return to WCA Archive Index
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n339 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - archive service picks us up
002 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Manichean heresy
003 - JoAnn Schwartz (jms mich. - Re: Braun on reading
004 - snell oro.net - Re: Braun on reading
005 - Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis - Re: Working with Angels
006 - Michael Rizzolo (rizzolo - RE: Manichean heresy
007 - Steve Premo (premo cruzio - Re: Working with Angels
008 - RigbyL aol.com - Re: Working with Angels
009 - snell oro.net - Malnak verses Yogi (Was: Working with Angels)
010 - snell oro.net - Re: Working with Angels
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: archive service picks us up
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 01:28:51 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I received the following information:
- Reference.COM has begun archiving this list as of:
Feb. 11, 1997
- Searchable archives for the lists are available at:
http://www.reference.com/cgi-bin/pn/listarch?list=waldorf-critics lists.best
.c
om
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.2 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Manichean heresy
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 01:28:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The following passage from "How the Irish Saved Civilization" by Thomas
Cahill (Anchor 1995, p. 49) resonates with the roots of Anthroposophy:
"Augustine wanted Truth, not cheap success: such a pressure-cooker psyche
can settle for nothing less. He soon abandoned the simple, emotional
Catholicism of his mother and adopted something more exclusive and
*recherche'*: the religion of Mani, a Persian syncretist who had taken this
and that from here and there and come up with something that can only
strike us as a California cult--a little Christian symbolism, a large dose
of Zoroastrian dualism, and some of the quiet refinements of Buddhism. It
was called Manicheism. For a while, it let Augustine off the hook. For one
thing, it absolved him from any responsibility for his raging lusts: in
Mani's system, Good was passive, unable to battle the gross and fleshly
evils that raged against it. It was a made-to-order religion for a smart
young provincial who needed to explore every dark corner of the boiling
city and experience every dark pleasure it had to offer--and at the same
time think himself above the herd. But it couldn't keep up with Augustine's
fearlessly inquiring mind. Like Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormonism, it was
full of assertions, but could yield no intellectual system to nourish a
great intellect."
Most of this description applies directly to Anthroposophy; no wonder,
Steiner honors the Manichean heresy as an earlier state of Anthroposophy,
and speaks of "the initiation of Manes."
In another passage he describes the Dark Ages:
"The intellectual disciplines of distinction, definition, and dialectic
that had once been the glory of men like Augustine were unobtainable by
readers of the Dark Ages, whose apprehension of the world was simple and
immediate, framed by myth and magic. A man no longer subordinated one
thought to another with mathematical precision; instead, he apprehended
similarities and balances, types and paradigms, parallels and symbols. It
was a world not of thoughts, but of images." (p. 204)
Sounds like Waldorf elementary school.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.3 ---------------
From: JoAnn Schwartz (jms mich.com)
Subject: Re: Braun on reading
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 06:46:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dan Saykaly wrote:
)J Schwartz:
) I agree that your bad experiences are still bad, and the
))wrongs done to your family are still wrong; I disagree that Waldorf
))education and methodology in general, as opposed to WE as practiced
))by a specific group of teachers, caused them. We may need to agree to
))disagree on this one.
)
D. Saykaly
)How cozy and how comfortable. Evil befalls others in the WE school system, the
)system does nothing to enforce change to prevent evil happening again, and
)we are all to pleasantly 'agree to disagree'.
)
)If the AWSNA does not impose standards on its schools, then it is directly
)responsible for the abuses that occur in its schools. If it lets every group
)of teachers function as they see fit - with or without hiring rules, teacher
)code, complaints procedure that _works_, etc., then the AWSNA is saying that
)the occasional (frequent?) evil outcome is a necessary price WE pays for
)'absolute freedom' for teachers.
)
Hello?? Are we having a bad connection here? This thread (from some weeks
back) was about how WE alledgedly does not teach many children how to read,
nor does WE (again alledgedly) have any remedial programs for children whose
learning styles differ from those best served by the primarily oral Waldorf
approach.
The evidence for this was largely anecdotal, the implication was that this was
a problem at _all_ WS. I provided counterexamples to show that this lack of
remedial education was not the case in at least two Waldorf schools with which
I am familiar. (I might add that a one year course in remedial education
according to Waldorf principles is offered by the local teacher's training
institute here in Detroit.)
You seem to be trying to link my remarks to the thread "Molestation (was A
School by the Sea". Please do not quote my remarks out of context in this
fashion. It ill serves both you and your cause.
Warmly,
JoAnn Schwartz, Detroit Waldorf School parent
(jms mich.com) Detroit, Michigan USA
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.4 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Braun on reading
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 10:28:21 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)Dan Saykaly wrote:
))J Schwartz:
)) I agree that your bad experiences are still bad, and the
)))wrongs done to your family are still wrong; I disagree that Waldorf
)))education and methodology in general, as opposed to WE as practiced
)))by a specific group of teachers, caused them. We may need to agree to
)))disagree on this one.
))
)D. Saykaly
))How cozy and how comfortable. Evil befalls others in the WE school
))system, the
))system does nothing to enforce change to prevent evil happening again, and
))we are all to pleasantly 'agree to disagree'.
))
))If the AWSNA does not impose standards on its schools, then it is directly
))responsible for the abuses that occur in its schools. If it lets every group
))of teachers function as they see fit - with or without hiring rules, teacher
))code, complaints procedure that _works_, etc., then the AWSNA is saying that
))the occasional (frequent?) evil outcome is a necessary price WE pays for
))'absolute freedom' for teachers.
))
)
)Hello?? Are we having a bad connection here? This thread (from some weeks
)back) was about how WE alledgedly does not teach many children how to read,
)nor does WE (again alledgedly) have any remedial programs for children whose
)learning styles differ from those best served by the primarily oral Waldorf
)approach.
I think that Daniel (accurately) saw this thread's discussion as a symptom
of a larger problem, and stated his opinion of the real problem. I think,
FWIW, that he is dead-on-accurate. To each his own, Joanne. Frequently
threads evolve into discussions having little to do with the original post.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.5 ---------------
From: Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 17:33:26 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: (199702280753.XAA03684 lists1.best.com)
BTDunatt aol.com writes
)There are _very few_ Waldorf teachers who are
)not members of the society,
Please could you cite your reference for this statement. (I presume that
by "society" you mean "Anthroposophical Society"?) I'm interested to
know what you mean by "very few" as it's one of those vague terms which
don't really mean anything.
I haven't a clue how representative our school is, but I know that at
least 2 class teachers are members (I am one of them) and at least one
isn't. As for the others, I haven't a clue -- it's not a question on
our application form, neither is it one asked at interview.
Do you think it should be asked and, if so, why?
)and such teachers are not given free reign.
True -- *no* teacher is given free reign, thank God! I wouldn't send my
children to *any* school where teachers are given free reign. We do,
thankfully, have two bodies which exist to guide/lead/control the
direction of the school and the behaviour of teachers: the College of
Teachers and the Council of Management. Both have members who are not
AS in GB members. The College has responsibility for educational issues
and the Council for all other issues. College membership is open to all
teachers who have been teaching at the school for a full academic year
and who wish to take on educational responsibility. Council membership
is open to all parents, teachers and friends of the school who have been
at the school for a year (although this requirement is sometimes waived)
and who wish to take responsibility for management issues.
All issues affecting changes in school policy are aired and discussed at
the monthly PTFA meetings -- open to all parents, teachers and friends
of the school. The College and Council meetings are essentially
business meetings.
)
)
)The College of Teachers is run by Anthroposophic pedagogy, and the higher
)ranking Anthroposophists have the most say.
I have been a member of the Anthroposophical Society for over a decade
and have never heard of this "ranking" system -- please could you
enlighten me as to its nature. As far as I was aware my vote was equal
to everyone else's at the AS in GB AGM -- this allegation of a "rank"
system has really got me interested.
Since I haven't a clue who has the highest "rank" in our College (and
neither can I tell you who is and who isn't an member of the AS in GB,
as far as most of the membership goes) I can neither confirm nor deny
your allegation, but it probably won't surprise you to know that I
usually have a lot to say for myself -- does this mean I have attained
some sort of higher rank without my knowledge? In fact, if your
allegation is true, I held high rank in the AS in GB before I even
joined it!
) The issues discussed and decided
)upon within those tightly closed College meetings are often about very
)personal issues concerning students and their parents, as any parent who has
)sent a complaint to the College knows all too well.
Strikes me as being a damned good reason for keeping things
confidential! If I had sent a personal complaint to College, I wouldn't
want all and sundry having access to the meeting where it was discussed.
)There's a reason why parents are not allowed inside those hallowed halls, and
)that reason is that the meetings are quite Anthroposophist in nature.
Interesting statement.
# How many College meetings have you attended that you know the nature
of them?
# How do you explain the fact that parents are sometimes invited to our
College meetings?
# What then is the reason that parents aren't permitted to most staff
meetings, heads of department meetings, etc. at public/state schools.
) Parents' input or opinions are unwelcome.
Utter twaddle. They are actively solicited. PTFA meetings, Council
meetings, Fora, questionnaires, parent's evenings, parent consultation
meetings....
) Families who continue to bother
)the College with complaints or demands, or more to the point, spread
)discontent within the school community, are often told to leave the school.
I wonder why a parent who is not content would wish to stay.
) A teacher who is not a member of the society has little more say than a
)parent, and that's not much.
At least one of our College members is not an AS in GB member and that
person has a great deal to say -- most of it of great value. I'm
beginning to get a distinct feeling that you are talking utter rubbish.
)it is a religious
)mission nonetheless.
[sigh]
Not that old chestnut being wheeled out again.
[yawn]
The WC's last ditch gasp, that one is. Or is the tape on continuous
loop?
Any definition of religion that includes anthroposophy is so broad as to
be meaningless, as the WCs discovered the last time they tried to
fabricate a definition of religion that included anthroposophy.
We *know* you guys have to keep up the pretence to avoid revealing your
true agenda, but do you *really* think you're kidding anyone, except
those of you who believe your own propaganda?
If you wish to suggest I'm wrong, demonstrate it with that inclusive and
exclusive definition of religion.
--
Stephen Tonkin
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.6 ---------------
From: Michael Rizzolo (rizzolo earthlink.net)
Subject: RE: Manichean heresy
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 11:11:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Dan:
Your post touches on the very question I have been struggling to
answer about Waldorf elementary education. I would like to know if WE
lays the proper foundation for the later development of analytical
thought. I refer to these specific abilities:
Reading: close textual analysis--includes good "decoding" skills which
allow an understanding of complex syntax as well as awareness of what
may be implicit, rather than explicit, in a passage (tone, central
theme, etc.)
Writing: logical, sequential argumentation which recognizes the
necessity of providing adequate support for any assertion
Dan Dugan wrote:
)
) The following passage from "How the Irish Saved Civilization" by Thomas
) Cahill (Anchor 1995, p. 49) resonates with the roots of Anthroposophy:
)SNIP
) In another passage he describes the Dark Ages:
)
) "The intellectual disciplines of distinction, definition, and dialectic
) that had once been the glory of men like Augustine were unobtainable by
) readers of the Dark Ages, whose apprehension of the world was simple and
) immediate, framed by myth and magic. A man no longer subordinated one
) thought to another with mathematical precision; instead, he apprehended
) similarities and balances, types and paradigms, parallels and symbols. It
) was a world not of thoughts, but of images." (p. 204)
)
) Sounds like Waldorf elementary school.
)
Could you or someone else please expand upon the above comparison of
"Dark Ages" readers and Waldorf elementary students? It
seems like we are setting up two distinct "worlds" here: one of
"intellectual discipline," "mathematical precision," and "thought" and
an utterly opposing one of "myth and magic," "symbols," and "images."
I myself am confused about the bridge between these two worlds in
relation to the maturation of young children, yet I sense that setting
up polarities in this way will not provide the answers I seek.
My own work experience has been solely with adolescents, so I have a
fairly clear picture of where I think they should be in terms of
intellectual development. However, the route to that point is foggy!
Thank you.
Suzanne Rizzolo
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.7 ---------------
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 11:31:19 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
References: (199702280753.XAA03684 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199702281827.KAA02266 lists1.best.com)
On 28 Feb 97 , Stephen Tonkin wrote:
) )it is a religious
) )mission nonetheless.
)
) Any definition of religion that includes anthroposophy is so broad as to
) be meaningless, as the WCs discovered the last time they tried to
) fabricate a definition of religion that included anthroposophy.
Frankly, I think the whole discussion of whether Anthroposophy is a
religion has relevance only for the purpose of determining whether it is
constitutional, in the US, for a Waldorf school to be chartered as a
public school. And even if Anthroposophy is a religion, this may not be
conclusive on the issue, if religious rituals and concepts are not taught
to the kids.
The other issue is whether the "true" nature of Anthroposophy is made
clear to prospective parents. This is a serious issue, but its
relevance does not turn on whether Anthroposophy is a religion or not. It
is an occult philosophy, and the question is whether its occult nature is
fully disclosed.
In my experience, it is not exactly hidden, but in explaining Steiner's
child development theories, the teacher with whom I've been in contact
does not speak in terms of the etheric body coming into the child, but
rather in terms of "saving the child's energy for physical development,
rather than intellectual development." In other words, it appears to me
that the schools will tend to explain the pedagogy in a way that will not
seem too weird to the average person. A parent is not likely to find out
about the "weird stuff" (e.g., Atlantis, spiritual beings such as Lucifer,
and the distinctions between the various "bodies" of the individual)
without reading Steiner, which is encouraged.
In other words, parents are encouraged to read Steiner and learn about
Anthroposophy, but the school does not go out of its way to publicize
the occult aspects of Anthroposophy.
On the other hand, that same teacher, and the school in general, does
emphasize that the school seeks to further the spiritual development of
the child. He does say that it is a religious school, although it is not
intended to indoctrinate the kids in any specific religion. This seems to
be accurate enough on the "religion" issue.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.8 ---------------
From: RigbyL aol.com
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 22:33:42 -0500 (EST)
Steve Premo, thanks for your calm and objective comments on this topic. You
wrote:
"Frankly, I think the whole discussion of whether Anthroposophy is a
religion has relevance only for the purpose of determining whether it is
constitutional, in the US, for a Waldorf school to be chartered as a public
school. And even if Anthroposophy is a religion, this may not be conclusive
on the issue, if religious rituals and concepts are not taught to the kids."
Exactly. It would be interesting to see what a court would do with the
"mystical osmosis" theory of indoctrination that some of the critics have
espoused.
You also said, "The other issue is whether the "true" nature of Anthroposophy
is made clear to prospective parents. This is a serious issue, but its
relevance does not turn on whether Anthroposophy is a religion or not. It
is an occult philosophy, and the question is whether its occult nature is
fully disclosed."
Again I agree. I would only point out that a major part of Steiner's agenda
was to disclose openly what previously had been occult (that is, hidden).
Although the term "occult" may still be attached to Anthroposophy
(particularly by those critics who think of it as synonymous with "weird"),
it really does not have its original meaning due to the ready availability of
a large number of books describing its ideas.
You then said, "In my experience, it is not exactly hidden, but in explaining
Steiner's
child development theories, the teacher with whom I've been in contact does
not speak in terms of the etheric body coming into the child, but rather in
terms of "saving the child's energy for physical development, rather than
intellectual development." In other words, it appears to me that the
schools will tend to explain the pedagogy in a way that will not seem too
weird to the average person. A parent is not likely to find out about the
"weird stuff" (e.g., Atlantis, spiritual beings such as Lucifer, and the
distinctions between the various "bodies" of the individual) without reading
Steiner, which is encouraged.
"In other words, parents are encouraged to read Steiner and learn about
Anthroposophy, but the school does not go out of its way to publicize the
occult aspects of Anthroposophy.
"On the other hand, that same teacher, and the school in general, does
emphasize that the school seeks to further the spiritual development of the
child. He does say that it is a religious school, although it is not
intended to indoctrinate the kids in any specific religion. This seems to be
accurate enough on the 'religion' issue."
This has been my experience as well. I consider it to be a fair and balanced
way for Waldorf teachers to handle the issue of disclosure.
Best regards,
Rigby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.9 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Malnak verses Yogi (Was: Working with Angels)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 20:29:17 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Steve Premo says,
[snip]
)Frankly, I think the whole discussion of whether Anthroposophy is a
)religion has relevance only for the purpose of determining whether it is
)constitutional, in the US, for a Waldorf school to be chartered as a
)public school. And even if Anthroposophy is a religion, this may not be
)conclusive on the issue, if religious rituals and concepts are not taught
)to the kids.
