[Photocopy; color added.]

34. "The head is only body; the human chest is body toward the rear and soul toward the front. We carry a real body only in our head as it rests upon our shoulders. We have body and soul by separating the physical chest from the remainder of the chest aspect and allowing it to be acted upon by the soul. " — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 160. 

In addition to teaching Waldorf faculty members about the souls and spirits of their students, Steiner taught them about their students' bodies. All of this is necessary in order for education to be successful, Steiner said; these doctrines are part and parcel of the basis of Waldorf education. The obvious problem is that so much of what Steiner said is obviously wrong, even occasionally ridiculous. Yet devout Waldorf teachers (those who are Anthroposophists or nearly so) usually accept Steiner's pronouncements not simply as truth but virtually as revealed, unarguable, divine truth. Devotion to Steiner is generally widespread among Waldorf teachers and among trainees aiming to become Waldorf teachers. Even at the most deeply Anthroposophical Waldorf training institutions, there are very few recorded instances of Waldorf trainees jumping up, shouting "This is insane! Let me out of here!" and then rushing from the room. This is unfortunate. (Some trainees have come close, though. See, e.g., http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/andreas_lichte.html.)

Here we see Steiner denigrating the head, which houses the brain. The head is dead, he effectively says — it is "only body," or in other words it is wholly physical. The chest is better. Housing the heart, the chest is "soul toward the front." This is consistent with Steiner's general proposition that we should distrust our brains but follow the promptings of our hearts. Many people will like the sound of this, in a general sort of way — who doesn't want to follow the heart's promptings? But, in fact, the heart is not really the seat of emotion. The heart is a pump (a truth Steiner denied). All of our thoughts are produced by our brains (a truth Steiner denied), and in fact all of our emotions are produced by our brains (another truth Steiner denied). We think and feel and perceive thanks to our brains and our nervous systems. Steiner denied this, whereby he cut the ground out from under his strange, mystical educational system: Waldorf education.

35. "A very small portion of what we are becomes visible in our limbs, enough for the limbs to be something corporeal, but actually only a scintilla of what exists in the human limb system, namely the spirit [sic]. The body, soul and spirit exist in the human limb system. The body is only hinted at in the limbs; however, they also contain the soul as well as the spirit, which in principle encompasses the entire universe." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 164.

Steiner taught that physical things are manifestations of spiritual things, and human beings especially manifest the spiritual universe: Not only are we the center of the universe, but we reflect the entire spiritual/physical universe — human beings are microcosms of the universe's macrocosm. As we noted previously, Steiner's teachings are highly flattering to the frail human ego, which helps explain why people (a few — not many, but a few) turn to Steiner for reassurance and guidance. It is just too bad that his reassurances are empty, devoid of factual content. For instance, there is no such thing as the "limb system" (which Steiner sometimes called the "metabolic-limb system," falsely teaching that the limbs and metabolism are parts of a single system). Check any medical encyclopedia or any authoritative medical website. But the kind of real knowledge presented in such places is precisely what Steiner and his followers reject.

As for what Steiner meant by statements such as "The body is only hinted at in the limbs; however, they also contain the soul as well as the spirit...", I don't want to try your patience. Steiner was a mystic, and in such statements his mysticism comes flooding out. Perhaps the best option for us is to look at a couple more statements Steiner made about limbs, and then pass along quietly to other subjects. So, consider the following, if you will:

◊ “[W]e are always shedding and peeling on the outside. If the spirit is not sufficiently strong, then we must cut off some parts, such as fingernails, because the spirit wants to destroy them by absorbing them from outside ... The chest and abdomen...fight against the destruction of the penetrating spirit-soul and fill people with matter. From this you can see that the human limbs extending out beyond the torso are really the most spiritual part of the human being, because in the limbs the process of creating matter occurs the least ... Our limbs are spiritual to a very high degree, and as they move, they consume our body.” — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, pp. 195-196.

◊ "Consider the art of eurythmy [a form of spiritual dance devised by Steiner], through which we move the human body. What exactly are we moving? We are moving the human organism by making the limbs move. The limbs, more than any other part of the human body, pass into the life of the next incarnation ... We directly link what precedes birth with what follows death. In a certain sense, we take from earthly life only the physical medium, the actual human being who is the tool or instrument for eurythmy. But we allow this human being to make manifest what we study inwardly, what is already prepared in us as a result of previous lives; we transfer this to our limbs, which are the part of us where life after death is being shaped in advance." — Rudolf Steiner, ART AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), pp. 246-247.

I suggest we move quietly along.  

36. "Teachers will feel differently when they say to themselves that here is a human being from whom relationships extend out to the entire cosmos and that when I do my work with every one of these growing children, I do something that has meaning for the entire universe. We are in the classroom, and within every child lies a center of the universe. The classroom is a center, yes, even many centers for the macrocosm. Think to yourselves how alive this feels and what it means!" — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, pp. 170-171.

If you have doubted that Steiner's strange medical/physiological teachings have any bearing on Waldorf schooling, here we find Steiner telling us that they do. And he stresses how good this should make Waldorf teachers feel.  Despite the complexity of his teachings, Steiner aimed more at stirring up emotion rather than stimulating intellectual thought. "Think to yourselves how alive this feels!" But, despite Steiner's doctrine that we gain truth through feeling rather than through thinking, in reality feeling is just a subconscious state, it has nothing to do with apprehending reality. We all want to feel good. But doing so on the basis of fallacies and delusions gets us nowhere.

Steiner urges Waldorf teachers to feel vastly ennobled by their work; their work "has meaning for the entire universe"! The classroom is full of human souls, each of whom is "a center of the universe"! This all sounds great, from a certain mystical perspective. Surely it feels great to Waldorf teachers who believe it. But whether it stands up to rational consideration may be something else. Surely, all children are infinitely precious. All deserve the very best we can give them. But is the best we can give them Waldorf education? Wouldn't a real education, based on sensible predicates and oriented to sensible objectives, serve them far better? [See the following passages and commentary.]

37. "Think for a moment about what we have just learned, namely, that regarding the head, humans enter the world with a sleeping spirit and a dreaming soul. Recall that it is necessary from the very beginning, from birth, to educate children through the will because unless we act upon them through the will, we cannot reach the spirit sleeping in their heads. We would create a major gap in human development if we could not in some way reach the spirit aspect in the heads of people. When human beings are born the spirit in the heads is asleep. We cannot get a child with kicking legs to do gymnastics or eurythmy. This is impossible. We also cannot get a child when it is still kicking its legs and, at best, crying, to take up musical instruction. We cannot yet reach the child through art. We cannot yet find a clearly defined bridge from the will to the child’s sleeping spirit. Later, when we can somehow reach the child’s will, we can act upon the child’s sleeping spirit...." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 176.

