actually think more with our bones than with our brains.
[18] See, e.g., "Academic Standards at Waldorf" and "Our Experience". For a look at particular parts of the Waldorf educational approach, see "Curriculum", "Mystic Math", "Oh My Word", "Magical Arts", and related pages here at Waldorf Watch. [19] Rudolf Steiner, ART AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 247. [20] THE GOETHEANUM: School of Spiritual Science (Philosophical-Anthroposophical Press, 1961), p. 25. [21] For more on these matters, see "Most Significant", "Curriculum", "Common Sense", and "Basement". [22] For more on Waldorf class books — also called lesson books — see "Lesson Books". [23] See "Eurythmy". [24] This was Perra's first day as a Waldorf student. See “My Life Among the Anthroposophists”. [25] Recorders are simple woodwind instruments. Usually, all students in a Waldorf school are required to play them.
A characteristic Anthroposophical practice, lazure is related to veil painting. [See The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.] [27] Bothmer gymnastics is a non-athletic form of movement in which the practitioners "experience" the space around them. "Bothmer Gymnastics is intended to foster balance, not just physical balance but mental and spiritual balance too. It's sometimes associated with the phrase 'spatial dynamics' as it aims to help older children (and adults) explore the relationship between their body and its position in space." [http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=93199] As employed in Waldorf schools, such gymnastics are related to the practice of eurythmy. [See "Eurythmy".] [28] This prohibition is not implemented in many Waldorf schools, but Steiner's views on sports were indeed peculiar. [See, e.g., "Oh Humanity".] [29] Waldorf education generally downplays the use of the brain, especially before high school. [See, e.g., "Thinking" and "Steiner's Specific".] [30] See "Oh Humanity". [31] In Anthroposophy — and in Waldorf education as infused by Anthroposophy — great emphasis is placed on experiencing the "natural rhythms" of life. Each day, week, month, season, and year is thought to have natural rhythms that reflect spiritual forces. One submerges oneself in such rhythms in order to be attuned with the spirit realm. Waldorf classes are often designed to have an underlying rhythmic structure, for this reason. Likewise, Anthroposophists place great emphasis on the will, which is deemed a distinct human faculty. In his instructions on how to develop clairvoyance, Steiner taught that the will must override all obstacles, blocking out any thoughts or experiences that run counter to Anthroposophical belief. The emphasis on will becomes, thus, a profoundly anti-intellectual force, actively suppressing rational thought. [See "Knowing the Worlds".] [32] E.g., from the founder:
[33] See, e.g., http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Vague_%28film%29. [34] Éditions Golias, 2001, ISBN-10: 2914475195.  [35] Loki is a likable but immoral prankster god; the Aesir are a band of gods opposed to Loki and his allies. [See "The Gods".] [36] In Anthroposophical belief, the gods of ancient mythologies are real beings. They exist. Ancient peoples were able to see them, whereas today we have largely lost this ability.
[37] The Cathars were a gnostic Christian cult. Anthroposophy is essentially gnostic. [See "Gnosis".] [38] Occult initiation — gaining access to secret spiritual knowledge, becoming an esoteric insider — is a central goal for Anthroposophists. Senior Waldorf faculty members often deem themselves to be initiates. [See "Inside Scoop".] Steiner outlines the path of initiation in his book KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT. [See "Knowing the Worlds".] [39] See "Secrets". [40] Anthroposophists claim that their system promotes human freedom; they value "living thoughts" (implanted in us by spiritual powers, not products of our brains); and they think that wisdom comes more through emotion than through thinking. The Anthroposophical meaning for such terms, e.g., "freedom," often runs contrary to ordinary usage. [For more on such matters, see, e.g., "Freedom", "Thinking", and the appropriate sections of The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.] [41] UNADFI is an organization that disseminates information about cults. Perra published an article at the UNADFI website, as the result of which the Waldorf school federation in France sued him for defamation. [See “He Went to Waldorf” and Part 3 of “My Life Among the Anthroposophists”.]
[R.R., 2019.] |