In the case of Malnak verses Yogi (440 F.Supp.1284-1305 D.N.J.1977), action
was brought to enjoin teaching a course of Transcendental Meditation in New
Jersey public high schools. The U.S. District Court issued injunction, and
appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals held that teaching of course
involved religious activity, constituted establishment of religion in
violation of the First Amendment.
"One's views, be they orthodox or novel, on the deeper and more
imponderable questions - the meaning of life and death, man's role in the
Universe, the proper moral code of right and wrong - are those likely to be
the most "intensely personal" and important to the believer. They are his
ultimate concerns. As such, they are to be carefully guarded from
governmental interference, and never converted into official government
doctrine. The First amendment demonstrates a specific solicitude for
religion because religious ideas are in many ways more important than other
ideas. New and different ways of meeting those concerns are entitled to the
same sort of treatment as the traditional forms.
Thus, the "ultimate" nature of the ideas presented is the most important
and convincing evidence that they should be treated as religious......A
religion is not generally confined to one question or one moral teaching;
it has a broader scope. It lays claim to an ultimate and comprehensive
"truth." Thus the so-called "Big Bang" theory, an astronomical
interpretation of the creation of the universe, may be said to answer an
"ultimate" question, but it is not, by itself, a "religious" idea.
Likewise, moral or patriotic views are not by themselves "religious" but if
they are pressed as devine law or a part of a comprehensive belief-system
that presents them as "truth", they might well rise to the religious level.
The teaching of isolated theories that might be thought to address
"ultimate" questions is not the teaching of such a "ruling science" that
overflows into other academic disaplines as the guiding idea of the
student's pursuits. It is just such a "ruling science" that the
establishment clause guards against.
Another element to consider in ascertaining whether a set of ideas should
be classified as a religion is any formal, external, or surface signs that
may be analogized to accepted religions. Such signs might include formal
services, ceremonial functions, the existence of clergy, structure and
organization, efforts at propagation, observation of holidays and other
similar manifestations associated with the traditional religions. Of
course, a religion may exist without any of these signs, so they are not
determinative, at least by their absence, in resolving a question of
definition. But they can be helpful in supporting a conclusion of religious
status given the important role such ceremonies play in religious life.
I wonder what a court would say about Anthroposophy and the funding of
Waldorf in the public sector ?
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n339.10 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 00:21:23 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Rigby writes,
[snip]
I would only point out that a major part of Steiner's agenda
)was to disclose openly what previously had been occult (that is, hidden).
Why does the Anthroposophic Press catalog have so many book offerings
listed under "Essoteric Christianity" or "Essoteric Studies" if he wished
to openly disclose ? (El- Would _that_ be an oxymoron ?)
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n339 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n340 --------------
001 - BTDunatt aol.com - Re: Working with Angels
002 - snell oro.net - Re: Working with Angels
003 - Steve Premo (premo cruzio - Re: Working with Angels
004 - BTDunatt aol.com - Re: Working with Angels
005 - snell oro.net - Re: Working with Angels
006 - James Souttar (ancient ur - Re: Working with Angels
007 - James Souttar (ancient ur - Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
008 - snell oro.net - Re: Working with Angels
009 - James Souttar (ancient ur - Re: Manichean heresy
010 - James Souttar (ancient ur - Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.1 ---------------
From: BTDunatt aol.com
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 16:44:38 -0500 (EST)
Questions (reactions) were raised here regarding my comments about the
Anthropological hierarchy and how it is related to the structure of the
Waldorf schools. I feel that one of those questions deserves a response.
In retrospect, the word "rank" was not the best one to use in that context.
The word "rank" could be taken as meaning a fixed and defined militaristic
type of structure. The reference was not meant to imply people arranged and
labeled in that particular way. A more appropriate (and perhaps better
mutually understood word for spanning continents here) might be "hierarchy,"
implying recognition and deference based on levels of study achieved.
The matter of weight of influence based on hierarchy is not such an unusual
notion. The unique situation that I have seen in WE is that such influence
is used to make decisions about matters affecting individual children and
parents who are not part of the guarded inner group.
I have heard many parents with very serious concerns which they were limited
to sending to the College by messenger say, "And of course we weren't allowed
to attend the meeting!" I have heard of very few parents or students being
allowed to represent themselves.
If the British schools are subject to much tighter government control,
which I think might be the case, I might have inadvertently painted with too
wide a brush. It would indeed be frustrating to read something here which is
untrue of your personal experience.
U.S. schools do not fall under the same kind of government controls as
those somewhere else. On the other hand, it was strongly pointed out here in
a recent post by an English WE teacher that it is a good thing the College
meetings are kept closed, so I would have to conclude that there is a
similar potential and therefore the likely reality of tight inner
Anthroposopical control in G.B. as well. Personally, I have yet to see a
Waldorf stone under which the same old story is not being played out.
It would be counter productive if I were aim for less than accuracy and
truth here. It would also be a waste of everyone's time and energy to jump at
bait and indulge in personal skirmishes. -BT
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.2 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 15:22:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
BT writes,
A more appropriate (and perhaps better
)mutually understood word for spanning continents here) might be "hierarchy,"
)implying recognition and deference based on levels of study achieved.
) The matter of weight of influence based on hierarchy is not such
)an unusual
)notion. The unique situation that I have seen in WE is that such influence
)is used to make decisions about matters affecting individual children and
)parents who are not part of the guarded inner group.
As a former Board member in a WE it is common for younger teachers, who
have not yet made the greater committment to Anthroposophy, to be kept from
participation in school decisions. One such [younger] teacher wished to
serve on the Board of Directors as a Faculty Representative. The College of
Teachers simply would not allow her to serve in this role. They
specifically mentioned her lack of knowledge and committment to
Anthropsophy as the reason given.
It is not uncommon for prospective Board members to answer questions about
their own views and understanding of Anthroposophy as part of the
evaluative process to become eligible for Board work.
Deby
I have heard many parents with very serious concerns which they were limited
)to sending to the College by messenger say, "And of course we weren't allowed
)to attend the meeting!" I have heard of very few parents or students being
)allowed to represent themselves.
When my son's teacher told me that they did a child-study on my son at the
Faculty meeting, I grew curious. I asked why I was not told this was to
happen, and why we weren't invited to participate. I was told that this was
an Anthroposophical study, and no parent or Board member was allowed into
the Faculty meetings. The Faculty Representative's task was to communicate
faculty desires and needs to the Board.
Deby
On the other hand, it was strongly pointed out here in
)a recent post by an English WE teacher that it is a good thing the College
)meetings are kept closed, so I would have to conclude that there is a
)similar potential and therefore the likely reality of tight inner
)Anthroposopical control in G.B. as well. Personally, I have yet to see a
)Waldorf stone under which the same old story is not being played out.
I agree with you, BT. Some schools are better at masking what goes on, but
Waldorf is Waldorf. There must be different levels of health and ability to
communicate with parents, etc. But when the stone is turned over...
Deby
It would be counter productive if I were aim for less than accuracy and
)truth here. It would also be a waste of everyone's time and energy to jump at
)bait and indulge in personal skirmishes. -BT
BRAVO !
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.3 ---------------
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:30:55 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199703022145.NAA07505 lists1.best.com)
On 2 Mar 97 at 16:44, BTDunatt aol.com wrote:
) The matter of weight of influence based on hierarchy is not such an unusual
) notion. The unique situation that I have seen in WE is that such influence
) is used to make decisions about matters affecting individual children and
) parents who are not part of the guarded inner group.
Could you give specific instances of situations in which decisions
were made on matters affecting individual children, where persons
with a greater background in Anthroposophy had an inappropriately
large influence on the decisions?
I understand what you're saying, I think, in the abstract, but I
don't understand how that plays out in specific situations.
) I have heard many parents with very serious concerns which they were limited
) to sending to the College by messenger say, "And of course we weren't allowed
) to attend the meeting!" I have heard of very few parents or students being
) allowed to represent themselves.
Again, examples please?
I'm not doubting what you say; I just want to understand how this
process works in terms of actual decision-making.
Steve Premo
Premo/Fine Family
Santa Cruz, California
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.4 ---------------
From: BTDunatt aol.com
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 02:26:43 -0500 (EST)
Steve Premo asks:
((Could you give specific instances of situations in which decisions
were made on matters affecting individual children, where persons
with a greater background in Anthroposophy had an inappropriately
large influence on the decisions?...
I understand what you're saying, I think, in the abstract, but I
don't understand how that plays out in specific situations...
I'm not doubting what you say; I just want to understand how this
process works in terms of actual decision-making.))
I understand. You're wise in wanting specifics. I can really see now that
you bring it up, how veiled this talk must sound-and quite frankly it is,
because It's awkward to tell other people's stories in a setting where there
are so many unknown readers. This is really a loaded subject. I'll think on
how much I can say without putting someone on the spot, and make a few phone
calls to refresh my mind on details. In the meantime I hope others can jump
in with personal examples of their own. -BT
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.5 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 23:52:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)On 2 Mar 97 at 16:44, BTDunatt aol.com wrote:
)
)) The matter of weight of influence based on hierarchy is not such
))an unusual
)) notion. The unique situation that I have seen in WE is that such influence
)) is used to make decisions about matters affecting individual children and
)) parents who are not part of the guarded inner group.
)
)Could you give specific instances of situations in which decisions
)were made on matters affecting individual children, where persons
)with a greater background in Anthroposophy had an inappropriately
)large influence on the decisions ?
)
)I understand what you're saying, I think, in the abstract, but I
)don't understand how that plays out in specific situations.
Hi Steve,
I hope BT answers you, but I agreed, so thought I'd share my own experience
as well.
I believe that our son, as a result of a child-study (that we, as his
parents were not told about or allowed to participate in) in faculty
meeting, was truely labeled. While he is adopted, he is just a normal boy.
After the child-study, I felt that he was focused on in an unhealthy way.
One teacher asked him, "Why is it that you think differently than every
other child in this school ?" He cried in the car on the way home. He
thought that the teacher [who said that to him] thought he was dumb. This
was not his class teacher, thank goodness, but a teacher who watched over
the kids at recess. Also, he was accused of saying the "F" word during
Games class. When he denied it, he was not believed. He had to sit on the
sidelines until after the class, then he was made to put away all of the
equipment. The Games teacher, who was in charge of the Pentathlon, told my
son (in my presence) that he was not eligable to participate in the
Pentathlon. My son was upset and crying (again, in the car). He was ardent
that he did not use this word. (And swearing has not been an issue with him
in the past.) Some of his class mates stood up for him, to no avail. Only
when the child who did say the "F" word came forward the next day, was my
son let off the hook. Interestingly, _nothing_ happened to the child who
stood by on the first day without admitting his guilt. **Note. I agree that
this child should only be praised for coming forward. I just thought that
my son's punishment was too harsh. Plus, there was _never_ an apology given
to my son.
I point this out because I believe that my son's background, prior to his
placement with us, colored the view of other teachers. I may be wrong, but
things started happening shortly after the child study took place.
I believe that, if we would have been invited to the child study that he
would not have been labeled. He is a great kid. He _has_ been through alot
in his life, but they did not get to hear how our family has worked with
him. Normal, every day child issues began to get blown out of proportion.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.6 ---------------
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 97 11:09:42 GMT
BT:
)The issues discussed and decided upon within those tightly closed
)College meetings are often about very personal issues concerning
)students and their parents, as any parent who has sent a complaint
)to the College knows all too well.
By comparison, is this not the case with public schools (and other
private schools) in the US? That is, can parents insist on being
present at meetings where 'very personal issues concerning students
and their parents' are being discussed? And are public schools
obliged to notify parents when this happens?
I ask because this most definitely does not happen in the UK. Perhaps
it is because of our obsessive love of secrecy, but these kinds of
discussions are routinely held without parents' knowledge or consent.
There is, of course, an issue of openness and accountability. But
this needs to be weighed against the needs (and rights) of
professionals to talk about their clients in privacy. Delicate
balance... how best is it to be achieved?
James
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.7 ---------------
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 97 11:33:18 GMT
Me:
)If I had the book to hand, I'd be happy to quote you chapter and
)verse. But I don't, and am not proposing to source it simply to
)answer your point.
Michael:
)Why not? You defenders of the faith are constantly harping on the
)lack of evidence presented by critics.
Since when did I become a 'defender of the faith'? I have repeatedly
asserted, and will do so again: 'I am not an Anthroposophist'.
Nor do I have any sense in which this argument might be 'proved' one
way or the other. No doubt if I were to present the evidence, you
would attempt to explain it away (and I'm the one accused of
'intellectual slipperyness'!).
What is clear, though, is that you haven't read Sagan. If you had,
you would almost certainly know the piece I'm referring to.
)You're not being asked to "simply answer [my] point" -- you're being
)asked to substantiate a rather extravagant characterisation you made
)about the beliefs of a principle figure in the scientific community
)who has done more than most to help people understand what science
)is about, but whom you wish to dismiss.
I merely pointed out that Sagan himself believed that, beyond this
world, there was other intelligent life in the universe - and had
concocted a mathematical 'proof' to demonstrate the irresistible
likelihood of this assertion. You were the one who interpreted this
as belief in 'alien visitations' or whatever. Despite the rather more
modest claims that Sagan makes (with which I concur, incidentally)
this position has been explicitly repudiated recently by several
notable astronomers - an is contrary to the 'orthodox' viewpoint.
James
)You don't set the rules here, buddy boy. The above is not an ad
)hominem.
Well, even if it wasn't (and it looked pretty like one to me), what
follows is without doubt a torrent of insults and abuse.
Michael, there is no need for this. Rally your arguments, and desist
from the insinuations.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.8 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 08:20:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
James asks,
)
)By comparison, is this not the case with public schools (and other
)private schools) in the US? That is, can parents insist on being
)present at meetings where 'very personal issues concerning students
)and their parents' are being discussed? And are public schools
)obliged to notify parents when this happens?
)
)I ask because this most definitely does not happen in the UK. Perhaps
)it is because of our obsessive love of secrecy, but these kinds of
)discussions are routinely held without parents' knowledge or consent.
Absolutey not. Parents are expected to be involved in meetings regarding
their children. If there is a concern, the School Physchologist is
generally present, and an IEP (Individual Educational Plan) is created.
Currently the trend involves the child, as well. This has been popular [in
our area] since the early 80's. The reason for this trend is the school's
realization that _if_ the parents and child is involved in the decision
making process, the success rate goes up for the child. (A partnership is
developed between the child, school and home.)
Perhaps this is why the Europeans' are much more tolerant of Waldorf ways.
In our neck of the woods, parents are involved in decisions regarding their
children's education.
I found that _our_ public schools does what Waldorf says they do. This has
been a reoccuring conversation among former WS parents who, often with
great hesitancy, transferred our children to the public sector.
Perhaps it speaks to our particular WS, where the WS experiences annual
exodus to the public schools, parents regret not transferring their
children out of WE sooner.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.9 ---------------
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Manichean heresy
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 97 13:12:16 GMT
Dan:
)"The intellectual disciplines of distinction, definition, and
)dialectic that had once been the glory of men like Augustine were
)unobtainable by readers of the Dark Ages, whose apprehension of the
)world was simple and immediate, framed by myth and magic. A man no
)longer subordinated one thought to another with mathematical
)precision; instead, he apprehended similarities and balances, types
)and paradigms, parallels and symbols. It was a world not of
)thoughts, but of images." (p. 204)
I suppose it is an obvious point, but the 'Dark Ages' were only dark
in Northern Europe - and they may not have been that dark even there
(this was the golden age of monasticism, for instance).
In the Mediterranean there flourished one of the most splendid,
tolerant, inquisitive and cultured societies the world has ever known
- that of mediaeval Islam. 'Distinction, definition and debate'
flourished, throwing up such intellectual giants as Moses Maimonides,
Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and Al Ghazali. Science and mathematics
developed apace - giving us many of the concepts we use today (from
the zero to the algorithm).
Mediaeval Islam also produced some of the world's most profound
mystics (and mystical poets)...
James
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n340.10 ---------------
From: James Souttar (ancient urizen.demon.co.uk)
Subject: Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 97 12:59:35 GMT
Steve:
)One might be convinced that one's argument is correct, and that is
)"belief" in a sense. I "believe" in the evolution of species
)because I have been convinced that it is supported by overwhelming
)evidence, and because it is a mechanism that makes sense. It would
)take a lot to convince me otherwise.