The purpose of Waldorf education is not educating children. There are various ways to describe the real purpose of Waldorf education, and here Steiner offers us one way. The purpose is to waken the "sleeping spirit" and "dreaming soul" in children. The purpose is spiritual. And this purpose is enacted in various ways, including the arts, and particularly eurythmy — a form of temple dancing created by Rudolf Steiner. [See "Eurythmy".]

38. "Your teaching [i.e., your activities as a Waldorf teacher] must work in parallel with the needs of [the students'] growth. What I have to say here is particularly important for the elementary school years. In the same way that what arises from the head before the change of teeth is connected with the creation of form, what occurs during the period of elementary schooling is the development of life, that is, growth and everything connected with it until puberty." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, p. 180.

To the uninitiated, Steiner's statements sometimes seem like gibberish, and sometimes they seem sort of pleasing but awfully hard to comprehend. In fact, however, Steiner's statements are almost always perfectly meaningful and comprehensible (albeit generally fallacious), and you can easily grasp them once you learn to decode Anthroposophical jargon. Thus, let's use some of the information we have gathered so far and use it to decode statement #38. Steiner taught that children up to age seven ("before the change of teeth") are working on the development of their physical bodies (i.e., "the creation of form"). They do this by gradually incarnating the etheric body, which consists of forces that give the physical body its shape. The head does not think, but it receives impulses from above, which bring the child into life — that is, incarnation in the world. This is "the development of life...growth and everything connected with it until puberty." At puberty, around age fourteen, the astral body incarnates and a new stage of life begins.

Most of what Steiner said is wrong, but his words can be deciphered with a bit of work. Anyone considering Waldorf schooling should put in the work to understand what Waldorf schooling is really about, and an important part of that is learning to understand Steiner's lectures and books — because devout Waldorf teachers take most of their guidance from these sources.

All children are infinitely precious. All deserve the very best we can give them. But is the best we can give them Waldorf education? Wouldn't a real education, based on sensible predicates and oriented to sensible objectives, serve them far better? Waldorf education, based on clairvoyant occultism, aims at such phantom objectives as the incarnation of the etheric and astral bodies. Nothing productive or real — nothing of genuine benefit to children — can come from pursuing such imaginary goals.

39. "Through the head, human beings are related to the animal kingdom, but in such a way that in their physical activities, they continually go beyond it ... The continual metamorphosis of animalistic tendencies streaming downward from the head is not expressed sense perceptibly, but those tendencies act supersensibly upon the human being as the thought process. That really exists as a supersensible process. Your head is not just a lazybones sitting on your shoulders. It is actually the thing that would like to keep you an animal." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 185.

We have seen, previously, what Steiner thought of animals and what he thought of our heads and brains. Here he links these aversions. The head is the seat of animalistic tendencies; it sends animalism (i.e., brain-centric thinking and its effects) downward into the rest of our bodies, potentially making us wholly animalistic. The head and its products, in other words, would cause us to regress, preventing us from evolving to higher states. This would be a disaster. Indeed, people who yield to the effects of their heads/brains will end up in the Anthroposophical version of hell, the "abyss." (Yes, Steiner threatened unbelievers with perdition.) 

◊ "Let us suppose a man were to deny that it was the spirit which has given him the human countenance ... He would remain united with the body and go down into the abyss. And because of not having used the power of the spirit, the external shape would again come to resemble the previous form. The man who descends into the abyss would become animal like [sic]." — Rudolf Steiner, UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN BEING (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993), p. 103. 

◊ Or, to put things more bluntly, “The evil race, with its savage impulses, will dwell in animal form in the abyss.” — Rudolf Steiner, UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN BEING, p. 103.

40. "In the future, healthcare will need to ask how the various levels of heat interact in the cosmos. What is the effect of heat transferred from a cooler location to a warmer one and vice versa? How does an external heat process affect the human organism when a human being encounters it? An interplay of air and water in the processes of external vegetation has been identified, but its effects on people will need to be studied. Modern medicine has barely begun to ask such questions. It places much greater value upon the discovery of the bacteria that cause a disease or illness." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, pp. 190-191.

Steiner did not wholly discount the importance of bacteria, just as "Anthroposophical doctors" — that is, doctors who follow Steiner's teachings — do not wholly  reject modern medicine. But such doctors mainly  reject modern medicine, as did Steiner. Steiner's medical teachings can most aptly be described as quack medicine, which should concern parents, since the medicine practiced in and around Waldorf schools often conforms to Steiner's guidance. Here, for instance, is a report by a mother who sent her daughter to a Waldorf school. When the girl become ill, the school recommended an Anthroposophical doctor: 

"The Anthroposophical doctor made a diagnosis: my child had lost the will to live. He announced one of the potential cures — we were to give our daughter red, yellow, and orange crayons to color with! I looked at my husband in disbelief. When the doctor instructed us to make the sign of a flame out of Aurum cream over my child’s heart at bedtime, I was dumbfounded! I asked the doctor to repeat himself. Indeed, I had heard correctly. I was to make a flame of Aurum cream over her heart at bedtime. Mystified, I asked the doctor what the flame should look like and he showed us with his hand. He told us to apply the gold cream from below the heart upwards, towards the sky at bedtime. I was so baffled by his instructions that he took it upon himself to draw a small diagram of a torso on a prescription pad sheet, with an arrow demonstrating the direction in which the gold flame was to be applied ... During this encounter with the Anthroposophic doctor I had an epiphany of sorts. After paying him his fee of $50, we left the school and I turned to my husband and said with certainty, 'We are in a real live cult!'” — Sharon Lombard, "Spotlight on Anthroposophy".

Anthroposophical medicine draws on many outdated and unscientific sources, such as homeopathy. Tracing the movement of heat within and around the body is thus deemed highly significant. Anthroposophical doctors believe there are three main "systems" in the body: the head or senses-nerves system, the chest or rhythmic system, and the abdominal or metabolic-limb system.

"[These systems] tend to oppose each other in functioning and characteristics ... For instance, the digestive system is associated with heat and helps to dissolve elements in the body, while the head system is associated with cooling and helps in the formation of elements in the body. Illness is caused when the systems of the body become out of balance." — "Anthroposophical. medicine," ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE, altMD. 

As for bacteria, Steiner offered this invaluable observation: 

"Mammon [i.e., the arch-demon Ahriman], the spirit of hindrances and darkness, has countless helpers who incarnate as bacteria." — Rudolf Steiner, ESOTERIC LESSONS 1904-1909 (Steiner Books, 2007), p. 208.