)I also, in another sense, "believe" that there is a "life force"
)which permeates the natural universe, that the essence of that
)"force" is love, and that consciousness arises from an interaction
)of that "force" and the highly organized matter that we call life.
)But this is a matter of faith.
)It ain't science.
If only there was such a distinction... But few indeed of the
'scientific' beliefs we hold are really there because we have been
convinced of their rationality through rigorous testing of
hypotheses. Most have been taught to us when we were yet young by
people in apparent authority whose opinions we were encouraged to
respect. No twelve-year-old has the intellectual capacity, not the
maverick independence of mind, to challenge what she or he is being
told.
In all honesty, how many of the scientific beliefs and assumptions
that you hold have you really shaken down to their roots to see if
they stand up? Since I am busily engaged in just this process, I can
tell you that I am appalled by how much 'science' I have taken on
faith.
However, perhaps your 'lack of confidence' in your 'unscientific'
beliefs - which are probably far more autonomous and rooted in
personal experience than anything you've had on trust from a College
professor - has ironically caused you to be far more rigorous and
exacting about them?
When it comes down to the final analysis, though, much of what we
consider to be 'science' (from L. 'scrire', to know) is really only
technology (from Gk. 'tekhne', art). As an example, Dolly, the cloned
sheep, is hailed as a 'scientific' breakthrough - but while she
undoubtedly represents a breakthrough in the development of method
and technique - there is no new understanding here of the natural
world. The sense of 'repeatability' - which seems here to be the
touchstone of 'science' - is really no more than the confidence of
the skilled artisan in his methods and techniques. If a paradigm
delivers consistently repeatable results - as Ptolemaic astronomy did
for thousands of years - there is a positive disincentive for anyone
who works with it to come up with an alternative.
Real science - the attempt, in your words, to 'learn how the natural
world operates' - can never remain happily within a technological
paradigm. It also seems to require an act of faith that appears to
contradict the 'scientific method'. Such was the case with Copernicus
and Galileo, as much as it was with Heisenberg and Bohm. I would go
further and suggest that the ability to intuit 'truths' beyond the
existing paradigm - and a strong belief bordering on faith needed to
stick with those truths in the opposition of counter-argument and
orthodoxy - is an absolute requirement of an original scientist.
(Copernicus could never make his heliocentric universe deliver the
predictability of the Ptolemists). Whilst this seems to fit the
historical facts, it goes against the concept of the scientist as
someone who enters into experiment with an open mind - and draws
whatever conclusions are there to be made.
)Souttar does not seem to understand the difference, or to understand
)what science is *really* about, that is, learning how the natural
)universe operates in a disciplined and reproducible way. This is
)demonstrated by his apparent implications that, because scientists
)do not perfectly apply the scientific method, that method is a sham.
Inevitably, I would disagree with you! Like many people, I accepted
the 'difference' as part of a conventional education. It is only much
later in life that I have gone back and re-examined this subject -
with the help of Bortoft, Koestler and Kuhn - and found the
demarcation far more blurred than I had ever imagined.
Nor do I believe that the 'scientific method' is a sham. I do think
that it is not what scientists actually do - however much they
protest otherwise - because they rely much more on intuition and
faith than they are prepared to admit. (IMO, such an admission would
do far more good for public perceptions of science than all the
jeremiads of Sagan and Dawkins). I also think that we need a more
sophisticated model of science than this bit of Enlightenment
idealism (which is as effectively sabotaged by human psychology as
all those other principles which require a 'Sovereign Reason'). Such
a model is certainly developing within quantum physics - but, like
most of the 'weird science' originating there, it has yet to catch on
with the materialists...
James
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n340 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n341 --------------
001 - Steve Premo (premo cruzio - Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
002 - snell oro.net - A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
003 - snell oro.net - Re: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
004 - BTDunatt aol.com - Re: Working with Angels
005 - snell oro.net - Waldorf in Winnepeg (article pointer)
006 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - New York public Waldorf school
007 - snell oro.net - Stephen & Lefty
008 - Daniel Sabsay (DanielSabs - Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
009 - "Marc MERIEL" (marmeriel - European experiences
010 - Michael Kopp (mkopp actri - Re: Waldorf in Winnepeg (article pointer)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.1 ---------------
From: Steve Premo (premo cruzio.com)
Subject: Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 11:56:35 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
In-Reply-To: (199703031731.JAA01596 lists1.best.com)
On 3 Mar 97 , James Souttar wrote:
) If only there was such a distinction... But few indeed of the
) 'scientific' beliefs we hold are really there because we have been
) convinced of their rationality through rigorous testing of
) hypotheses. Most have been taught to us when we were yet young by
) people in apparent authority whose opinions we were encouraged to
) respect.
Perhaps, but if I understand the mechanism and it makes sense, and I know
that it has been rigorously tested by others, I do not need to test it
myself.
) When it comes down to the final analysis, though, much of what we
) consider to be 'science' (from L. 'scrire', to know) is really only
) technology (from Gk. 'tekhne', art). As an example, Dolly, the cloned
) sheep, is hailed as a 'scientific' breakthrough - but while she
) undoubtedly represents a breakthrough in the development of method
) and technique - there is no new understanding here of the natural
) world.
True. That is a failing of education. Those who are reasonably
well-versed in science know the difference.
) Real science - the attempt, in your words, to 'learn how the natural
) world operates' - can never remain happily within a technological
) paradigm. It also seems to require an act of faith that appears to
) contradict the 'scientific method'.
I disagree, as you might imagine.
) I would go
) further and suggest that the ability to intuit 'truths' beyond the
) existing paradigm - and a strong belief bordering on faith needed to
) stick with those truths in the opposition of counter-argument and
) orthodoxy - is an absolute requirement of an original scientist.
Of course, intuition is a necessary part of the creative process. But it
is not sufficient. Intuition will help you conceive new hypotheses, but
you can't test them by intuition alone.
) I also think that we need a more
) sophisticated model of science than this bit of Enlightenment
) idealism (which is as effectively sabotaged by human psychology as
) all those other principles which require a 'Sovereign Reason'). Such
) a model is certainly developing within quantum physics - but, like
) most of the 'weird science' originating there, it has yet to catch on
) with the materialists...
So far, you appear to be saying that science is not really a product of
what we call the "scientific method." I disagree; while that method is
not perfectly applied, it does provide a most useful framework.
But I really don't know what you're getting at. If your point is that
science is inadequate, how to you suggest that it be improved?
In other words, what would be the characteristics of a "more sophisticated
model of science," and how would that model, in practical terms, help us
understand the nature and characteristics of matter, energy, and living
organisms?
If you have specific ways to improve scientific methodology, fine.
Otherwise, talking about whether science is a disciplined method for
discovering the universe, or is "really" just based on faith, has no
point other than mental self-pleasure.
Steve Premo
Santa Cruz, California
http://www2.cruzio.com/~premo/steve.html
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.2 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:33:54 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
James:
)[snip] Most have been taught to us when we were yet young by
)people in apparent authority whose opinions we were encouraged to
)respect. No twelve-year-old has the intellectual capacity, not the
)maverick independence of mind, to challenge what she or he is being
)told.
I realize that I may be accused of taking this out of context, but it was
such a good point that I couldn't resist. The story below was published in
a private Waldorf School's newsletter. While I would not be surprised to
learn that the author of the article, "A Birthday in the Kindergarten" was
not the author of the story, the newsletter article credited it to her. (It
is riddled with Anthroposophical indoctrination)
Deby
"A Birthday in the Kindergarten" by Marilyn Stahl, Waldorf kindergarten teacher
"Once upon a time there was a child who lived in a beautiful garden, where
happiness ruled and flowers grew with such perfection of scent and color
that nothing could surpass them. All around this beautiful garden there was
a solid golden wall, and you could not see over it, under it or through it.
In the garden many wise things taught the children the many secrets there
were to know in the school of the sun and the moon and all of the stars.
One day when the child was playing with a golden ball it rolled into a bed
of roses. When the child bent down to pick it up, he noticed that there was
a teeny, tiny peephole in the golden wall with light streaming through it.
The child couldn't help but look, and oh what a glorious sight he saw.
There was the beautiful earth with all its splendor, and there was a field
of flowers a group of children were playing with their parents. "Oh, if
only I had a mother and a father, I would be so very happy," sighed the
child. Just then, a wise being whispered in his ear, "Would you like to
choose a mother and a father ?" "Oh yes!", was the reply from the child. So
the wise being took the child to the North
and the South and the East and the West and then suddenly the child caught
sight of the perfect mother and father for him. "They are the ones that I
want and love !", said he. "Wait here," said the wise being and went
quickly and whispered in the ear of the mother, "Soon you are to have a
child!" The mother was so excited that she whispered into the ear of her
husband, "Soon we are to have a child!"
and together they prepared for the arrival. Meanwhile the child gathered
all of the gifts he had received from the school of the sun, the moon and
all of the stars and put them into his heart, and then one very special day
said, "I am ready to go!" "Indeed you are!" said the wise being, "And I
will care for your heavenly garments while you are gone." "You have learned
much, and you will forget much of this wonderous place." "Take care not to
forget it all, though much must remain a secret!" said the wise being and
then placed his finger on the child's lip and whispered "shhhhhh", making a
tiny indentation above his mouth. The child was then led to the end of a
rainbow bridge, where he slid, and slid, and slid right into the arms of
his mother and his father and he was born...."
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.3 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 19:23:39 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)X-Sender: lefty mail.apple.com
)Mime-Version: 1.0
)Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:56:44 -0700
)To: snell oro.net
)From: Lefty (lefty apple.com)
)Subject: Re: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
)Cc: sft aegis1.demon.co.uk, hoffmanl neb.com, ancient urizen.demon.co.uk,
) RigbyL aol.com, allure netcom.com, litvas icu.com
)
)Dear Ms. Snell:
)
)Someone was kind enough to forward me a copy of your posting, commenting
)that it sounded like something I had once told them. In fact, the story
)you quote is a straightforward retelling of a well-known _midrash_, a
)Jewish teaching story that is probably, oh, a thousand or two years old.
)
)You wrote
))
))I realize that I may be accused of taking this out of context, but it was
))such a good point that I couldn't resist. The story below was published in
))a private Waldorf School's newsletter. While I would not be surprised to
))learn that the author of the article, "A Birthday in the Kindergarten" was
))not the author of the story, the newsletter article credited it to her. (It
))is riddled with Anthroposophical indoctrination)
)
)You should have resisted; you'd look less silly if you had. The story in
)question predates anthroposophy by centuries, if not millennia; if it's
)"riddled with Anthroposophical indoctrination", then Rabbinical Judaism
)must be as well. Your comments are ill-informed, ignorant and foolish. No
)major surprises there, I'm afraid.
)
)Have a nice day!
)
)
)--
)Lefty [gYon-Pa] (lefty apple.com)
)C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.4 ---------------
From: BTDunatt aol.com
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 22:50:43 -0500 (EST)
Mr. Souter writes:
((By comparison, is this not the case with public schools (and other
private schools) in the US? That is, can parents insist on being
present at meetings where 'very personal issues concerning students
and their parents' are being discussed? And are public schools
obliged to notify parents when this happens?))
It almost makes me cringe to think of the outrage that would result from
excluding parents in the U.S. when private and personal matters were being
discussed about their children. The only case I can imagine where it might be
legally acceptable is where abuse had been suspected--and even then I would
think that the parent would need to be notified pretty darn quick. Gossip in
a teachers' lounge is something I've heard and found loathsome, but as for
official meetings, no, no, NO. Arrogance exists in the U.S. public schools
as well as anywhere, I would think, but there are just certain cultural and
legal expectations beyond which one had better not tread. -BT
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.5 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Waldorf in Winnepeg (article pointer)
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:00:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)X-Delivered: at request of mckay on Au
)Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 19:18:59 -0800
)From: mckay oro.net
)X-Sender: mckay pop3.oro.net
)Mime-Version: 1.0
)To: snell oro.net
)Subject: Waldorf in Winnepeg (article pointer)
)
))X-Sender: vanmaren mail.uwlax.edu (Unverified)
))Mime-Version: 1.0
))Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:57:22 -0600
))Reply-To: SJU Waldorf School List (WALDORF MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU)
))Sender: SJU Waldorf School List (WALDORF MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU)
))From: "Cathy J. Van Maren" (vanmaren MAIL.UWLAX.EDU)
))Subject: Waldorf in Winnepeg (article pointer)
))To: WALDORF MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
))
))I found an article from the Winnipeg Free Press about Waldorf education
))called "Educational Wonderland: Waldorf schools worship the child" at
))http://portal.mbnet.mb.ca/freepress/jun14edu1.html
))
))It looks like it was written in June (maybe someone has already mentioned
))it?) Thought it might be of interest.
))
))- cathy
))Cathy Van Maren*Upward Bound*UW-La Crosse*La Crosse, WI 54601*608 785-8539
))Three Rivers Waldorf Initiative*PO Box 791*La Crosse, WI 54602*608 782-8774
)) ********************** vanmaren mail.uwlax.edu ********************
))
)
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.6 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: New York public Waldorf school
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:42:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
A friend in New York checked out the public Waldorf school there. It is
"West Side Community School: An Alternative Elementary School for Grades
K-5 (District III Public School)." Edna Johnson is the director.
They have 90 children. Their brief brochure describes it as "A small, child
centered environment that is open, active, participatory, and inspired by
Waldorf approach." (sic) They have "A fully equipped Computer Center."
The only science mentioned is in the middle grades, "comparative zoology
[that would be 'man and animal'], botany, and elementary physics."
They also distribute a six-page "Frequently asked questions about Waldorf
education" paper, which credits the *Waldorf education mailing list* as its
source (thanks, David Schlesinger). Question four is:
*What is the philosophy behind Waldorf education?*
"Consistent with his philosophy called anthroposophy, Steiner designed a
curriculum responsive to the developmental phases in childhood and
nurturing of children's imaginations. He thought that schools should cater
to the needs of children rather than the demands of the government or
economic forces, so he developed schools that encourage creativity and free
thinking."
That's it. That's all you need to know! Of course, we know that to be
"consistent with anthroposophy" the curriculum has to be as eccentric as
anthroposophy is. Note the use of "the developmental phases," as though we
all agree on what is actually, in Waldorf schools, radically different. I
think most educators agree that schools should cater to the needs of
children rather than the government; that is a subtle denigration of public
education. And "schools that encourage creativity and free thinking"? Sure,
all that copying from the board makes them creative and free.
In the reasons why children should be sent to a Waldorf-inspired school,
the FAQ says "Waldorf schools produce graduates are academically advantaged
with respect to their peers, and who consistently gain admission to top
universities (sic). Further down, under "How well do Waldorf graduates
do...", it says "Anecdotal evidence collected from various sources would
seem to suggest that Waldorf graduates tend to score toward the high end of
standardized examinations..." I guess that's honest, but it's awfully
vague, isn't it?
They're looking for teachers with NY State licences and Waldorf training.
My contact asked what the detailed requirements for teachers were, and was
told that that would be discussed after a resume was submitted.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.7 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Stephen & Lefty
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:51:27 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:42:22 -0800
)To:Stephen Tonkin (sft aegis1.demon.co.uk)
)From:snell oro.net
)Subject:Re: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
)
)Hi Stephen,
)It was kind of you to send me a copy of your post. But no, I don't feel or
)look silly. The Waldorf newsletter attributed this story to the
)kindergarten teacher, not I . I said that I wouldn't be surprised to hear
)that this teacher didn't write the story...(In fact, it would surprise me
)more to think she did.)
)
)I can see how happy the Anthroposophists must have been to _find_ such a
)story that spoke to them so deeply. I still consider it indoctrination.
)(Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat then act out the story.)
)Deby
)
))Hi Lefty,
))
)))Someone was kind enough to forward me a copy of your posting, commenting
)))that it sounded like something I had once told them. In fact, the story
)))you quote is a straightforward retelling of a well-known _midrash_, a
)))Jewish teaching story that is probably, oh, a thousand or two years old.
))
Stephen Tonkin adds,
))Stuff from the WC list seems to be taking a while to get here -- I can't
))wait to see Snell's post. Always nice to have a good chuckle at the
))expense of a WC.
))
Lefty:
)))You should have resisted; you'd look less silly if you had. The story in
)))question predates anthroposophy by centuries, if not millennia; if it's
)))"riddled with Anthroposophical indoctrination", then Rabbinical Judaism
)))must be as well. Your comments are ill-informed, ignorant and foolish. No
)))major surprises there, I'm afraid.