◊

The grave dangers of Anthroposophical medicine are perhaps most clearly revealed in the Anthroposophical notion that illness is good for us:

41. "Nerves are always created when matter...disintegrates and dies in the living organism. This is the reason that nerves in the living organism are dead material: life is displaced and dammed up in itself, and matter crumbles and disintegrates. That is how channels filled with dead matter — the nerves — are created everywhere in people. There the spirit-soul can course through the human being. The spirit-soul speeds through the human being along the nerves because it needs disintegrating matter. It allows the matter on the surface of people to decompose and peel off. The spirit-soul can only fill people after matter dies in them. Inside human beings, spirit-soul moves parallel to the materially dead nerve pathways." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 197.

As we have seen, Steiner associated the nervous system and the brain with death. (“When we think, we die continually." — Rudolf Steiner, BLACKBOARD DRAWINGS 1919-1924 (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2003), p. 56.) Here, Steiner explains that nerves are dead material. This doctrines creates a problem, however. Nerves clearly work; they clearly send signals back and forth between the brain and other organs in the body. If the nerves are dead, how does this happen? Steiner's answer is that the "spirit-soul" travels along the channels created by the nerves. The nerves themselves do nothing, but the living spirit-soul travels back and forth, bringing life and motion to our bodies. Steiner's underlying tenet is that all physical matter is in a significant sense dead; only the spirit world is really alive, and thus everything that exists is, essentially, informed by the living forces of the spirit realm. This is a pleasing idea. The specific problem raised by this quotation, however, is that nerves are quite clearly not dead: As science has shown, nerves are living material that conduct electrical impulses throughout our bodies. In other words, our physical bodies are not, in fact, dead; they are very much alive, and the nerves play a crucial, living role in the functioning of our bodies. Thus, what we see here is Steiner once again rejecting real knowledge — in this case real knowledge of medicine and physiology — and substituting attractive but mistaken mystical beliefs instead.

(Concerning the "spirit-soul": As we saw previously, Steiner said that we have both spirits and souls. Your soul is the temporary spiritual essence that you have during one incarnation, one earthly life. The soul that you have now will be replaced by a different soul in your next life. Your spirit, on the other hand, goes with you through all of your lives: It is your immortal spiritual essence. And, to return to the quotation, the "spirit-soul" is the combination of the spirit and soul. For more, see THE BRIEF WALDORF / STEINER ENCYCLOPEDIA.)

42. "We always work in the spirit of the cosmos. We always connect ourselves with cosmic spirit when we work physically. Physical work is spiritual; mental work is a human bodily function. We must comprehend and understand that physical work is spiritual and that mental work is human activity. When we work physically, we are engulfed by the spirit. When we work mentally, matter is active and excited within us." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 199. 

Steiner's followers tend to rationalize away his absurd and negative statements. They focus instead on his more "uplifting" remarks, as if these were the sum total of his teachings. Here we see Steiner backtracking, something he did rather often. He made many extreme statements, and then from time to time, seeming to recognize that he had gone too far, he retrenched. What is the most positive spin that can be put on the things we have seen Steiner say? Here is an example. Instead of talking again about the deadliness of using our brains, and the dead nature of physical existence, and the threat of sinking into the abyss as animalistic wrongdoers — here Steiner stresses the idea that spirit permeates everything, so even physical existence is really spiritual, in a sense. Therefore, physical work is really spiritual work, and brainwork is "human" and potentially creative, reflecting spirit. (Mental activity is only material substance that has been activated; it is low and physical. But spirit infuses matter, so...) You can make your own decision as to whether a statement like this offsets (or contradicts) the statements we saw previously. At a minimum, however, you should not fall into the trap that so many Steiner fans fall into: Don't pretend that Steiner only made uplifting statements. He also made all the other statements we have seen, and many more like them.

43. "That we have slowly made something senseless out of gymnastics, have made it into an activity that only exercises the body, is a side effect of the age of materialism. That we want to raise it to the level of a sport, that we want to add nonsense to it, so that it becomes even less than senseless, meaningless movements, reflects a desire to drag people down, not just to the level of materialistic thinking, but also to animalistic feeling. Excessive sport activity is Darwinism in practice. Theoretical Darwinism claims that people developed from animals. Sports are practical Darwinism, and that means setting up the goal of degenerating people back into animals." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 201.

Having been, at least briefly, positive and uplifting, Steiner switches back to his other mode, in this instance turning his guns on targets that might seem awfully trivial: gymnastics and sports. Of course, gym and sports constitute a big part of student life at most schools, so the topic is not out of place in a discussion of Waldorf schooling. So, what does Steiner say? We have taken the spiritual component out of gymnastics. In this materialistic age, we have turned gymnastics into something that "only exercises the body." (Contrary to what he said before, Steiner now does not consider physical activity to be, really, spiritual.) We have dragged gymnastics down to become nothing but "senseless, meaningless movements" — i.e., purely physical movements. This is the result of our "materialistic thinking" and our "animalistic feeling." We are dragging ourselves down, lowering ourselves to a "Darwinian" level (one of Steiner's harshest terms: Darwin said we evolved from animals, therefore his teachings are animalistic, and when we are animalistic, we become "Darwinian"). By putting too much emphasis on sports, we run the risk of "degenerating people back into animals" — and you know what happens to such people (hint: the abyss). In fact, we seem to be doing this intentionally, willfully: This has become our "goal." We are committing spiritual suicide through "excessive sport activity." Heavens.

Of course, there are good reasons to think gym and sports are over-emphasized in many schools. But these good reasons are far removed from the Steiner/Waldorf reasons. The Steiner/Waldorf reasons are mystical, irrational, and fundamentally false. Doing gymnastics, or playing on a sports team, does not "degenerate people back into animals." Heavens.

44. "As teachers, we might ask ourselves why we should test children at all, because we have had them in front of us and know very well what they do or do not know. Under current conditions, this can, of course, be only an ideal, and I would ask you, in general, not to reveal your rebellious natures too strongly. For the present time, you need to keep what you have to say against modern culture to yourselves, so that you can slowly work (because, in this area, we can only work slowly) toward the goal that people learn to think differently. In that way, society can take on a form other than the one it has now." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 203.

Steiner often urged Waldorf teachers to disguise their opinions and purposes: Keep our secrets from outsiders, he said many times. The truth is that devout Waldorf teachers (those who are Anthroposophists or nearly so) have "rebellious natures." They are revolutionaries who want to reform all human institutions to conform to their own Steiner-inspired vision. [See "Threefolding".] Steiner initiated and led this intention, but he sometimes had to remind his fervent followers to play things cool. Go slow, keep mum, work surreptitiously. Move subtly toward our "goal" — teaching people to "think differently", i.e., teaching them to think like Anthroposophists. Eventually, if we are clever enough, the great political victory will be at hand, and society will "take on a form other than the one it has now." 

Anthroposophy is a spiritual movement, but it is also a political movement. And Waldorf schools play a significant part in this movement: They are centers for guiding people to "think differently," nudging them to move toward Anthroposophy. In reviewing THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, we have been seeing how Anthroposophists think. Is this how you would like to see more people think? Is this how you would like to see your children think?

◊

45. "It would be a mistake to view the lung as less spiritual than the nose. The lung is more artistically formed. The spirit, or at least the soul, permeates it more completely than the nose. If you understand things properly, you will see that, although the nose sits shamelessly in the middle of the human face, the lungs, even though they are more closely connected with the soul, modestly hide their existence." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 205.

What can I say? Steiner here shifts back to his upbeat mode. Everything is spiritual. The lungs are spiritual. The nose is spiritual. Everything is, in varying ways, spiritual. This is very nice.

But Steiner evidently did not realize how laughable his remarks sometimes were. I nearly knocked a friend off her chair, once, by quoting the first line of this passage ("I would be a mistake..."). Steiner did play for laughs, occasionally. But in this instance he was trying to make a serious point ("If you understand things properly..."). But he was not quite successful. (Oh, that presumptuous nose, sitting "shamelessly in the middle of the human face." Compare it to the sweet, more-soul-connected lungs, which "modestly hide their existence.")

I have been accused of hating Steiner and Waldorf schools and Anthroposophists. Not so. I have only tried to tell the truth. I have quoted Steiner and his followers, and explained what they sometimes left unclear, and pointed out instances when their statements are without any factual foundation, and noted when occasionally their statements are preposterous. I laugh at things that are funny, not at things that I hate. I encourage a little more laughter, and charity, and freedom from cant, all around. One of the highest forms of charity I can imagine is making sure that children are not immersed in mystical, occult nonsense.

46. "Modern science has absolutely no understanding of [these things] ... [T]he soul-teeth appear as [i.e., when] a capacity to learn to read and write [develops]." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 208. 

This is a particularly opaque statement by Steiner. Here is a different translation: 

"[C]ontemporary science has not the least understanding of the [things] I have just barely touched on ... [T]he power to write and read is an expression of the teething of the soul." — Rudolf Steiner, STUDY OF MAN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1966), p. 186.

Steiner here is speaking of several parts of the body: the torso, the chest, and then the teeth. His main point is that he is right and science is wrong; modern or contemporary science is in the dark, whereas he can tell us the deep truths about things. On other occasions, Steiner said that his own teachings — "spiritual science" — build on the natural sciences; and sometimes he said that the natural sciences would eventually confirm the truths of spiritual science. But more commonly he took the stance we find here: Science is wrong.

Well, science is certainly incomplete. There is still a vast amount for us to discover about the universe. The scientific knowledge we possess now towers over the scientific knowledge possessed during the 19th and early 20th centuries — when Steiner was alive — and we can be confident that the scientific knowledge of the 22nd century will tower over are own, 21st-century knowledge. But this does not mean that scientific knowledge is false. It means that science is always advancing. As the best tool we have for learning about the universe, and our world, and ourselves, science teaches us more and more every day.

As for Steiner's teachings: Not only do they often contradict the firm scientific knowledge we possess, they become less and less plausible as science progresses. For instance, what Steiner once said about Mars (it is wetter than Earth, and there are long lines resembling canals to be seen there) may have seemed plausible once, but we now know that these statements are wholly false. 

Of course, it can be difficult for laymen to judge. Science says X, but "spiritual science" says Y. Which is right? Figuring this out can be tough. But sometimes it isn't so very  tough. Read Steiner's statements and look for the evidence he provides. Generally, he provides none, whereas the essence of real science is to provide plentiful evidence and keep doing so over and over, as scientist after scientist runs experiments to test scientific hypotheses. Then, too, sometimes Steiner's statements insult our intelligence. "Soul-teeth" or "the teething of the soul" refers to a child's loss of baby teeth and their replacement by adult teeth (your soul is more fully incarnated when your "soul-teeth" come in). This is the signal that the child is ready to learn reading and writing. Only parents who can take such statements seriously should even consider sending their children to Waldorf schools, where Steiner's words are treated as virtual holy writ. (And such parents must willingly accept that their children will not receive any of the benefits of early-childhood education as offered in mainstream society. For instance, their kids won't be taught to read and write until several years after they ordinarily would have begun. Why? Because their baby teeth haven't fallen out yet.)

◊

Why in the world do Waldorf schools place so much emphasis on teeth?

"It will seem strange that in discussing man as a spiritual being, I speak first of the teeth ... [A] truly spiritual understanding of the human being shows us [that] the child develops teeth not only for the sake of eating and speaking, but for quite a different purpose as well. Strange as it sounds to-day, the child develops teeth for the purpose of thinking. Modern science little knows that the teeth are the most important of all organs of thought. For the child, up to the time of the second dentition, these teeth constitute the organ of thought ... The forces that press the teeth out from the jaw are the same forces that [in the young child] bring thought to the surface from the dim, sleeping and dreaming life of childhood. With the same degree of intensity as it teethes, the child learns to think." — Rudolf Steiner, EDUCATION (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Co., 1943), lecture 4, GA 307.

Scientists don't know this. Did you know it?

47. "What forms human intellectuality has a strong tendency to become slow and lazy, and it becomes most lazy when people constantly feed it with materialistic ideas. However, it will take flight when we feed it ideas received from the spirit, but we receive these into our souls only through the indirect path of imagination." — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, Foundations of Waldorf Education, I, p. 211.

Intellect is the use of the brain for rational, objective thought — especially, at a high level, when dealing with concepts and abstractions. Intellect can be wrong, and intellectuals are certainly not always right. Nevertheless, intellect is a powerful tool. But Steiner — despite being an intellectual himself —  scorned it. 

“The intellect destroys or hinders.” — Rudolf Steiner, WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 1, Foundations of Waldorf Education, XIII (Anthroposophical Press, 1995), p. 233. [See "Steiner's Specific".]

Steiner's antidote to intellect is imagination. And what did he mean by imagination? As we have seen, he meant a form of clairvoyance. People once possessed natural powers of clairvoyance, Steiner taught, but most people have lost those powers today. Note how in the following statement, "clairvoyance" and "imagination" are essentially synonymous: 

“Essentially, people today have no inkling of how people looked out into the universe in ancient times when human beings still possessed an instinctive clairvoyance ... If we want to be fully human, however, we must struggle to regain a view of the cosmos that moves toward Imagination again....” — Rudolf Steiner, ART AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 256.