Stephen:
))I wonder if she'll have the grace and integrity to apologise for her
))gaffe -- somehow I doubt it. Whilst I agree that Snell probably didn't
))know the source of her story, I doubt that knowing it's origins would
))have prevented her using it if she felt that it suited her vendetta -- I
))get the feeling that (with the exception of Steve Premo) the WCs weren't
))anywhere near the front of the queue when moral and intellectual
))integrity were handed out.
OK, here it is. I am sorry that the _private_ Waldorf school's newsletter
inaccurately attributed this story to one of their Waldorf teachers instead
of giving credit to the real author. Perhaps ackwardly I noted my suspicion
about the author credited actually being the true author. Stephen and
Lefty, are you saying that I should have known beter than to quote a
Waldorf School's newsletter???
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.8 ---------------
From: Daniel Sabsay (DanielSabsay earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Carl Sagan, ET's, science, evidence -- & Jimmy Souttar
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 97 00:27:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
)When it comes down to the final analysis, though, much of what we
)consider to be 'science' (from L. 'scrire', to know) is really only
)technology (from Gk. 'tekhne', art). As an example, Dolly, the cloned
)sheep, is hailed as a 'scientific' breakthrough - but while she
)undoubtedly represents a breakthrough in the development of method
)and technique - there is no new understanding here of the natural
)world.
Perhaps you were one of the few people in the world who KNEW ahead of
time that this could be done. Pity the poor scientists who had many
questions about the ability to reset the differentiated genes in a
non-gamate mammalian cell.
)It is only much
)later in life that I have gone back and re-examined this subject -
)with the help of Bortoft, Koestler and Kuhn - and found the
)demarcation far more blurred than I had ever imagined.
This is a good example of choosing exactly what satisfies your
pre-conceived ideas.
Water is H2O, and always will be.
I find your analysis shallow and ignorant.
-- Daniel Sabsay, president
East Bay Skeptics Society
http://home.earthlink.net/~danielsabsay/ebss/
Daniel Sabsay Macintosh Consultant
home.earthlink.net/~danielsabsay/ebss Ignorance is the Ultimate
Renewable Resource
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.9 ---------------
From: "Marc MERIEL" (marmeriel msn.com)
Subject: European experiences
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 97 19:01:31 UT
Three of our four children were at the WS, two of them for nine years, first
in Stuttgart and then in Schopfheim near Basel and I could agree with most of
the critics I read on the list. Having worked for several French Institutes in
Europe with a German wife (also a teacher) and trilingual children, we found
it rather difficult for them to fit in the pattern of public schools again
especially after Scandinavia. So back to Germany we decided on WS.
I will leave aside the discussion on whether anthroposophy is a religion or a
philosophy because of the ambiguity of the relations between state-schools and
dominant religions in Europe and perhaps even in America (in God we trust).
However I would say that, without doubt, the non anthroposophian teacher has
to attend numerous courses in Stuttgart or in Basel before he is allowed to
play a decisive role in the school.
Although Rudolf Steiner was just as racist as many of his contemporaries
were(amusingly enough he succeeded in post-war Germany because Hitler rebuffed
him) I never experienced any nasty remarks in the day to day class work. I
also appreciated the full engagement of the teachers and active and motivating
methods in teaching German and Music.
The trouble is that Waldorf pedagogy was supposed to be the exact answer to a
very definite teaching problem (education principles for the sons and
daughters of the workers of a particular fabric in Stuttgart) and probably not
meant to be extended to all children in several countries. Hence the "dogmae"
no television, no computer of course, but also no "lego" and no football
(basket-ball, "yes", but kicking is taboo)
As Rudolf Steiner had no time to get information about language teaching,
English or French courses may vary from nothing to something according to the
personal abilitiy of the teacher who receives no proper training except than
anthroposophic guidelines (Russian, "yes", because it is a language that comes
from the heart. French, "no", because it is too intellectual. English,
"careful", because of disco music and internet)
Art education is of course a scandal. Every child has to repeat the same
motives and colours for years. If he deviates here from the norm he will be
proposed for therapy teaching including special "curing" eurythmy (heil
Eurythmie).
However, even in Germany, children won't always accept anything without
questioning. Our daughter could happily go through the last classes to
"abitur" and still change her hair colour every week or contradict nearly any
WS orthodox assertion. Our youngest boy decided not to play music but became a
master in pretending to be impressed by Rudolf Steiner's achievements. Only
our second son came into trouble because he insisted on wearing black. He was
probably the typical Waldorf School student, quiet, interested in History and
very good in Eurythmics, but he insisted on wearing a black shirt or a black
sweater. This was too much. We, as parents, were given to understand that
curing eurythmy would not be enough this time and the board of teachers (that
is only the full A teachers) decided (decision recorded in secrete book) to
send him to a land-school because what he needed was a stronger contact to
earth. And that was the end of our Waldorf School experience.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n341.10 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Waldorf in Winnepeg (article pointer)
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 08:20:50 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199703040658.WAA21397 lists1.best.com)
)))I found an article from the Winnipeg Free Press about Waldorf education
)))called "Educational Wonderland: Waldorf schools worship the child" at
)))http://portal.mbnet.mb.ca/freepress/jun14edu1.html
This article appeared on a page the newspaper devotes to student journalism.
I found the article to be simplistic, uncritical "reporting" done by an
obviously impressionable journalism student.
It does not meet the standard of balance and questioning that is required
of professional journalism, and is little more than the usual
Steiner/Waldorf/ Anthroposophy propaganda.
I have written to the executive editor of the Free Press and the
"journalism" instructor (whose email address is at the newspaper,
indicating he may also be on their staff) expressing these views and
suggesting the need for teaching balanced reporting to journalism students,
and the need for the Free Press to ensure that student reporting meets the
same balance standards it expects of its staff.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n341 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n342 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - Newspaper Articles out today !
002 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
003 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: Working with Angels
004 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - RE: Manichean heresy
005 - snell oro.net - "Twin Ridges School a Deceptive Alternative"
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n342.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Newspaper Articles out today !
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 18:01:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The only two local newspapers printed our story about Twin Ridges
Alternative Waldorf School (soon to be known as "The Yuba River School").
Pastor Morton was given a guest Editorial on page A5 of The Union, our
area's only daily newspaper. The article took up nearly half the page,
complete with his picture.
The Community Endeavor (a monthly paper) came out today. A position
statement from Pastor Morton (our chairperson) and Dan Dugan and Judy
Daar's 'Are Rudolf Steiner Schools Non-Sectarian' was printed.
YES!!!
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n342.2 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: A Birthday in the (Waldorf) Kindergarten
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 18:56:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I'm really glad there's a system for checking heavenly garments while one
is on earth. (8-)] Maybe it's the *lower* Guardian of the Threshold who
takes care of that chore.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n342.3 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Working with Angels
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 18:56:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
BT wrote,
) I have heard many parents with very serious concerns which they were limited
))to sending to the College by messenger say, "And of course we weren't allowed
))to attend the meeting!" I have heard of very few parents or students being
))allowed to represent themselves.
This happened to us in San Francisco. I asked to air my concerns to the
College of Teachers. I wanted to talk to the boss. The College appointed a
committee, including my son's teacher, with whom I had no problem, to tell
me to shut up or get out. A parent does not have standing with a College of
Teachers.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n342.4 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: RE: Manichean heresy
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 18:56:47 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Suzanne Rizzolo, you wrote to me,
)Your post touches on the very question I have been struggling to
)answer about Waldorf elementary education. I would like to know if WE
)lays the proper foundation for the later development of analytical
)thought. I refer to these specific abilities:
)
)Reading: close textual analysis--includes good "decoding" skills which
)allow an understanding of complex syntax as well as awareness of what
)may be implicit, rather than explicit, in a passage (tone, central
)theme, etc.)
)
)Writing: logical, sequential argumentation which recognizes the
)necessity of providing adequate support for any assertion
These outcome specifications sound good to me.
Nobody knows whether WE "lays the proper foundation". Research would be
very helpful in separating the good from the bogus. Regarding "providing
adequate support," the literature of Anthroposophy is replete with
unsupported assertions about the universe, requiring faith in Steiner's
"clairvoyance." I would be surprised if this habit didn't manifest itself
in Waldorf.
Dugan quoted Cahill's book,
)) "The intellectual disciplines of distinction, definition, and dialectic
)) that had once been the glory of men like Augustine were unobtainable by
)) readers of the Dark Ages, whose apprehension of the world was simple and
)) immediate, framed by myth and magic. A man no longer subordinated one
)) thought to another with mathematical precision; instead, he apprehended
)) similarities and balances, types and paradigms, parallels and symbols. It
)) was a world not of thoughts, but of images." (p. 204)
and quipped
)) Sounds like Waldorf elementary school.
to which Suzanne Rizzolo responded,
)Could you or someone else please expand upon the above comparison of
)"Dark Ages" readers and Waldorf elementary students? It
)seems like we are setting up two distinct "worlds" here: one of
)"intellectual discipline," "mathematical precision," and "thought" and
)an utterly opposing one of "myth and magic," "symbols," and "images."
It has to do with Steiner's child development theory. Children reincarnate
in stages. In the elementary school age bracket, 7-14, children's physical
bodies have been born, and their etheric bodies with the change of teeth at
age seven, but the astral body has yet to emerge (it will at puberty) and
the "I" will be born at 21. By this system children are in a realm of, as
you rightly categorize, "myth and magic," "symbols," and "images" until
puberty in a Waldorf school. The consequence of violating this law of human
nature is illness later in life. "Intellectual discipline," "mathematical
precision," and "thought" are to be developed after age 14.
I suspect that this theory is not only hogwash, but it might be crippling
by denying a child's need to experience rational thought during a critical
period of development. I'm not willing to take Steiner's word on this.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n342.5 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: "Twin Ridges School a Deceptive Alternative"
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 22:32:28 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello all,
The Union entitled our article "Twin Ridges School a Deceptive
Alternative". I couldn't be happier with the title.
I have received _many_ phone calls of support tonight from former Waldorf
parents, and a former Waldorf teacher. The teacher told me that the article
was "dead on accurate" but suggested that instead of saying "which the
children deeply absorb", she recommended that we begin to use the term
"lives within the child", as she felt this was the phrase Waldorf teachers
[at Twin Ridges] used.
One parent called to say "Go girl!". I was delighted with her particular
call, as I had no idea that she had any concerns with Waldorf. (Her husband
was a Waldorf board member years and years ago.
Another supportive call we recieved was from one of the original founders
of the local private Waldorf school (now closed). He wanted us to know that
he felt the article was accurate and well written. He offered his gfamilies
support. He is a self declared ex- Anthroposophist.
My only complaint about the article was that the editor did not honor our
capitol "A" in Anthroposophy. I am sure the Anthroposophical phone lines
are burning tonight.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n342 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n343 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: European experiences
002 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - teacher wanted
003 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - a Sunbridge student
004 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: Evolution of Mailing Lists (Nazis)
005 - snell oro.net - Public Waldorf 2nd grade reader
006 - Michael Kopp (mkopp actri - Evolution of Mailing Lists (Nazis) & Re: a Sunbridge student
007 - snell oro.net - Re: Public Waldorf 2nd grade reader
008 - snell oro.net - Brave and True
009 - snell oro.net - copy of Lungren letter
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: European experiences
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 21:49:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Many thanks to Marc Mariel for sharing. Many times when pointing out some
wacky Waldorf thing or other, Europeans have said something to the effect
"well, American Waldorf schools may be crazy, but in Europe they're more
professional." I've always suspected that they were just the same over
there, and Marc's post gives evidence for that.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.2 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: teacher wanted
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:59:26 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The London, Ontario, Canada Waldorf school is advertising for a teacher,
including the following:
"We are looking for someone with Waldorf training and/or experience,
leadership, ability, a team spirit, youthful energy, good health, artistic
ability, post-secondary education with a good background in the arts and
sciences, the ability to work with children with a balance of warmth and
firmness, the ability to describe Waldorf education in comparison with
other forms of education, and a connection and conversance with
Anthroposophy."
Note "a connection...with Anthroposophy." Of course, it isn't a religion.
They go on to say,
"We have available to us biodynamically grown food, regular meetings of the
Anthroposophical Society, and Christian community services."
Anthroposophical heaven!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.3 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: a Sunbridge student
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:59:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Here is the editor's introduction and an excerpt from an essay by a
Sunbridge College Waldorf teacher trainee. Sunbridge is the main East-coast
Waldorf training school. The "orientation year" or "foundation year" is the
course of Anthroposophical studies that Waldorf trainees take.
"The following essay by Margaret Thom was written as a 1995/96 Orientation
Year student in Norman Davidson's class on World Evolution. She was
responding to the question: What is the value to modern human beings to
have such knowledge as is contained in Rudolf Steiner's book Cosmic
Memory?"
...
"Whatever we may think initially, if we take in the ideas and think about
them, they stimulate our own understanding. Steiner's extremely expansive
view into the past and future lifts one's mind far beyond materialistic,
self-centered, short-sighted ways of thinking. At the same time this view
gives dignity and belonging to the human being; one is not just a speck of
dust in a cold vastness, but part of a living world. This sense comes from
the idea that human beings are one kind of spiritual being which has been
present and evolving since the beginning of time. The idea that the world
is evolving gives a sense of purpose and hope. The knowledge that
everything material was spiritual first, and still intrinsically is, and
the images of how much our forms have changed, opens our minds to
possibilities of transformation that a materialist view does not offer.
Knowing about the evolution of our organs and senses makes us more aware of
them and increases our appreciation for the wonder of creation.
"Finally the development of thinking as a consequence of the separation
of the sexes from an androgynous state is very interesting."
[Thom, Margaret. "A Student Perspective." *Sunbridge Perspectives*
13 (Autumn, 1996) p. 13.]
It would appear that the "orientation" course has produced an exemplary
devotee. Will she be teaching in one of the many new publicly-funded
charter schools? Would it be religious discrimination if a Waldorf-inspired
charter school chose NOT to hire her BECAUSE of her committment to
Anthroposophy? I think it would be. So there's no way a well-meaning school
board can prevent a Waldorf-inspired charter school from becoming an
Anthroposophical congregation, as happened in Nevada City. Better to say
no, thank you, religions not allowed.
Ms. Thom would have studied, on p. 48 of Cosmic Memory, Steiner's version
of the Theosophical racial myth which became part of the Nazi doctrine:
"The Ancestors of the Atlanteans lived in a region which has
disappeared, the main part of which lay south of contemporary Asia. In
theosophical writings they are called the Lemurians. After they had passed
through various stages of development the greatest part of them declined.
These became stunted men, whose descendants still inhabit certain parts of
the earth today as so-called savage tribes. Only a small part of Lemurian
humanity was capable of further development. From this part the Atlanteans
were formed.
"Later, something similar again took place. The greatest part of the
Atlantean population declined, and from a small portion are descended the
so-called Aryans who comprise present-day civilized humanity. According to
the nomenclature of the science of the spirit, the Lemurians, Atlanteans
and Aryans are root races of mankind. If one imagines that two such root
races preceded the Lemurians and that two will succeed the Aryans in the
future, one obtains a total of seven."
(rant)
I think it is reprehensible for the self-righteous Anthroposophists of
Sunbridge College to be presenting this seductive and corrupting material
to idealistic young teachers-to-be. And with a reverent, rather than an
analytical, attitude (see the master teacher's question in the
introduction). It isn't education, it's indoctrination. This isn't
"knowledge," it's crap.
(/rant)
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.4 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Evolution of Mailing Lists (Nazis)
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:59:16 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Steve Premo, you said,
)Another interesting thing: most threads, if they go on long enough,
)will include some reference to Hitler. Applies to newsgroups,
)mailing lists, you name it, as long as there's a high level of
)rhetoric.
Right, Steve! But in this case it is not just rhetoric, it's really relevant.
(begin rant--those who have been here a while have heard this before)
Hitler and Steiner were rivals for the hearts and minds of the German
people after the Great War. In 1919, the year of the founding of the
Waldorf School, Steiner's Union for the Threefold Social Order had a weekly
newspaper, and that was also the year that Hitler joined the German Workers
Party. Both Steiner and Hitler were making concerted political efforts.
Within the next few years, Nazis attacked Steiner in the press and thugs
harassed his meetings. Steiner fled to Switzerland and Anthroposophists did
not stand up to the Nazis. Instead they tried to convince them that they
were really on the same side, while trying to carry on underground, in much
the same way that they are doing in their public school movement today.