If we still possessed clairvoyant or imaginative powers, what would we see in the world around us? What did Steiner see, using the clairvoyance he claimed to possess? For one thing, gnomes. 

“There are beings that can be seen with clairvoyant vision at many spots in the depths of the earth ... If you dig into the metallic or stony ground you find beings which manifest at first in remarkable fashion — it is as if something were to scatter us. They seem able to crouch close together in vast numbers, and when the earth is laid open they appear to burst asunder ... Many names have been given to them, such as goblins, gnomes and so forth.”  — Rudolf Steiner, NATURE SPIRITS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995), pp. 62-63.

So there you have it. This is the choice Steiner confronts us with; this is the choice a parent must make when deciding whether to send a child to a school run by people who believe Steiner. Science or Anthroposophy? Intellect or clairvoyance? Reality or... gnomes?

This brings us to the end of the lectures that form the chief "basis of Waldorf education": all fourteen lectures in A GENERAL STUDY OF THE HUMAN BEING, otherwise known as STUDY OF MAN or THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE. 

The volume I have primarily quoted from, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, includes additional material. That material has its own interest, but it is not essential to our purpose here. You have seen excerpts from each of the lectures specified as essential to an understanding of Waldorf education. 

I hope you have found this survey helpful. But don't stop here. Get a copy of these fourteen lectures, under whatever title, and read the lectures in full. Read other Steiner texts as well. And read essays and lectures and books by advocates of Waldorf education as well as by critics of Waldorf education. 

If nothing else, I think the survey we have conducted should convince you that there are deep issues one must address before embracing a form of education that is based on the kind of thinking Steiner displayed in these key lectures. 

Steiner delivered the last of the fourteen lectures on September 5, 1919. We would be remiss if we did not note that Steiner held a discussion with Waldorf teachers on the same day. From it, we can extract a final quotation, one that may put the value and wisdom of all Steiner's teachings in context. 

One of the teachers raised the subjects of sunrise and sunset, and how the Sun and planets move. Steiner corrected the poor teacher, explaining that the conventional view of planetary movements "is not quite correct." The planets don't move in orbits, he explained. Instead, they travel along with the Sun in a spirally ("lemniscatory") line:

48. "In reality it is a case of a movement like this (lemniscatory screw-movement). Here, for example, [in position 1] we have the Sun; here are Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, and here are Venus, Mercury, and Earth. Now they all move in the direction indicated [spiral line], moving ahead one behind the other, so that when the Sun has progressed to the second position we have Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars here, and we have Venus, Mercury, and Earth over there. Now the Sun continues to revolve and progresses to here [position 3]. This creates the illusion that Earth revolves round the Sun. The truth is that the Sun goes ahead, and the Earth creeps continually after it." — Rudolf Steiner, DISCUSSIONS WITH TEACHERS, Foundations of Waldorf Education (Anthroposophic Press, 1997), Foundations of Waldorf Education, III, p. 168.

[Photocopy; color added.]

It is not recorded that any of the Waldorf teachers shouted "This is insane! Let me out of here!" and then bolted from the room. No, the teachers obediently absorbed the "wisdom" of Rudolf Steiner and then settled down to "educate" children in accordance with that "wisdom" — just as subsequent generations of Waldorf teachers have done.

Postscript

Here's an inducement to read all fourteen lectures in their entirety.

How do you know that I haven't cheated? How do you know that I haven't skipped over page after page of wonderful, brilliant, logical, and transcendent statements by Steiner? How do you know that I haven't perversely plucked out a few stray quotations that, by willfully misrepresenting everything true and noble, I have twisted into a semblance of nonsense?

Come to that, how do you know that Steiner made any of the statements I have ascribed to him? How do you know that I am not — to put it bluntly — lying?

You can't know. Not unless you read Steiner. Reading Rawlings isn't enough. Rawlings may be wrong, or only half-right, or wholly evil and malicious. (I can promise you that I have not misrepresented Steiner — I have correctly quoted representative statements made by Steiner, and I have explained them truthfully and accurately. Cross my heart. But — how can you know?)

No. I'm sorry. If you truly want to get to the truth, you'll have to do some extra work. Read Steiner. Get his lectures, get the complete texts of his lectures, and read them. I ask you to do this for your own sake and also, more importantly, for your children's sake. You will see that I have told you the truth, and you should certainly bear this truth in mind when selecting a school for your children.

Post-Postscript

Belief in the actual existence of gnomes is just one minor telltale sign of the strange, mystical thinking found in Waldorf schools. We shouldn't make too much of it, in and of itself. Still, it is indicative. Most outsiders can hardly believe that Rudolf Steiner's followers actually believe in the actual existence of gnomes. But they do. Here's an example from an Anthroposophical publication. As you read, keep reminding yourself that this passage was written for adults, not children:

“Since gnomes and human beings are alike earthbound creatures, we will probably find gnomes — or cobolds, or goblins, as they are sometimes also called — the fairy race closest to our understanding... [G]nomes live down below the surface of our planet, where roots take an anchor-hold on earth ... Gnomes are immensely clever Little People ... Gnomes are the only beings in the world who never sleep. This is because they are afraid to do so. They believe that any slackening of attention forebodes double tragedy: the dissolution of their bodies (which they rightly or wrongly feel must be held together by sheer concentration) and the frightful disgrace of being ignorant of what goes on ... There could be no such things as plant or tree roots if there were no gnomes to tend their development. Gnomes are at work all through the year marshaling nutrients around them and wielding magnetic forces to draw them down to a firm grounding in the earth.” — Waldorf teacher Marjorie Spock, FAIRY WORLDS AND WORKERS - A Natural History of Fairyland (Anthroposophic Press, 1980), pp. 11-12.

Note the adult language ("alike earthbound," "slackening of attention," "forebodes double tragedy," "dissolution," "magnetic forces"...). This passage was written, in all seriousness, by an adult for adults. Few adults outside the Waldorf/Anthroposophical community could possibly take it seriously. But Rudolf Steiner's adult followers — including many who teach in Waldorf schools — take such writing very seriously indeed. They believe such things. Seriously.

To explore Anthroposophical beliefs more generally, with minimal emphasis placed on gnomes, see "Everything", "Oh Man", and "Nutshell." (Or, if you insist, to learn more about gnomes and other mystical beings taken seriously in Anthroposophical doctrines, see "Neutered Nature", "Gnomes", and "Beings".)