Jewish Waldorf teachers were fired. Most Waldorf teachers joined the Nazi
teachers' union.
Steiner, preaching truth, beauty, goodness, and Aryan racial superiority,
appealed to intellectuals and mystics, and Hitler, preaching hate, revenge
for the humiliation of Germany after World War I, and Aryan racial
superiority, appealed to the lowest instincts of the largest number of
people. I'm sorry Steiner lost. For all his faults, he was the better man.
The world would probably be a better place today if the Germans had turned
to Steiner instead of Hitler, and if the leaders of the world had come to
pay court to the philosopher king in his temple in Dornach. At least we'd
have been spared the holocaust. What might have happened if
Anthroposophists had rallied their constituency in opposition to the Nazis
can never be known. They chose not to.
When the Threefold Social Order failed to catch on, Steiner said that a
great opportunity had been lost, and the best thing left to do would be to
work on preparing souls to lead future generations...by means of Waldorf
education.
Steiner died in 1925. After 1935 Hitler banned Anthroposophy, Theosophy,
and every other fringe religion except for the established churches, which
were too big to take on directly. The Nazi movement adopted what was useful
to them from their rivals on the fringes before they crushed them,
including the racial history myth from Theosophy and Anthroposophy. I don't
think Hitler had much to do with that. Hess and Himmler were the occult
dabblers. (Anthroposophist Ravenscroft's book about Hitler and the holy
lance has no credibility.) The Waldorf schools were controversial within
the Nazi movement. They had both promoters and detractors. I imagine the
occultist Nazis wanted them, because they were the only organized system
teaching the occultism that formed the "spiritual" core of Nazism. The
non-spiritual Nazis had little reverence for that, and noticed that the
Waldorf schools did not promote nationalism. Rudolf Hess was no. 3 in the
regime and an occultist. As deputy Fuhrer, Hess intervened twice to keep
Waldorf schools open (Leschinsky). The mother school in Stuttgart lasted
five years into the twelve-year period.
Given Steiner's good intentions, and Hitler's banning of his movement, how
can I dare say that Steiner bears some responsibility for the holocaust?
Because good intentions are not enough. Here is the chain of
responsibility: Blavatsky created a racial myth of the evolution of
humanity. Steiner (and others) preached and embroidered it. In 1909 when
the occultist magazine *Ostara* turned racist, Blavatsky and Steiner were
cited as spiritual authorities for it. Ray McDermott gives several examples
of scholarship contemporary with Steiner that refute his racial theory (see
his article on the PLANS web site). Steiner chose to ignore the science of
his day, to cling to romantic racial myths. When that fabric was sewn into
the Nazis' patchwork philosophy (see Rosenberg's "Myth of the 20th Century,
1930), the occultist racial myth was a visible part of it.
So forgive me if I point out, yet again:
The Theosophical-Anthroposophical myth about the "seven sub-races" of the
"Aryan root race" is used today as the framework for ancient history in the
5th and 6th grade of every Waldorf school and most Waldorf-inspired
schools. I know that studying Ancient India, Ancient Persia, etc. isn't
going to make kids Nazis, but we know where that myth's been, and it
stinks. It has been both morally and historically discredited. I wish the
Anthroposophists would acknowledge that and just throw it out. As a
framework for teaching history, that myth has no redeeming social value. It
represents neither the development of world civilization nor the
development of Western culture. It's there because it's what Steiner
taught. It's Anthroposophy, not history. It can correctly be called
"proto-Nazi pseudohistory."
(end rant)
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.5 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Public Waldorf 2nd grade reader
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 15:47:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Twin Ridges _public_ Waldorf school issued the second grade class their
"first readers". These books were made by hand as a gift to the students.
The Title of the book is "The Sun filled Cave." Besides "The Spiral Road",
by Eugene Swartz, the reader includes the stories of 'Saint Michael' and
'Saint Martin' as part of the 22 sory collection. It was a great score.
Below is a story from this reader.
The Owl
The owl with a scowl and a frown asked, "Where is my golden crown ? Though
the color is brown, of my feathery gown, I should be king of this town."
Then the wolf with a terrible howl, and the fox with a nasty growl, and the
bear with it's mighty jowl, set out on their nightly prowl to make a reply
to the owl.
They said to the owl, "although you may scowl and may frown, we never shall
give you a crown. For whose feathery gown is not purple but brown can never
be king of this town !"
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.6 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Evolution of Mailing Lists (Nazis) & Re: a Sunbridge student
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 17:54:37 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199703071807.KAA24674 lists1.best.com)
Dan Dugan invents a new html tag! Too bad it has no effect in ordinary email.
)(rant)
[snip]
)This isn't "knowledge," it's crap.
)(/rant)
Come to think of it, the abreviated form of his actual rant, summarised
above in one sentence, could be trademarked as the core of Stein/Dorf/Pop
criticism.
Good on ya, mate!
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.7 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Public Waldorf 2nd grade reader
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 20:57:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)From the Second grade Reader,
[snip]
)They said to the owl, "although you may scowl and may frown, we never shall
)give you a crown. For whose feathery gown is not purple but brown can never
)be king of this town !"
I wonder how "brown" children feel when they read this story ?
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.8 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Brave and True
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 20:57:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Again, from Twin Ridges curriculum,
Brave and True
Brave and true will I be
Each good deed sets me free
Each kind word makes me strong;
I will fight for the right
I will conquer the wrong.
I am straight, I am strong
I am valient and bold
For the sun fills my heart
With it's life giving gold.
Is this evidence of the sun's importance in Waldorf schools ?
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n343.9 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: copy of Lungren letter
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 21:01:00 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)
)Dan Lungren, Attorney General
)Public Inquiry Unit
)P.O. Box 944255
)Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
)
)Re: Violations of church-state separation by Waldorf charter schools
)
)Dear Attorney General Lungren,
)
)The charter school movement has opened up publicly-funded education to a
)wide diversity of approaches. The law is clear that religious education is
)to be excluded, but a golden opportunity exists for infiltration by
)religious groups that conceal their true identity. Since charter schools
)are overseen only by local school boards, a religious group with a good
)front could get established in many places before it is discovered.
)
)I'm sorry to inform you that this has already occurred in at least three
)charter schools in California. "Anthroposophy," a cult-like religious sect,
)has successfully promoted their religious school system "Waldorf education"
)to school boards in San Diego, Nevada County, and Novato, California. The
)Waldorf movement has always been deceitful about the relationship between
)Anthroposophy and the schools. Private Waldorf schools around the world
)claim to be non-sectarian while teaching the Anthroposophical world-view
)and doctrine. Given their 75 years of practice at obfuscating this
)relationship, the transition to public funding has been easy, so far.
)
)People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS) has organized to blow
)the whistle on Waldorf's move to public funding. We are a network of former
)Waldorf parents, teachers, and board members who have seen through the
)institutionalized deception of the Waldorf movement. We are exposing the
)true nature of Waldorf education, and we will not rest until all these
)schools are back in the private sector where they belong.
)
)* In San Diego, special Waldorf trainers were brought in to re-educate
)public school teachers. One of the teachers resigned, complaining that the
)program violated the First Amendment. The school board's legal counsel
)advised that violations of separation of church and state were likely.
)Incredibly, due to overcrowding, the school board bused in three hundred
)additional students to the Waldorf charter to join the fifty who had
)selected the Waldorf program. A group of parents attempted to protest the
)strange beliefs and questionable practices they saw at the school. They
)were put off by a promise of an independent investigation by WestEd. A year
)later WestEd said in their report that church-state issues had been raised
)but were outside the scope of their investigation.
)
)* In Nevada County, the private Mariposa Waldorf School failed financially.
)Enterprising parents got a neighboring school district to approve Twin
)Ridges Alternative Charter School, a "Waldorf-inspired" charter, and most
)of the teachers went back to work teaching most of the same kids, now on
)the public payroll. Families who exposed the religious content of the
)curriculum and the incompetence of the Waldorf-trained teachers were driven
)out of the school. The only teacher who was not "committed to
)Anthroposophy" left at the end of the 1995-96 school year.
)
)* A third California "Waldorf-inspired" charter school in Novato opened in
)September, 1996. The organizers claim that "spirituality" is not religion.
)Teachers are receiving training from Anthroposophical colleges and mentors.
)
)Local school boards are unable to recognize the orchestrated deception of
)an international cult-like religious sect. We need action at the state and
)national levels. We ask you to put your best investigators on this case and
)get past the window dressing to the legal issue, violation of the
)constitutional separation of church and state. PLANS has extensive
)documentation and experts ready to testify to the substance of our
)allegations.
)
)It is your duty as Attorney General to investigate wrongdoing by public
)officials. PLANS requests that you act immediately to remove public funding
)from these "stealth" religious schools, and notify all California school
)boards that "Waldorf inspired" charter schools are unacceptable.
)
) Sincerely,
)
)
)
) Debra Snell
) President, PLANS
)
)
)Enclosed:
)Dugan, Dan, and Judy Daar. "Are Rudolf Steiner's Waldorf Schools
)'Non-Sectarian'?" Free Inquiry, 14:2, Spring 1994, p. 44.
)Wilkinson, Roy. "Helpful Elementals" and "A Christian Mystery." The
)Interpretation of Fairy Tales. Fair Oaks, CA: Rudolf Steiner College Press,
)1993.
)Tonsall, Sonseeahray. "Waldorf program rejected by board." St. Cloud Times,
)Nov. 11, 1994.
)Shinohara, Rosemary. "Arts School debate takes religious turn." Anchorage
)Daily News, January 13, 1994, p. B-1.
)Jones, Sharon L. "Probe ordered of charter school." San Diego
)Union-Tribune, July 12, 1995, p. B-1.
)Lauer, Susan. "Parents challenge NC charter school." The Union. Grass
)Valley-Nevada City, CA: Feb. 27, 1996, p. A-1.
)"Foundation Year Book List 1993-1994." Rudolf Steiner College.
)"For students who have not completed the Foundation Year program at Rudolf
)Steiner College or another comparable study center..." Rudolf Steiner
)College.
)Steiner, Rudolf. Excerpt from Health and Illness: Volume I: Nine Lectures
)to the Workmen at the Goetheanum, Dornach, Switzerland, 1922. (1922)
)Trans. Maria St. Goar. Spring Valley: Anthroposophic Press, 1981, p. 86.
)Gonzales, Jose A. (for Christina L. Dyer). "Tubman Village School." Letter
)to Members of the Board of Education and Superintendent, San Diego Unified
)School District, July 6, 1995.
)Boston, Rob. "Charter for Indoctrination?" Church and State, 49:4, April
)1996, p. 4
)Boston, Rob. "Anthroposophy: Rudolph Steiner's 'Spiritual Science'" Church
)and State, 49:4, April 1996, p. 7
)Barker, John C. "Approval of Waldorf Magnet School in Sacramento." Letter
)to Sacramento Board of Education, September 4, 1996.
)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n343 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n344 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - Dan Lungren
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp actri - Re: Dan Lungren
003 - snell oro.net - Re: Dan Lungren
004 - "Hope Seidman" (hseidman - Re: copy of Lungren letter
005 - snell oro.net - Welcome Hope
006 - "Hope Seidman" (hseidman - Re: Welcome Hope
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n344.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Dan Lungren
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 23:51:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I accidently posted Dan's wonderful letter to the Attorney General to the
critic's list.
Like I said before, sometimes my blunders amaze _even_ me.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n344.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Dan Lungren
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 23:49:36 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199703080748.XAA16935 lists1.best.com)
)I accidently posted Dan's wonderful letter to the Attorney General to the
)critic's list.
)
)Like I said before, sometimes my blunders amaze _even_ me.
)Deby
Well, you _could_ have posted it to the Waldorf or Steiner lists by
"mistake" ... Lefty would have seen the humour in that, wouln't he?
Wouldn't he just?
What's wrong with putting it here? Is it "top secret"?
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n344.3 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Dan Lungren
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 12:45:02 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
))I accidently posted Dan's wonderful letter to the Attorney General to the
))critic's list.
))
))Like I said before, sometimes my blunders amaze _even_ me.
))Deby
)
)Well, you _could_ have posted it to the Waldorf or Steiner lists by
)"mistake" ... Lefty would have seen the humour in that, wouln't he?
)Wouldn't he just?
I've been kicked off the Waldorf list, so it would have kicked it back.
)
)What's wrong with putting it here? Is it "top secret"?
Not that it is top secret, just that PLANS board should have been consulted
first, out of curtesy. I recently learned how to send to
multiple people. The request to write Dan Lungen's letter came from our
local area's Grand Jury to our local committee. I wanted Dan to write the
letter (cuz he's sooo good at it), but also wanted our local Committee
Chair and Vice Chair to know it was done, so I wanted to e-mail them a
copy. When I held down on my command key, the address that I had last
posted to was already highlighted, causing me to send it to the critics
list as well. A pilot error. This is the second time....but the first that
I figured out what I did.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n344.4 ---------------
From: "Hope Seidman" (hseidman UDel.Edu)
Subject: Re: copy of Lungren letter
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 18:02:39 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi there.
I am a new member of this list serve. I am not exacly clear about its
purpose. Could someone please respond?
I recently joined the other (non-critical) Waldorf Education list serve and
was attacked!
I am including my initial email as well as my rebuttal. I will not include
any responses, but I will tell you that they were quite nasty and
uninformative!
*****************
) HI there! This is my first posting on the list serve. I am not
including
) the suggested questionnaire, since it does apply to me.
)
) I am a Ph.D student in Family Studies with a particular interest in early
) childhood education. I would like to learn more about Waldorf Education
) and I have been surfing the net for information. It seems as though
books
) and articles found in the library are not getting at the critical issues.
)
) I recently read an article on the net addressing the issue of racism
) inherent in the Waldorf philosophy. The question raised is, how can we
) teach/promote tolerance in the classroom when the philosophies were
derived
) from a man who was alledgedly intolerant and racist. Any thoughts?
************************
I don't really know where to begin, given the unexpected influx of
responses to my open-ended question regarding the issue of racism and
Waldorf education.
It seems as though many of you believe that I invaded your cyberspace with
the intention of provoking a reaction and that my "post is of the nature of
a troll". I do not appreciate being insulted and lambasted. I do,
however, thank the few who welcomed me to the list serve and responded in a
mature and informative manner.
To explain, my purpose was to find out how those associated with Waldorf
Schools feel about these allegations. Contrary to what was suggested by
one member of the list serve, I do NOT believe everything I read on the
internet. That is precisely why I wanted to hear about how you felt about
the issue. Whether you like it or not, these allegations have been
presented by others and cannot simply be ignored because it is found to be
insulting. Instead of attacking me and dismissing the issue, it would have
been more helpful to inform me on how tolerance can be promoted in the
Waldorf classroom. I might have also been enlightened by some comments on
how you respond and essentially teach others who question some of Steiner's
writings. From your feedback, I can clearly see how this is
accomplished...Steiner's philosophies are not to be questioned, and
criticism is not welcome.
I never, in any way, criticised Rudolf Steiner. Obviously there are
individuals out there trying to "smear him by whatever means possible".
This was in not my intent. I now understand that those who follow
Steiner's philosophies are sensitive and "take any criticism very
personally" and I was not as tactful as I should have been. Although I am
truly sorry for offending many of you, I still believe that we need to
continuously question our practices and philosophies---in any field or
discipline. I am shocked to find so many people unwilling to discuss and
ponder relevant issues.
As Mr. Premo pointed out, I did NOT by any stretch of the imagination,
imply that parents were making poor choices when enrolling their children
in Waldorf schools. In fact, I simply asked what was being done to promote
racial tolerance.
In response to other members, my question was not itentionally "loaded",
although it has been viewed in that manner.
I am well aware of the fact that we need to examine Steiner's philosophies
in the context of the political times in which he wrote.
My "background" has nothing to do with my question. If (and I repeat,
"if"),
you were referring to the fact that I am Jewish (as indicated by my last
name), you are incorrect. ALL human beings, regardless of their religion,
race, class, gender...should be concerned about racism in and outside of
the classroom. It is not only an issue for marginalized individuals.
I will not post the allegations of intolrance and racism (as requested) on
this list serve. I
also understand that the policy is not to drag Waldorf Critics onto the
list serve, although I did not at the time, realize that I was
breaking this rule.
Most importantly, someone commented on the fact that I did not include my
name or a "subject" and accordingly assumed that I did not want to engage
in any dialogue. The simple explanation is that my
name is already on the email address and I forgot to include a subject.