— Roger Rawlings

Here are items from 

the Waldorf Watch News: 

October 18, 2018

STRUGGLING STEINER ACADEMY 

POSTPONES KINDERGARTEN REOPENING 

From DevonLive.com [Devon, UK]:

MP backs temporary closure 

of Exeter's struggling 

Steiner school

The school's Kindergarten will now 

remain closed until after half term

By Rom Preston-Ellis

Exeter's MP [Member of Parliament] has spoken of his concern following the sudden closure of the city's Steiner Academy.

The school on Cowley Bridge Road closed to all pupils on Friday after an Ofsted [Office for Standards in Education] inspection raised 'serious concerns'.

[The school] is set to reopen on Thursday after appointing a completely new management committee.

However, parents with children at Steiner's Kindergarten were told on Tuesday that that section of the school would not reopen until after half term [i.e., the middle of the term].

Writing to parents, acting principle Paul Houghham said that reasons for the continued closure of the Kindergarten included the need for improvements in "physical infrastructure, systems and processes and staff training”.

Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw said: "I have written to the Education Secretary to seek his urgent assurance that the problems at the school are being addressed and that the children affected can go back to a school that is safe and where they can receive the quality education every child deserves….”

[10/18/2018    https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/mp-backs-temporary-closure-exeters-2115948   This article originally appeared on October 17.]

◊

Waldorf Watch Response:

This is one of a long, doleful parade of news articles about failed or failing Steiner/Waldorf schools in the United Kingdom. [See "Steiner School Crisis".]

Steiner Academy Exeter seems to be making an effort to be more cooperative with UK education officials than Rudolf Steiner School Kings Langley was. The latter school was eventually shut down by the officials. [See "RSSKL".]

Reforming a Steiner or Waldorf school is quite difficult. Fundamental characteristics of Steiner education may prevent a Steiner/Waldorf school from truly meeting the requirements established by state departments of education.

Steiner/Waldorf education is not primarily intended to provide a good education, as this concept is usually understood. [See "Academic Standards at Waldorf".] Steiner/Waldorf schools have other objectives.

The chief objective is to promote Rudolf Steiner's version of Theosophy, the religion he cobbled together and dubbed "Anthroposophy." [See "Basics" and "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?"] Steiner/Waldorf schools rarely teach students the tenets of Anthroposophy as intellectual constructs, but they work to convey Anthroposophy to the children at the emotional and spiritual level — which Anthroposophists deem far more important. [See "Here's the Answer", "Spiritual Agenda", and "Sneaking It In".]

Steiner/Waldorf schools function essentially as Anthroposophical centers of worship. [See "Schools as Churches".] Students receive indirect but persistent and deep conditioning in Anthroposophical attitudes and behaviors. [See "Indoctrination".] The objective is that the students may, when they become adults, make the conscious decision to become full-fledged Anthroposophists.

Rudolf Steiner asserted that the most important knowledge is "occult" or "hidden." His most important book, giving an overview of all his teachings, is titled "An Outline of Occult Science". [See "Everything".] Occult knowledge is fully conveyed only to initiates; it is largely kept hidden from outsiders. [See, e.g., "Inside Scoop".] For this and other reasons, Steiner/Waldorf schools often conceal their intentions and underlying beliefs from outsiders. [See "Secrets".]

When speaking with insiders, Steiner made matters plain. Thus, in addressing Waldorf teachers, he once said this:

“[W]e have to remember that an institution like the Independent Waldorf School with its anthroposophical character, has goals that, of course, coincide with anthroposophical desires. At the moment, though, if that connection were made official, people would break the Waldorf School’s neck." — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 705.

A Steiner/Waldorf school can become good school in the ordinary sense — that is, a school that conveys real knowledge to children, preparing the students for real lives in the real world — only if it renounces Rudolf Steiner and his occult preachments. But this would mean creasing to be a genuine Steiner/Waldorf school.

— R.R.

◊

For previous coverage of the situation at Steiner Academy Exeter, see "What the School Must Do to Save Itself", October 17, 2018, "Exeter Closure Extended Again", October 16, 2018, "Exeter Update: More than Safeguarding", October 14, 2018, "Another Inspection, Another Closure", October 13, 2018, and "Problems at Another U.K. Steiner School", July 29, 2018.

October 19, 2018

FAILING 

YET HANGING ON 

From Schools Week [London, UK]:

Revealed: The private schools 

that remain open despite 

standards warnings

[by] Jess Staufenberg

A private school has been forced to close most classes after the government threatened to shut it down over poor standards — despite other failing schools remaining open....

Only the kindergarten is open at Rudolf Steiner School Kings Langley, Hertfordshire after the Department for Education threatened to deregister the school following an ‘inadequate’ Ofsted [Office for Standards in Education] grade two years ago.

The school had also failed to meet the government’s independent school standards on six occasions, however on its most recent inspection it met the requirements.

But other failing schools don’t appear to have been hit with deregistration notices, Schools Week has found, with one faith school judged ‘inadequate’ four times in a row.…

The worst offender, Rabia Girls’ and Boys’ School, an independent Islamic school in Luton...has been graded ‘inadequate’ in four full inspections, and failed the independent school standards eight times since 2014.

The power to close down schools rests with the DfE [the Department for Education], but Ofsted has been increasingly outspoken about the [Department's] inaction….

Rudolf Steiner School, Kings Langley...was graded inadequate in 2016 over a lack of robust safeguarding systems and weak teaching.

Following monitoring visits, the school received a letter from the DfE in July 2017 saying it would be struck off the independent schools’ register.

Rudolf Steiner School, Kings Langley has appealed the DfE decision….

A spokesperson for the DfE said they cannot comment until the appeal process has concluded. They added all independent schools must meet the standards or face closure.

[10/19/2018   https://schoolsweek.co.uk/revealed-the-private-schools-that-remain-open-despite-standards-warnings/]

◊

Waldorf Watch Response:

The current British government, under the Conservative Party, has been accommodating to various independent educational efforts. It has supported a free-enterprise approach, encouraging the formation of a wide range of alternative educational institutions. And it has been loathe to shutter schools even when they clearly serve their students badly. 

The Department for Education under this government has been anything but a fierce watchdog. Yet even in these lax circumstances, some British Steiner schools have found themselves imperiled. School inspectors have found many flaws in them.

We might ask why this has happened. Why, even in a favorable climate, have some Steiner schools found themselves threatened with official sanctions?

The answer lies deep in the nature of Steiner or Waldorf education.

Steiner/Waldorf schools often have serious difficulties meeting regular educational requirements. These schools do not generally strive to offer students a good education, per se — their focus lies elsewhere. [See "Academic Standards at Waldorf", "Spiritual Agenda", and the Waldorf Watch for October 18, 2018: "Reforming a Steiner or Waldorf school is quite difficult...."] 