Excuse my list serve etiquette, as this is my first time participating in
one. I was not trying to hide my identity (I couldn't if I wanted to!) and
I was hoping to engage in some stimulating dialogue with others more
informed on Waldorf Education. In fact, I get the distinct impression that
many of you are not willing to do that.
In sum, I am sorry for for all of the disturbances I have caused. I did
not mean to insult anyone and I did not personally criticize Steiner's
philosophy. I am however, disappointed at the reaction I have received
here. Rather than enlightening me, I have been insulted and attacked for
bringing an issue to the forefront. This could have been a wonderful
opportunity for all of us to share ideas and deconstruct the
misinterpretations of Steiner's worldly views. Once again, ideas cannot
simply be dismissed because you you don't like them.
**********************
Response #2:
Thank you for the information. It is very much appreciated. This is what
I was looking for in the first place.
My email might be offensive to those who have experienced a great deal of
unwelcome and insensitive criticism. Taken out of that context, it is
harmless. My point being, that I have read my email several times and it
does not "smell" like anything. Simple curiosity.
It cannot, however, be taken out of its context, so I have apologised for
my actions and will do my best to be sensitive and tactful as possible.
I must admit, that I have some other questions that I do not feel
comfortable posing, even though I cannot imagine why they would be
offensive. Obviously, there are critics of Steiner and Waldorf Education
(as in any educational approach), and as "experts" people should be willing
to discuss them or refute them in the manner in which you have carried out.
For example, I know several Christian religious women who question the
sexist texts in the Bible. It does not mean that they cannot be devout
Christians or follow the word of Jesus. It is an open dialogue in which
individuals feel free to question and criticize. Isn't that what humanity
is all about?
Or in the case of the Montessori approach, her philosophies and approaches
have been questioned and criticized. I see nothing wrong with that. As a
doctoral student and as a human being, I feel that is my duty and
responsibility.
*****************
Any comments?
Hope Seidman
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n344.5 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Welcome Hope
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 18:09:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi and welcome,
I saw the responses to your first posting to the Waldorf list. It was
predictable. Have you been further "warned" by Lefty yet ?
My children attended Waldorf schools for 4+ years. Did you see my recent
post on "The Owl" story ? It is right out of a public funded Waldorf
school's second grade curriculum.
Have you seen the child-development model that Waldorf Schools base their
curriculum on ? Pure religion. It is based on reincarnation.
While Anthroposophists claim Anthroposophy is not a religion, it is
ardently defended _as if_ it was.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n344.6 ---------------
From: "Hope Seidman" (hseidman UDel.Edu)
Subject: Re: Welcome Hope
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 21:32:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----------
) From: snell oro.net
) To: waldorf-critics lists.best.com
) Subject: Welcome Hope
) Date: Saturday, March 08, 1997 6:09 PM
)
) Hi and welcome,
)
) I saw the responses to your first posting to the Waldorf list. It was
) predictable. Have you been further "warned" by Lefty yet ?
No, I have not been further warned. I truly had no intention of offending
and agitating. I am simply a Ph.D student, trying to get a personal feel
for the approach.
Have you read my rebuttal? I must admit, that I have received some very
kind and welcoming mail...privately. It IS curious, that individuals will
not publicly respond. I am grateful, however for those who wish to discuss
and question Waldorf practices.
DO your children still attendd Waldorf schools?
I did read the owl story and it is appauling! I do know that there are
stories like that in many schools, not just Waldorf Schools...sad as it
may be.
What is the child-development approach? Do WAldorf Educators view
anthroposophy as a religion?
My interest in mainly in early childhood education. I realize that Waldorf
schools are mainly private, but are there any WE early childhood programs?
(specifically). In other words, there are Montessori preschools, even
though there are programs for older children.
Also, some more "traditional" preschools/child care centers incorporate
some Montessori ideologies and materials...but are not considered to be
Montessori schools. Many other early childhood programs are very ecclectic
and use a variety of approaches. It seems to me that it would be difficult
to do that with WE. It is all or nothing (Just my impression). Any
thoughts?
Hope
) My children attended Waldorf schools for 4+ years. Did you see my recent
) post on "The Owl" story ? It is right out of a public funded Waldorf
) school's second grade curriculum.
) Have you seen the child-development model that Waldorf Schools base their
) curriculum on ? Pure religion. It is based on reincarnation.
) While Anthroposophists claim Anthroposophy is not a religion, it is
) ardently defended _as if_ it was.
) Deby
)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n344 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n345 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - Re: Several Things
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n345.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Several Things
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 13:01:05 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Deby writes
)) Of course the children could not understand the Anthroposophical
)) interpretation, but the parents _should_ be told. A reading list of all the
)) stories to be told, and the Anthroposophical reasoning and interpretation
)) _should_ be handed out to parents.
_El writes,
)The children are never told the Abstract Adult reason for a story.
)Simply; "The boy who cried wolf."
)These stories were written for children, they speak for themselves.
)I think it is quite natural for a teacher to present a list of what has and
)will be covered for the year to come for each family. If a teacher, for
)some reason hasn't extended this courtesy a polite request for a list
)from a parent will probably work quite well.
I am glad that _some_ schools find this request reasonable. Not only did
parents (politely) ask for a book/story list to be passed out to parents,
the County Superintendent of Schools asked as well. The faculty stated that
"the science curriculum alone would take two years to go through." Also,
the request from the Superintendent was tossed out because the faculty
stated that "he went over our heads by writing to the School Board." (Most
public officials are _clueless_ about WE's unique administrative set up.)
)Parents have asked me from time to time why I have chosen a particular
)story or poem, I have never refused to sit down with them and answer any
)question they may have. They have entrusted me with the teaching of
)their child, as far as I am concerned they have every right to request a
)reasonable amount of time out side the class room for understanding.
That is great, El. At our school, Waldorf teachers were making arrogant
statements such as, "I feel sorry for _any_ parent who thinks he knows what
their child needs, and _hanging_ up on the telephone without so much as a
goodbye" (YES ! That _happened_by a member of the college!!)
)
)
)) A point well taken by Lillian reminds us that these stories are told and
)) retold, then "acted out" by the children over the course of weeks. They are
)) _deeply_ absorbed. And that alone, leaves no question in the children's
)) minds that they _must_ be important ]to the teacher].
)
)The telling of a story "over the course of weeks" does not happen in the
)grades. Each story has a 3 day or a 2 day rhythm. Of course, if the children
)are working something up as a play to perform before their families and
)classmates then they will practice this for several weeks. This type
)of preparation is par for any other public or private school as well.
)That is just common sense.
)Your confusion is with the retelling of a story over a period of 3
)weeks or the a seasonal story in the kindergarten. There is also
)quite a difference in the subject matter from what is told in the
)kindergarten and the 1st grade.
)Most of the tales in the kindergarten deal with issues of right and
)wrong. I must also mention that many of the children in the kindergarten
)do not attend school everyday of the week and to the best of my
)knowledge neither is the same story told *every single day*. There are
)different ways of approaching this topic. It is really up to the teacher to
)decide what is best for the class. Please also take into account that
)the teachers *tell* the story, it is not read from a book with
)preconceived pictures.
)I would think that a teacher who has a student that may be exposed to many
)gruesome images would take the her or his story content into account.
)
)
)) If it was told once, I would say that would be alright, but considering how
)) deeply the children take in these stories, and not being told that they are
)) "make believe", concerns me.
)
)Why does this concern you? I have read "Good Night Moon" and "The Runaway
)Bunny" to my children more times than I care to count. I do not expect my
)children to runaway or never understand the concept of the moon as a
)satellite of the earth when they are older.
It is common aroung 3, 4 and maybe 5 yo to want a story retold, but by the
time the children are eight...retelling stories can seem insulting to some
kids.
)
)
)To Deby:
)I have a hard time understanding many of your concerns, how can you have
)been so involved, as you have claimed, in a Waldorf School and either
)pretend or know so little about the curriculum?
I _need_ to brush up on the curriculum. I have focused my time and energies
on administrative concerns. I truely was pleased with the fact that my
older son was "happy" with the school and thats is what mattered. (I hear
_that_ far too often from parents. It is also our responsibility to ensure
a quality education. (rant))
)The books you have mentioned in other posts have been in print and available
)for decades. It seems to me that you didn't really bother to look into
)the school until after you left. There are no great secrets in Waldorf
)Education, there is no underlining conspiracy to take over the world, a
)small country, or to corrupt the freedom of any one human being.
)With all the books in print and the on-going parent education the
)only thing required is a little effort. This, I feel was your
)responsibility long ago.
Yes, I share some of the blame, El. Three weeks into the school, I was
asked to serve on the board of directors. (Big mistake for the school.)
Most of my energies immediately fell within that arena. I served on the
board for the remainder of the time that the private Waldorf school was
open, and remained to "clean up the mess" for about 6 months past. Then I
jumped into the charter effort. Not alot of time to focus on the
curriculum. Just got my stomach full of dogmatic teachers.
) I have tried to understand your claim that the schools your were
)involved with didn't do the best job in parent education. I do not know
)everything that happen there, what I hear on this list is your side of
)the story, not the former teachers or any one representing the schools.
)Regardless, any endeavor where other human beings form a relationship
)requires TWO or more people involved. Were you the perfect parent and no
)one noticed? Did the teachers of this school gang up on you and forbade
)you to read anything concerning Waldorf Education? I think not.
)Did you approach the faculty or the board? I have seen a lot of blaming
)going on here and very little level headed thinking.
After the school closed, a long term Waldorf teacher [at the school]
explained to me that Anthroposophy was downplayed because the teachers had
come to the conclusion that our area is not an Anthroposophical community.
It seemed (to the teachers) that _every_ time Anthroposophy reared it's
head, half of the school population walked out. The faculty vowed not to
talk about it in front of parents. We had no book store. Anthroposophy
would come up during board meetings by way of statements such as, "If you
understood Anthroposophy, you wouldn't ask that question." But most
decisions made by the faculty were justified due to "pedigogical reasons".
)It is also difficult to understand your issues when some on this list state
)you have "studied Waldorf extensively." I am sorry, I just don't see
)that and find it hard to believe. If you have indeed "studied Waldorf
)extensively" your question and answers are not forth coming and I see
)them as a way of setting bait to develop conversations in a bias and
)underhanded manner.
"Studied Waldorf extensively" did not come from me. Compared to the average
citizen, I know alot. Compared to you, I may know very little.
I get the feeling on this list that PLANS is
)organization on a mission to slander Waldorf Education through erroneous
)accusations.
)I agree that Anthroposophy and Waldorf Education are complicated issues,
)but what isn't a complicated issue when human beings are involved.
)Our government, the state of public education, the environment are all
)complicated issues because in the center, where it really matters stand
)human beings.
)
)IMHO this is not a progressive way to discuss any issue, including
)Waldorf Education. In general I find this a forum to vent anger and create
)general descent.
)
)
)In another post:
)There is this on-going claim you state that someone from the
)school said one can not explain Anthroposophy or you will ruin it,
)something to that effect. I have seen you make that statment several
)times in quotes, but I have not seen it attributed to one single person.
)On the contrary, you make it sound as if every teacher in that school
)felt this way and had declared this as the policy of the school. Please
)explain who this individual or these individuals are?
You are correct that I haven't named names. Those people know who they are
and many families attending that meeting knows who they are. Without their
permission, I don't feel comfortable _blaming_ them just because they stood
up to represent the school.
If it was the
)policy of the school, being on the board and a parent of the school you
)would certainly have documentation of that statement, yes ?
Absolutely, I do. I have a tape of the meeting.
)
)
)In another post:
)Again I do not think this is put here to educate. Making a claim without
)posting some of the credentials of an unknown author.
)
)) Storr, in his conclusion chapter asserts that he felt that Steiner (and
)) Gurdjieff) would be diagnosed as "delusional disorder", verses
)
)
)Something about a great read:
)Are you suggesting I go and read the book to learn more about this man
)and his ideas on mental health? I wonder if it available in my area or on
)the net? I suppose I could go to a library or call the publisher to find
)out how I can find this book it may require effort on my part, but I
)guess if I think it is *important* enough I'll give a look see.
I purchased this book at a local book store. I doubt it is on the net.
)
)Do you really think I believe you want me to be enlighten or educated by
)Storrs book? Your other posts make it difficult for me to believe that.
)
)Do you understand what I am saying? In essence the critics-list seems to
)me a sad place for some people with an ax to grind and to make
)unsubstantiated claims about Waldorf Education and other facets of life.
)From your side of the fence, it probably _does_ look like that, El. But you
also contend that angels existance is fact. I call it a religious belief.
)
)I know I will get the usual belittling from those few who harbor deeper
)anger, but I did received the impression, from your private post, that you
)were requestion my opinions. Maybe I was wrong? David Macay has made it
)clear that he would like me to disappear, perhaps you feel the same?
)-El
No, I don't wish you to disappear, El. And I appreciate your style. But
that does not mean that I agree with your position.
)
)"My Pedagogic Creed:
)I believe that every teacher should realize the dignity of his calling;
)that he is a social servant set apart for the maintaining of proper
)social order and the securing of the right growth. I believe that in this
)way the teacher always is the prophet of the true God and the usherer in
)of the true kingdom of God." -John Dewey
Pure religion, El.
Deby
)___
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n345 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n346 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - Giving a grade to charter schools
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n346.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Giving a grade to charter schools
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 19:40:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Giving a grade to charter schools, by Susan Lauer (The Union, March 10,1997)
As alternatives to typical public schools flourish in Nevada County,
educators are grappling with how to measure students' progress.
Ten percent of all students in the county are in home-study programs, and
10 percent attend elementary charter schools where state regulations do not
apply, Nevada County Superintendent of Schools Terry McAteer said. McAteer
and other educators spoke to about 50 people at a League of Women Voters
forum Saturday in Grass Valley.
The diversity poses difficulties in assessing students' learning. Students
in the Grass Valley School District charter programs take the same
standardized tests as children in traditional programs, but assessment
becomes trickier when programs are not based on traditional models.
For example, Yuba River (public Waldorf) School students create their own
textbooks based on teacher instruction and oral presentations. There are
neither chapter quizes nor tests. At the Nevada City School of the Arts,
students are required to develop portfolios, but they do not take
traditional testing.
"There are challenges in assesment, especially at art-centered schools, and
we are working on that now," said George Hoffecker, principle at Yuba River
School. Still, he stressed, there is no doubt in his mind that students are
learning in the programs.
The public needs to have better ways to assess how children in charter
programs are doing, McAteer said: "There is not enough data to be hugging
or putting off (charter schools)," he said. "Accountability is a big
question."
"Accountability is a big question." Tell me about it. Plus, the Waldorf
students _copy_ their main lesson books from the board. "[S]tudents create
their own textbooks from teacher instruction and oral presentations" is a
misleading statement.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n346 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n347 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - The Temperaments with Karen Rivers
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n347.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: The Temperaments with Karen Rivers
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 23:42:34 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I was given a poster today. Thought I'd share the contents. There is a
picture of a little boy sitting amoung flowers and reeds, talking to an
elve, who is sitting on a mushroom.
"Understanding our children, family, friends and colleagues by cultivating
a knowledge of THE TEMPERAMENTS with KAREN RIVERS"
"Karen has been a Waldorf teacher in Marin County for over ten years. She
has also taught in the public school system and conducts many workshops
throughout California.This is a day worth your while."
March 16, 1997
at
Yuba River Charter School
870 Gold Flat Road
Nevada City, Ca 95959
Lecture
"Exploring the Tempersments"
10:00 - 12:00 pm
Lunch
12:00 - 1:00 pm
(Please bring a sack lunch)
Workshop
"Conflict Resolution in Light of the Temperaments"
1:00 - 4:00
$5 - $10 Donation at the door
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n347 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n348 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Dutch on-line magazine series on Anthroposophy
002 - Michael Kopp (mkopp actri - Re: Dutch on-line magazine series on Anthroposophy
003 - snell oro.net - In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n348.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Dutch on-line magazine series on Anthroposophy
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 01:48:16 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The Dutch magazine *Kleintje Muurkrant* has an electronic edition on the
World Wide Web. In it is an extensive series of articles on Anthroposophy
and racism.
http://www.telebyte.nl/~stelling/kleintje/series.htm#Antroposofie
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n348.2 ---------------
From: Michael Kopp (mkopp actrix.gen.nz)
Subject: Re: Dutch on-line magazine series on Anthroposophy
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 08:11:33 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199703160951.BAA16171 lists1.best.com)
All in Dutch, of course ... except for a link to Dan Dugan's "Roots of
Racism in Waldorf" article on the PLANS page. Now, how did that happen?
;B-{)}
)The Dutch magazine *Kleintje Muurkrant* has an electronic edition on the
)World Wide Web. In it is an extensive series of articles on Anthroposophy
)and racism.
)
)http://www.telebyte.nl/~stelling/kleintje/series.htm#Antroposofie
)
)-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n348.3 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 13:20:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Printed in The Union, Saturday, March 15,1997.
'Does its teaching system work ? The proof is in the learning'
As a subscriber to The Union, I recently read an opinion article regarding
the Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School(TRACS) which my little girl
attends. The article attacks the school as being deceptive and exploiting
religious teachings.
It is disturbing that Pastor Morton did not interview a representative
cross-section of the parent population which have children attending the
TRACS prior to writing this misinformed article.
It is noteworthy to recognise that PAstor Morton has been invited many
times over the course of the last several months to visit the classrooms,
unannounced on an open policy. He declined this first hand opportunity to
investigate the school and chose to write the article, irresponsibly. The
school even offered to be present at the church's meeting regarding this
concern and was again rejected.
In order to provide balance to accusations made in the March 4, 1997
article, I would like to share with you and your readership our family
search for preparatory education of our child. Our search ultimately led us
to the Waldorf inspired elementary school.
At 4 years old, our little girl was entered into a Montessori preschool and
continued into kindergarten. Sacramento was our home at the time. When it
was time to enroll in first grade, we suddenly recognised that several
alternative public education opportunities supplemented traditional public
schools. We were amazed that we had so many choices in today's school
system as compared to our own.
We investigated private as well as public schools, including public school
alternatives. We had strong interest in Waldorf education due to the
heartfelt atmosphere of the classroom and campus. Our initial concerns
centered around the postponement of teaching reading skills until second
and third grades. Therefore, we chose the fundamental alternative school
which was similar to our own education in the 1960s (the 3Rs). We were on a
learning curve and had not developed a comfort level for Waldorf education.
We were already familiar with the traditional approach.
Throughout first grade in the fundamental (alternative) public school, we
noticed much success in our daughter's academics. However, she appeared
overwhelmed at the intensity of the curriculum; consequently much
discontent prevailed. By the end of first grade, we began to reinvestigate
the alternative choices. This process led us to TRACS. We were searching
for more balanced teaching style which enhanced creativity, compassion for
all things and the love of learning. This approach to teaching inspires a
limitless capacity to create ... beneficial contribution to society.
Deception by TRACS was not at all what we have experienced. Initially, we
attended several meetings with teachers and discussed observations and
opinions of parents with kids in this type of education. We felt that the
degree of parent participation in the school provided ample opportunities
to monitor Waldorf teaching in the classroom. It has been our experience
that questions have always been answered in sufficient detail and with
genuine truth. We have never been disappointed.
During our first year (1996) at this school, we observed a handful of
discontented parents who apparently wanted for this charter school
something other than "Waldorf inspired" curriculum. Due to limited funding,
the school did not have a full-time administrator. The unresolved concerns
of this group caused some of these parents to leave with a veneance. They
continue to perpetuate misinformation in order to thwart progress of the
charter.
"Anthroposophy" was a new word for us, so we investigated through documents
and conversations with teachers and administrators. Later we learned that
anthroposophy means "study of man." The wisdom used to develop the Waldorf
teaching method has proved to be quite insightful and has demonstrated
success around the world for many years. Waldorf education prepares
children for vocational programs, higher education and continued
self-learning.
My impression of the literature written by Rudolf Steiner is mixed. Some of
Steiner's statements with regard to science appear less than impressive;
however, I was intregued to find that general aspects of Steiner's
pedigogical model paralleled my own childhood past. As a hydrogeologist, I
have reviewed endless scientific documents regarding a variety of issues,
ranging from good ideas to the rediculous. This is necessary for developing
the creative process. Wisdom and discernment are then needed to incorporate
the good ideas into practical uses. Bad ideas are to be ignored.
Our school has applied good, sound approaches to teach our youth. We know.
My wife has observed a heightened interest by students in mathematics and
Spanish and German languages, sharpening of comprehension skills, respect
toward others and an appreciation of music. We have never experienced a
more dedicated group of teachers. Pastor Morton has accused the school of
using myths and fairy tales without interpreting them, thereby allowing the
kids to believe the stories as fact. Our daughter has never considered
these stories as real with exception to Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and
the Tooth Fairy. As I recall, fairy tales were read in my school without
interpretation, and I believed in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the
Tooth Fairy. I can't help but wonder if Pastor Morton has a hidden agenda
in addressing non-issues.
Pastor Morton has also stated that the school exploits religious teachings.
Religious dogma has never been presented in our daughter's classroom. Our
involvement in her classroom and closeness with other parents would
certainly have revealed religious exploitation if it was present. Pastor
Morton also stated that you can not separate Steiner's religious world view
from Waldorf education (i.e., "you can't remove the pig from the pork").
One can separate a Catholic, fundamental Christian or Baptist public school
teacher from its curriculum just as well as any other spiritually based
teacher in the public school system.
The TRACS school is a brilliant assemblage of faculty and dedicated staff.
Waldorf-inspired teaching methods have demonstrated to us that students can
walk away with a love for learning, a compassion for all life and the
necessary tools to pursue higher education. The school district is
applauded for spearheading such an inovative alternative to teaching. I
only hope that Pastor Morton and his supporters speak to more parents in
TRACS. The proof is in the pudding.
Stephen Baker, Parent
***The issue of the church-state violation was _not_ addressed.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n348 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n349 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - PLANS letter to the Union
002 - mckay oro.net - Re: European experiences
003 - mckay oro.net - Re: European experiences
004 - mckay oro.net - non-Waldorf school transition
005 - mckay oro.net - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
006 - snell oro.net - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
007 - mckay oro.net - Re: Deception
008 - mckay oro.net - The Tale of the Violet
009 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
010 - mckay oro.net - Grand Jury Investigation
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: PLANS letter to the Union
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:23:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(Thanks to Dan Dugan for his help on this letter.)
Deby
3/14/97
Dear Editor,
The charter school movement has opened up publicly-funded education to a
wide diversity of approaches. The law is clear that religious education
must be excluded, but a golden opportunity exists for infiltration by
religious groups that conceal their true identity. Since charter schools
are overseen only by local school boards, a religious group with a good
front could get established in many places before it is discovered.
This has already occurred in at least three charter schools in
California. "Anthroposophy," an international religious sect, has
successfully promoted their religious school system "Waldorf education" to
school boards in Nevada County, San Diego, and Novato, California. The
Waldorf movement has always been deceitful about the relationship between
Anthroposophy and the schools. Private Waldorf schools around the world
claim to be non-sectarian while teaching the Anthroposophical world-view
and doctrine. Given their 75 years of practice at obfuscating this
relationship, the transition to public funding has been easy.
People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS) has organized to blow
the whistle on Waldorf's move to public funding. We are a network of
former Waldorf parents, teachers, and board members who have seen through
the institutionalized deception of the Waldorf movement. We are exposing
the true nature of Waldorf education, and won't rest until these schools
are back in the private sector where they belong.
Local school boards are unable to recognize the orchestrated deception
of religious sects that put up extremely attractive fronts. We need action
at local, state and national levels. We need the best investigators on
this case to get past the window dressing to the legal issue, violation of
the constitutional separation of church and state.
We're aware that parents of the children attending the Waldorf school
are happy. We're sure parents of students attending Catholic schools are
happy, but neither case is suitable for public funding. If Nevada
County's public officials don't address the church-state issue, it will
have to be settled in the courts, at a great expense to the community.
Let's stick to the issue. Public funds may not go to sectarian schools.
_____________________________
Debra Snell, PLANS President
Grass Valley, Ca (273-1005).
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.2 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: European experiences
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:57:57 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On 3/4/97 Marc Meriel wrote:
)Three of our four children were at the WS, two of them for nine years, first
)in Stuttgart and then in Schopfheim near Basel and I could agree with most of
)the critics I read on the list.
Good to see that not everyone over there is asleep and has the ability to
see the forest for the trees.
)However I would say that, without doubt, the non anthroposophian teacher has
)to attend numerous courses in Stuttgart or in Basel before he is allowed to
)play a decisive role in the school.
The same is true over here, and then you also get into the individual
"control" issues. At our local public WE school, the head of the College
of Teachers has successfully scared away _any_ teacher (Waldorf trained or
not) that has more education/experience that she feels will challenge her
views and control.
)As Rudolf Steiner had no time to get information about language teaching,
)English or French courses may vary from nothing to something according to the
)personal abilitiy of the teacher who receives no proper training except than
)anthroposophic guidelines (Russian, "yes", because it is a language that comes
)from the heart. French, "no", because it is too intellectual. English,
)"careful", because of disco music and internet)
German is _the_ language that is taught and some times Spanish in this
country. Also the children arn't taught _what_ they are saying in German.
)
)Art education is of course a scandal. Every child has to repeat the same
)motives and colours for years. If he deviates here from the norm he will be
)proposed for therapy teaching including special "curing" eurythmy (heil
)Eurythmie).
)
Very well said. I've never understood what WE methods of wet on wet had to
do with _real_ art or the teaching of it. It is _so_ limited, besides the
underlying Anthro reasons.
Having been involved in the art world most of my life (and how I earn my
living), as well as been an art docent in local schools in various grade
levels I was drawn to WE schools because of the claim that they are _very_
art oriented in not only the arts but that they teach the main lessons
through art. I became concerned when I offered to help in the class rooms,
but was told I didn't have the proper training and that the method/
information I was suggesting would "pre awaken" the children.
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.3 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: European experiences
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:57:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In a monthly periodical published locally, there was a recent contribution
by a 13 year old girl who has been attending public schools in Europe for
the last three years. She wrote about the differences of those schools to
our schools here and really likes them a lot. What I found educating for
me, and that helped shed some light on maybe why WE is accepted easier in
the European Public School system was this statement by her:
"Here is what I don't like about it: 1) The way we are taught. We mostly
recopy what the teacher writes on the blackboard into our "cahiers" or
notebooks. We need to know this pretty well by heart. Often after a test
we don't ever think about it again."
She could be describing a Waldorf School. In this country recopying is not
the main method of teaching or learning. When you are shown the main
lesson books that your child and the other children have done, you are lead
to believe that they were created from the oral presentation by the teacher
and that the illustrations are the childs original renderings. When you
realize that the lessons and art are copied from the blackboard by each
student, the main lesson books and the education that your child is
recieving is less than adequate, especially when it is stressed that WE
_is_ educationally superior to all other forms of education, since they are
teaching the "whole human being"!
"2) Some teachers read your scores on tests out loud in front of the whole
class. At the beginning when I was getting zeros, it was embarrassing! 3)
Many teachers humiliate you if you say something silly or make a mistake.
They show the rest of the class what you've done and laugh. 4) Grownups
consider themselves extremely superior and lately it's been getting to
me!!"
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.4 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: non-Waldorf school transition
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:57:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In a recent post (3/5/97) to the Waldorf List the question was asked:
"It is my understanding that Waldorf schools make a promise
to parents that Waldorf students will be at the same level
in academic subjects as children in non-Waldorf schools by
the third grade"
and was answered:
)) The belief that there
))is a three year promise comes from the agreement that Steiner made with
))the Dept. of Education in Stuttgart, 1919. [snip] Steiner, in the name of
))the Waldorf School, promised that children would reach the (then) normal
))goals by the end of the third, sixth and eighth grades. [snip] As far
))as we can tell,
))during the period 1919-1924, while the school was under Steiner's direct
))guidance, it was always a struggle to honor the agreement. This does not
))seem to be directly connected with the methods employed but more a result
))of the enormous amount that was presented in the class -- in other words,
))it seems to be a problem inherent in trying to educate the _whole_ human
))being in the same period of time normally required to teach only the
))cognitive aspects.
This claim to "educate the _whole_ human being" with WE is quite
interesting considering that all information for the main lesson books is
copied from what the teacher puts on the blackboard, including the
illustration. Does this "whole human being" imply some other sort of
education that doesn't fit in standard educational models and, is it what
many of us claim to be religious indoctrination? Also interesting that
even Steiner himself couldn't accomplish such a task.
))In our opinion, it is very difficult if not impossible to meet the goals of
))Waldorf education AND the cognitive/intellectual goals of most public
))schools in the classroom time available. The faculty at the Waldorf School
))in Stuttgart were unable to do it under Steiner's direct guidance, with a
))faculty of experienced, highly educated teachers, so it seems unlikely that
))with fewer hours of classroom time and without Steiner's direct guidance
))the goal would be easier to meet.
So to meet the goals of WE some things need to be left out like; reading,
math, _real_ art instruction, etc. Setting priorities _is_ important in
WE, just not most parents priorities for their childrens education.
))In any event, it does seem rather foolhardy to _promise_ that the public
))school goals will be met by the end of the third grade.
Well said, but to be more accurate it should be _maybe_ by the end of the
eighth grade, depending on how much educational enhancement is done by the
parents at home. At our public WE school, at Parent Council and Vision
meetings, many parents wanted _more_ spiritual/religious material in the
classroom and said they could supplement the standard educational stuff at
home. I think that is quite backwards for a Waldorf School that claims
"educational excellence" for it's motto (as do most I've seen).
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.5 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:58:02 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)Printed in The Union, Saturday, March 15,1997.
)
)'Does its teaching system work ? The proof is in the learning'
)
)As a subscriber to The Union, I recently read an opinion article regarding
)the Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School(TRACS) which my little girl
)attends. The article attacks the school as being deceptive and exploiting
)religious teachings.
This is one of the parents, Mr. Baker (whom I refered to in a previous
recent post) that at our "Vision" meetings was willing to have _more_
spiritual/religious educational teaching/material _and_ was willing to
supplement the standard educational material (reading, math, etc.) at home.
)
)It is disturbing that Pastor Morton did not interview a representative
)cross-section of the parent population which have children attending the
)TRACS prior to writing this misinformed article.
Pastor Morton did interview other parents, as well as one of the teachers
from the school whom also is a member of his church. The teacher and her
husband have been in WE for 18 years (she also has her public ed
credentials). When they told Pastor Morton that the information he had
been given was out-of-context and misleading as well as had been supplied
to him by disgruntled parents with no valid knowledge or information, they
offered to bring him some of their own books, brochures and class
curriculum materials. When the Pastor had read their information
thoroughly, he had to honestly tell them that the information that _they_
had provided him was _more_ incriminating as to the alligation of WE being
a religious education and in direct conflict with the separation of church
and state. Since Pastor Morton has his Doctorate in Comparitive Religion,
I think he would recognize one when he saw one.
)
)It is noteworthy to recognise that PAstor Morton has been invited many
)times over the course of the last several months to visit the classrooms,
)unannounced on an open policy. He declined this first hand opportunity to
)investigate the school and chose to write the article, irresponsibly. The
)school even offered to be present at the church's meeting regarding this
)concern and was again rejected.
He was invited, but _not_ for any "unannounced on an open policy", only by
prearranged appointment. He offered a second and separate meeting for the
school staff and interested parents.
[snip]
)Deception by TRACS was not at all what we have experienced.
Of coarse he wouldn't think there was any deception, this was the
spiritual "free" public Waldorf school him and his wife had thought they
always wanted.
)Initially, we attended several meetings with teachers and discussed
)observations and
)opinions of parents with kids in this type of education. We felt that the
)degree of parent participation in the school provided ample opportunities
)to monitor Waldorf teaching in the classroom.
Parent participation was mainly in things like organizing fund raisers,
festivals, playground improvements, office help, etc. Not class room
assistence. Besides, if you're totally enamored by WE and don't know what
to look for or how to interpret what you see or hear or don't think there
is anything to look for in the first place, but are one of those "newbees"
to Waldorf that say "as long as my child is happy" and "I don't know what
Anthroposophy is, but I don't think they teach it in the school", what else
would you expect someone like this to say?
)It has been our experience
)that questions have always been answered in sufficient detail and with
)genuine truth. We have never been disappointed.
I was at _every_ meeting that Mr. Baker and his wife were at and _many_
more for years before they ever showed up. At the meetings where the
questions were raised (Vision Work meetings) that went on for more than a
year (and they joined in past the half way point) many questions were
raised that _never_ got answered (or allowed). Questions like curriculum
checks and balances (testing), conflict resolution training, use of pencils
for the lower grades, other art styles besides wet on wet or the broad flat
crayons, continuing Ed for teachers, Dual credentialed teachers, remedial
training and special ed from _outside_ the Waldorf/Anthroposophy community,
etc. We weren't even allowed to put it up on the board for discussion at
these meetings.