The low quality of Steiner/Waldorf education, as judged by conventional standards, became apparent at the very first Waldorf school. When teachers at that school became concerned that they were not preparing students adequately for standard final examinations in the 12th grade, school founder Rudolf Steiner replied:

“The question of final examinations is purely a question of opportunity. It is a question of whether we dare tell those who come to us that we will not prepare them for the final examination at all....” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 712.

Later, when the students did poorly in the exams, Steiner said,

“We should have no illusions: The results gave a very unfavorable impression of our school to people outside.” — Ibid., p. 725.

Waldorf education is not designed to convey much knowledge to students nor to prepare the students for their lives in the real world after graduation. Hence, one of Steiner's followers has written this:

“The success of Waldorf Education...can be measured in the life force attained. Not acquisition of knowledge and qualifications, but the life force is the ultimate goal of this school.” — Anthroposophist Peter Selg, THE ESSENCE OF WALDORF EDUCATION (SteinerBooks, 2010)‚ p. 30.

The problem here is twofold. Waldorf education gives low priority to knowledge, and it gives high priority to a fantasy. "Life force" does not exist. It is a theoretical force postulated by some philosophers and scientists in the 19th century. The concept has been discredited subsequently, but — like many other old and even ancient fallacies — it is still affirmed in Waldorf education. As in so many ways, Waldorf is profoundly backward. [Steiner, of course, sought to differentiate his version of life force from the ordinary, discredited version. See, e.g., the entry for "life force" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.]

As another of Steiner's followers has written, Waldorf education is not "fact-based" — it attaches little importance to factual knowledge.

“This is the obvious flaw in fact-based education. Whether we were taught about the solar system, the Soviet Union, or computers, much of what we had to learn in school [i.e., in non-Waldorf schools] is now outdated.” — Waldorf teacher Jack Petrash, UNDERSTANDING WALDORF EDUCATION (Nova Institute, 2002), p. 26.

Yes, facts change. But the proper response is not to devalue factual knowledge — it is to teach children how to ascertain factual knowledge and how to keep abreast of new developments, new discoveries. Waldorf schools do not, however, aim to do this. In fact, Waldorf education is not intended to be essentially rational:

"You will injure children if you educate them rationally....” — Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 61. 

Steiner was speaking, here, primarily about young children. But the Waldorf aversion to rationality infects all levels of Waldorf schooling. Waldorf students are encouraged to have faith in their imaginations and intuitions, not primarily in their reasoning minds. The Waldorf approach discourages critical thinking. A Waldorf headmaster has expressed the matter this way:

"A youth whose childhood has been touched by the blight of 'critical thinking' will come to the moment of independent insight badly crippled ... Because skepticism has long since robbed him of part of his heart, he will now feel unable to embrace enthusiastically what he has come to understand." — John Fentress Gardner, THE EXPERIENCE OF KNOWLEDGE (Waldorf Press, 1975), pp. 127-128.

In the Waldorf view, we "understand" things — we reach "independent insight" — through our emotions and our imaginations. Ultimately, in the Waldorf view, we come to understand things by developing clairvoyance. Waldorf schools are frequently staffed by teachers who believe in clairvoyance. Many Waldorf teachers think they are clairvoyant; others credit the pronouncements of their colleagues who claim to be clairvoyant. Steiner commended this approach:

"Not every Waldorf teacher has the gift of clairvoyance, but every one of them has accepted wholeheartedly and with full understanding the results of spiritual-scientific investigation [i.e., the disciplined use of clairvoyance]." — Rudolf Steiner, WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 2 (Anthroposophic Press, 1995), p. 224.

Thus, we find Waldorf teachers making pronouncements such as this:

"Must teachers be clairvoyant in order to be certain that they are teaching in the proper way? Clairvoyance is needed...." — Eugene Schwartz, THE MILLENNIAL CHILD (Anthroposophic Press, 1999), pp. 157.

But clairvoyance is illusory. Like life force and so much else that Waldorf education affirms, clairvoyance does not exist. [See "Clairvoyance".] Yet clairvoyance is the central pillar of the Waldorf worldview. Clairvoyance constitutes what Steiner called "the Waldorf teacher's consciousness":

“[W]e must work to develop this consciousness, the Waldorf teacher’s consciousness, if I may so express it. This is only possible, however, when in the field of education we come to an actual experience of the spiritual. Such an experience of the spiritual is difficult to attain for modern humanity. We must realize that we really need something quite specific, something that is hardly present anywhere else in the world, if we are to be capable of mastering the task of the Waldorf school ... [We need] what humanity has lost in this respect, has lost just in the last three or four centuries. It is this that we must find again.” — Rudolf Steiner, DEEPER INSIGHTS INTO EDUCATION (Anthroposophical Press, 1983), p. 21. 

What have people lost? According to Steiner, modern humanity has lost the innate awareness of spiritual reality that ancient peoples possessed. The ancients had natural clairvoyance. If we are to realize our full human potential, we need to be healed. Such healing is the true but forgotten objective of education: to repair humanity so that we again recognize spiritual truths. This requires the fostering of clairvoyant awareness:

“Essentially, people today have no inkling of how people looked out into the universe in ancient times when human beings still possessed an instinctive clairvoyance. Nowadays we believe that the different pictures or images or Imaginations [mental images produced by clairvoyance]...are the product of fantasy. They are not ... Human progress demanded that this living imaginative view fade away and be replaced by the intellectual view ... If we want to be fully human, however, we must struggle to regain a view of the cosmos that moves toward Imagination again.” — Rudolf Steiner, ART AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 256.

Note how, in statements such as this, "clairvoyance" and "imagination" are essentially interchangeable terms. When they advocate imagination, Waldorf schools are ultimately advocating clairvoyance.

This is the Waldorf view. It is unrealistic. It is irrational. It devalues knowledge. It devalues facts. It devalues critical thinking. It emphasizes fantasies such as life force and clairvoyance. It is fundamentally false.

The Waldorf worldview is the reason Waldorf schools have difficulty meeting regular educational requirements. It is the reason Waldorf schools have difficulty providing their students with a good education.

— R.R.

October 20, 2018

AVERAGE, ABOVE AVERAGE, 

AND WALDORF  

Waldorf or Steiner schools often have low academic standards. [1] This does not mean, however, that all Waldorf/Steiner schools are inferior to other schools by all measures. [2] Nor does it mean that all students who attend Waldorf/Steiner schools will fare badly when they graduate. [3]

Here are excerpts from two recent news reports bearing on these matters.

From Schools Week [London, UK]:

Revealed: The top 10 schools 

in the country for progress 8

by Alix Roberston

Three schools belonging to the Star Academies trust featured in the top ten schools in the country for progress 8.... [4]

They included the top-of-the-table Tauheedul Islam Girls’ High School, which posted a progress 8 score of 1.91.

That means every pupil at the school achieved, on average, nearly two grades higher than an average pupil in other schools with the same prior attainment….

The top ten progress 8 schools[:]

Tauheedul Islam Girls’ High School

Wembley High Technology College

Dixons Trinity Academy

The Steiner Academy Hereford….

[Etc.]

[10/20/2018    https://schoolsweek.co.uk/revealed-the-top-10-schools-in-the-country-for-progress-8/]

◊

From Denver Business Journal [Colorado, USA]:

These Colorado high schools 

produced the most Harvard, 

Princeton and MIT grads

by Jonathan Rose

A new report examines the Colorado high schools that sent the most alums to the top-three-ranked universities on U.S. News & World Report’s latest list: No. 1 Princeton University, No. 2 Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which tied for third place….

The Colorado high schools with at least one graduate from the three institutions include…Shining Mountain Waldorf School (Boulder)…. [5]

[10/20/2018      https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2018/10/18/colorado-high-schools-ivy-league-graduates.html   This article originally appeared on October 18.]

◊

Waldorf Watch Response:

A fair assessment of Waldorf education must include the recognition that sometimes Waldorf or Steiner schools appear to stand well above average. Sometimes Waldorf/Steiner schools stack up well when compared to other schools, and sometimes alumni of Waldorf/Steiner schools do quite well in college and in their subsequent careers.

Assessing any type of school can be difficult. And, of course, there are exceptions to all norms. While most Waldorf/Steiner schools may attach little importance to academic excellence, a few may value it relatively more. And, then again, sometimes surprising results may arise largely by chance.

The success attained by any student is, generally speaking, a highly personal matter. Some kids are more highly motivated than others. Some are more industrious. Some are brighter. Some find a particular school environment more congenial than their classmates do. Some like their teachers while others don't. Some are obedient while others are rebellious. Some become fascinated by a particular subject while others remain unchallenged or unstimulated. Many factors are involved in any child's educational success.

The most important factor, often, has little to do with the school a child attends. It is family life. A child who has exceptionally caring, nurturing, and encouraging parents has an enormous advantage over children who receive less parental support. Home environment is important in many other ways, as well. A child may arrive at school primed for success if s/he comes from a home rich in intellectual and cultural resources — perhaps a home having a large family library, perhaps a home in which stimulating family discussions occur nightly at the dining table, perhaps a home in which many extracurricular opportunities are affordable and emphasized. [6]

Still, the importance of one's schooling cannot be denied. Although some very successful individuals come out of some very bad schools, attending a good school is surely a great advantage — and some Waldorf students attend better schools than others do. [7] Not all Waldorf/Steiner schools are wholly alike, and certainly not all Waldorf teachers are alike. [8] Indeed, not all Waldorf teachers are Anthroposophists. [9] A student fortunate enough to study under just one exceptionally talented and caring teacher — in any type of school — may benefit from this experience throughout all of her/his subsequent life.

These are all important and intricate subjects.

And yet, to some degree, they are all beside the point. The academic quality of a Waldorf/Steiner education is not the crucial question about such an education. The crucial question has to do with occult indoctrination. [10] Waldorf schools exist to promote Anthroposophy. [11] Unless you want your children to be steered toward Anthroposophy, you should not send them to a Waldorf or Steiner school. All other considerations pale in comparison to this.

Put the matter this way: Let's posit, for the sake of argument, that all Waldorf/Steiner schools are academically excellent. But let's also posit that children attending these schools will be lured toward the esoteric, occult labyrinth that is Anthroposophy. [12] Would you send your children to such a school?

The truth, of course, is different from our hypothetical situation. Most Waldorf schools are not academically excellent. But most of them do, to one degree or another, try to maneuver students (and their parents) toward lifelong devotion to Rudolf Steiner's concocted religion, Anthroposophy. [13] Realizing these things should help you greatly in answering the crucial question. Would you send your children to such a school?

◊

[1] See "Academic Standards at Waldorf". Also see recent news coverage here for October 19, 2018 and October 18, 2018.

[2] Comparing Waldorf schools to a national average, as in the Progress 8 program, means comparing them to some very good schools — but also to many very bad schools. Making the comparison only to the best schools would be more meaningful. But even then, the comparison would be difficult because Waldorf schools are unique — they have different purposes and a different character. Indeed, evaluating an individual Waldorf/Steiner school purely on its own merits, by its own standards, can be a challenge. [For guidance, see "Clues".]

[3] See, e.g., the section "Waldorf Graduates" on the page "Upside".

[4] Progress 8 is a program that compares academic achievement of students at secondary schools in the UK. The average score of schools in the program is 0. A score of 1 means that students at a school average one grade level higher than their peers elsewhere. Most schools score between 1 and -1. 

[5] If the criterion is having a single student who went on to graduate from one of these top institutions, the sample is terribly small and, perhaps, meaningless.

[6] I attended a Waldorf school. It was perhaps a more academically respectable Waldorf school than many others, but the education I received there was deficient in many ways. [See "I Went to Waldorf".] This was partially offset, however, by my circumstances outside school. My mother was extremely interested in arts and culture, and my father was a voracious reader — and they passed their interests to their children. Moreover, we lived in the suburbs of New York City, where we had access to all of the cultural and educational resources of that metropolis. The New York Times arrived at our doorstep every morning, for instance, while we also had weekly subscriptions to literally dozens of other publications (Life magazine, Look, The New Yorker, The Saturday Review of Literature, Newsweek, The Saturday Evening Post, and the like). We owned a multi-volume encyclopedia, a large LP collection (classical music, for the most part), and many other resources. I know that I learned far more at home than I ever did at school. And yet I arrived at college ill-prepared. [See "My Sad, Sad Story".]

[7] There is at least some variation among Waldorf/Steiner schools. [See, e.g., "Non-Waldorf Waldorfs".] 

[8] For first-person accounts by some former Waldorf teachers, see "He Went to Waldorf" and the essays that follow it.

[9] See the entry for "Waldorf teachers" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.

[10] See "Indoctrination".

[11] See "Here's the Answer" and "Spiritual Agenda".

[12] See the entry for "Anthroposophy" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia. 

[13] See "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?" and "Schools as Churches".

— R.R.

This is the product of the company owned by Emil Molt.

Molt prevailed on Rudolf Steiner to create a school

for the children of his company's workers.

That academy became the first Waldorf school.

Molt's company folded eventually, 

but Waldorf education is still around.

[Public domain photo.]