)
)During our first year (1996) at this school, we observed a handful of
)discontented parents who apparently wanted for this charter school
)something other than "Waldorf inspired" curriculum. Due to limited funding,
)the school did not have a full-time administrator. The unresolved concerns
)of this group caused some of these parents to leave with a veneance. They
)continue to perpetuate misinformation in order to thwart progress of the
)charter.
This is so typical of Waldorf distortion and misinformation. Mr. Baker
wrongly states that what the parents who left wanted was a non-Waldorf
inspired school. That couldn't be further from the truth, we wanted a
Wldorf inspired school that incorperated "Best Practised Education" along
with "Dual Credentialed" teachers. As a founding member of this public
Waldorf school and on it's Charter Council, Parent Council, Enrollement
committee, etc., I know for a fact that that "handful of discontented
parents" was 60 families who had been part of the private Waldorf school
and were _very_ awake about the short commings of "Pure Waldorf", and even
though this was being called "Waldorf inspired" that was in words only!
The public Waldorf school had an administrator at the school two days a
week at first, and then after six months his time at the school increased
to three days a week. As far as funds went, the school was very well
funded since it is part of a rural school district with a high ADA (average
daily attendance) Funding (about 1,500.00/student more than other
districts).
)
)"Anthroposophy" was a new word for us, so we investigated through documents
)and conversations with teachers and administrators. Later we learned that
)anthroposophy means "study of man." The wisdom used to develop the Waldorf
)teaching method has proved to be quite insightful and has demonstrated
)success around the world for many years. Waldorf education prepares
)children for vocational programs, higher education and continued
)self-learning.
Boy did he buy into this hook, line and sinker! (The "documents" he refers
to were the beautiful full color brochures we sent him and his wife.) To
be fair, so had I and many on this list also. It is _very_ enticing on the
surface.
)
)My impression of the literature written by Rudolf Steiner is mixed. Some of
)Steiner's statements with regard to science appear less than impressive;
)however, I was intregued to find that general aspects of Steiner's
)pedigogical model paralleled my own childhood past. [snip]
So what did this have to do with the issue raised by Pastor Morton?
Nothing. Never in this article did Mr Baker make any substantial arguement
for the separation of church and state issue.
[snip]
)Pastor Morton has also stated that the school exploits religious teachings.
)Religious dogma has never been presented in our daughter's classroom. Our
)involvement in her classroom and closeness with other parents would
)certainly have revealed religious exploitation if it was present. Pastor
)Morton also stated that you can not separate Steiner's religious world view
)from Waldorf education (i.e., "you can't remove the pig from the pork").
)One can separate a Catholic, fundamental Christian or Baptist public school
)teacher from its curriculum just as well as any other spiritually based
)teacher in the public school system.
He misses the point here, the big difference is the Christan, Babtist or
Catholic religions is not what underlies Waldorf education. It is
Anthroposophy. You wouldn't have "Waldorf" education at all if you removed
it's Anthroposphical base and teaching methodology. He accusses Pastor
Morton of not checking things out, but I know he has not looked further
than what the teachers tell him, which is exactly what he wants to hear.
)
)The TRACS school is a brilliant assemblage of faculty and dedicated staff.
It is a discredit to the educational system.
)[snip] The school district is
)applauded for spearheading such an inovative alternative to teaching.
At a community fund raiser last week the "talk of the nite" was that the
school district is being investigated by the Grand Jury for it's
sponsorship of this Waldorf school and it's many illegal violations of the
education codes for Charter schools.
)I only hope that Pastor Morton and his supporters speak to more parents in
)TRACS. The proof is in the pudding.
Not only have they spoken to more parents, they continue to watch more and
more families exit the program this year. The classes are more out of
control this year than the two previous years. They (the school) are now
looking into hiring Ca. Credentialed teachers for much needed "damage
control". They feel the heat, and are trying to create ways to appease the
government overseeing that they are finally getting. Yes, the proof is in
the pudding, and no I don't want a bowl.
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.6 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 11:31:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Steve Baker writes in The Union,
))During our first year (1996) at this school, we observed a handful of
))discontented parents who apparently wanted for this charter school
))something other than "Waldorf inspired" curriculum. Due to limited funding,
))the school did not have a full-time administrator. The unresolved concerns
))of this group caused some of these parents to leave with a veneance. They
))continue to perpetuate misinformation in order to thwart progress of the
))charter.
What this "handful of parents" experienced was the faculty spreading fear
among the new parents that the school would be just another public school
without Anthroposophy. The founding group of parents, with support from 95%
of the entire parent body (as per a polling), wanted a _democratic_ process
verses a "faculty led" school. We were _no_ way asking for something other
than Waldorf-inspired.
The faculty continued to want AWSNA sanction, and that meant a faculty led
school. AWSNA representatives came to the school to tell the faculty that
AWSNA could not sanction them, no matter what, due to the church-state
issue. Still, the faculty spoke (in closed meetings which were overheard by
_several_ parents) with a few loyal-but-niave parents to do their dirty
work. When all but one parent voted for a democratic representation, one
parent, who admitted freely that she had taken the advice of the
administrator, tore up the ballets of the second grade class [in the school
parking lot] stating, "You are trying to destroy Anthroposophy!"(This
parent had _no_ idea what Anthroposophy was.) The second grade teacher
successfully appointed her own parent representative instead. (The one that
received only _one_ vote).
Stephen Baker knew _nothing_ of this incident. Nor was he at the Parent
Council meeting when the Anthroposophic parents (all _four_ of them)
stormed the meeting, crying and yelling, refusing to allow the elected
Robert's Rules of Order process to proceed. (This was observed in silence
by the Administrator and Faculty). After the meeting, the administrator was
overheard _by myself_ praising these parents and saying, "I admire you _so_
much for the guts you have to step forward". That is the day I became
completely convinced that the school was doomed.
Steve Baker's documents that he read consisted of the typical Waldorf
school brocures that obsfuscate the relationship between Anthroposophy and
Waldorf. I know what he received because I was on the committee that chose
and ordered the documents parents would receive if they wanted an
explanation. I can't say _if_ he investigated furthur. He may have.
Steve Baker's article is a classic parent that I hope to interview in a few
years to see if his position on WE is the same. He is an intellegent man
that the school is using to confuse the public. It is interesting that this
family seems to be swinging from one extreme to the other when it comes to
choosing an education for their "little girl". The pendulum tends to swing
both ways before coming to rest in the middle.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.7 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: Deception
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:41:12 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)In 'Conferences with Teachers',(Rudolf Steiner, 1919-21,Steiner Schools
)Fellowship, 1986 p.125)
)
)Steiner speaks of establishing more schools:
)
)"What should happen is that more and more people should get hold of the
)idea of what we might call our School Movement, the movement to have
)independent schools, so that a really big movement to have independent
)schools arises as part of the Threefold Movement. We might use the term
)standard school where it is opportune, though for my part I must confess
)I never liked the choice of definition - although it had to be chosen as it
) was opportune - because it does not sufficiantly emphasise that we do
) not want what the State means by a standard school, and that we
)attach more importance to the school being independent than being standard.
)Then it is bound to come about. The kind of standard school the present
)German government is aiming for is the direct opposite. Giving in to things
)like this would be grovelling to something we abhor. We must worm our way
)through. We have to be conscious of the fact that this is done in life -
)not through an inner provocation, then it would be the way Jesuits work -
)but done with a certain mental reservation in response to external
)requirements. We have to be conscious that in order to do what we want to
)do, at least, it is necessary to talk with the people, not because we want
)to but because we have to, and inwardly make fools of them."
When the private Waldorf school (Mariposa) was closing and the staff was
working on the paper work to get a Charter School and then got the Charter,
they would always refer to Mariposa and it's "history" for reasons why
this or that could or couldn't be done. I advised them that they couldn't
refer to the old school in the ways they were because that was in direct
conflict with the "Conversion Law", which doesn't allow private schools to
just convert to public schools. They did it anyway. When we were all
meeting doing the "Vision Work", and a lot of parents wanted "Waldorf
inspired" with "Best Practice Education" we were told that it _wouldn't be
Waldorf_ to just take some aspects of it and mix with other Ed. models, it
had to be all or nothing, "Pure Waldorf". Now because of all the heat
they are getting for being a "Pure Waldorf" religious school in the public
sector, they are saying they are a "Waldorf inspired" school and everything
_is_ very different now. Yea, and the Popes not Catholic anymore either.
In the post of 16 Mar 1997, "In defense of...", Mr. Baker states that a
handful of parents wanted the charter to be something other than "Waldorf
inspired" curriculum. That is so far from the _truth_ it's pathetic. The
60 families that left _wanted_ "WE inspired", but were told that wasn't
possible and _if we didn't like it_ we could go somewhere else.
So you can see how well Steiner's words and training still work today; "We
must worm our way through, .... We have to be conscious that in order to
*do what we want to do*, at least, it is necessary to talk with the people,
*not because we want to but because we have to*, AND INWARDLY MAKE FOOLS OF
THEM."
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.8 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: The Tale of the Violet
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:41:08 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
This was posted on the Waldorf List on 3/11/97:
)) Rudolf Steiner gave the story of the violet in Lecture Four of "The
))Kingdom of Childhood." ))I include it below, preceded and followed by
))some of his remarks.
))
))"I have shown you how you should teach with descriptive, imaginative
))pictures between the change of teeth and the ninth or tenth year, for
))what the children then receive from you will live on in their minds and
))souls as a natural development, right through their whole lives.
))
)) "This course is possible only if the feelings and ideas you awaken are
))not dead but living. To do this first of all you yourselves must acquire a
))feeling for the inward life of the soul. Teachers and educators must be
))patient with heir own self-education, with awakening something in the
))soul that indeed may sprout and grow. You then may be able to make the
))most wonderful discoveries, but if this is to be so you must not lose
))courage in your first endeavors.
))
)) "For you see, whenever you undertake a spiritual activity, you always
))must be able to bear being clumsy and awkward. People who cannot endure
))being clumsy and doing things stupidly and imperfectly at first never
))really will be able to do them perfectly in the end out of their own inner
))self. And especially in education first of all you must kindle in your
))own souls what you then have to work out for yourselves; but first it must
))be enkindled in the soul. If once or twice you have succeeded in thinking
))out a pictorial presentation of a lesson that you see impresses the
))children, then you will make a remarkable discovery about yourself. You
))will see that it becomes easier to invent such pictures, that by degrees
))you become inventive in a way you had never dreamed of. But for this you
))must have the courage to be very far from perfect to begin with...
))
)) "Let me give you an example of something that can sink into the child's
))soul so that it grows as the child grows, something that you can come
))back to in later years and use to arouse certain feelings. Nothing is
))more useful and fruitful in teaching than to give the children something
))in picture form between the seventh and eighth years, and later, perhaps
))in the fourteenth and fifteenth years, to come back to it again in some
))way or other...
))
)) "Now suppose for instance that we tell an imaginative story to a child
))of seven or eight. The child does not need to understand at once all the
))pictures contained in the story. I will describe later why this is not
))necessary. All that matters is that the child takes delight in the story
))because it is presented with a certain grace and charm. Suppose I were
))to tell the following story:
))
))---
))
)) "Once upon a time in a world where the sun peeped through the branches
))there lived a violet, a very modest violet under a tree with big leaves.
))And the violet was able to look through an opening at the top of the
))tree. As she looked through this broad opening in the treetop the violet
))saw the blue sky. The little violet saw the blue sky for the first time
))on this morning, because she had only just blossomed. Now the violet was
))frightened when she saw the blue sky--indeed she was overcome with fear,
))but she did not yet know why she felt such great fear. Then a dog ran by,
))not a good dog, a rather bad snappy dog. And the violet said to the dog:
))"Tell me, what is that up there, that is blue like me?" For the sky also
))was blue just as the violet was. And the dog in his wickedness said: "Oh,
))that is a great giant violet like you and this great violet has grown so
))big that it can crush you." Then the violet was more frightened than
))ever, because she believed that the violet up in the sky had got so big
))that it could crush her. And the violet folded her little petals together
))and did not want to look up to the big great violet any more, but hid
))herself under a big leaf that a puff of wind had just blown down from the
))tree. There she stayed all day long, hiding in her fear from the great
))big sky-violet.
))
)) "When morning came the violet had not slept all night, for she had
))spent the night wondering what to think of the great blue sky-violet who
))was said to be coming to crush her. And every moment she was expecting
))the first blow to come. But it did not come. In the morning the little
))violet crept out, as she was not in the least tired, for all night long
))she had been only thinking, and she was fresh and not tired (violets are
))tired when they sleep, they are not tired when they don't sleep!) and the
))first thing that the little violet saw was the rising sun and the rosy
))dawn. And when the violet saw the rosy dawn she had no fear. It made her
))glad at heart and happy to see the dawn. As the dawn faded the pale blue
))sky gradually appeared again and became bluer and bluer all the time, and
))the little violet thought again what the dog had said, that it was a
))great big violet and it would come and crush her.
))
)) "At that moment a lamb came by and the little violet again felt she
))must ask what that thing above her could be. "What is that up there?"
))asked the violet, and the lamb said, "That is a great big violet, blue
))like yourself." Then the violet began to be afraid again and thought she
))would only hear from the lamb what the wicked dog had told her. But the
))lamb was good and gentle, and because he had such good gentle eyes, the
))violet asked again, "Dear lamb, do tell me, will the great big violet up
))there come and crush me?" "Oh no," answered the lamb, "it will not crush
))you, that is a great big violet, and his love is much greater than your
))own love, even as he is much more blue than you are in your little blue
))form." And the violet understood at once that there was a great big
))violet who would not crush her, but who was so blue in order that he
))might have more love, and that the big violet would protect the little
))violet from everything in the world that might hurt her. Then the little
))violet felt so happy, because what she saw as blue in the great
))sky-violet appeared to her as divine Love, which was streaming toward her
))from all sides. And the little violet looked up all the time as if she
))wished to pray to the God of violets."
))
))--
))
)) "Now if you tell a story of this kind they will most certainly listen,
))for they always listen to such things. But you must tell it in the right
))mood, so that when the children have heard the story the somehow feel the
))need to live with it and turn it over inwardly in their souls. This is
))very important, and it all depends on whether discipline can be maintained
))in the class through the teacher's own feeling."
))
)))From Rudolf Steiner's "The Kingdom of Childhood", Lecture 4. Translation
))by Helen Fox copyright 1982. Revised translation Copyright 1994
))Anthroposophic Press.
))
))Then Rudolf Steiner describes how a teacher told stories that so
))captivated the children they kept on insisting he tell another and another
))until he quite lost control of the class and reached the point where he
))couldn't think of any more stories to tell. He goes on after the above
))story to discuss it and how the children will ask questions about the
))story and how you can answer them.
))
))----------------------------------------------------------
))Gerry Palo Denver, Colorado
))palo netcom.com
))
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.9 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 17:28:58 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
David, thanks for your brilliant deconstruction of the parent's letter to
the Union.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.10 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Grand Jury Investigation
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 21:10:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I got a call a week ago by one of the parents at the public Waldorf school
here, the South Yuba Charter School (was Twin Ridges Alternative Charter
School). He was _very_ upset and concerned because the County Grand Jury
had come by the school to investigate complaints it had recieved concerning
several issues.
The reason for this call was because my name was being spread around the
school as having something to do with the investigation and since he and
his family have been friends for years he had stood up for me, but was
concerned and wanted to know from me personally. I thanked him for his
friendship and courtesy and expressed my understanding of how he felt, but
told him that I had _not_ had anything to do with the Grand Jury. He went
on to tell me that the people from the GJ had barged into his sons 7th
grade class and interogated several children and the teacher. He was upset
that these people hadn't gotten any parental permission to question the
children and said it felt like some Nazi inquisition. I asked him if he
had talked to any of the staff at the school or did the info come from his
son? He said that he hadn't talked to the teacher or staff yet, but was
going to talk to the administrator the next day. I asked him why my name
had come forth, and he said that it had been a big shock to the community
when my family and I left, since I had been so much a part of making it all
happen, and that people were still angry over our leaving.
I called the GJ the next day to see what I could find out, but since the
Grand Juries investigation is all confidential as to what _was_ done and
_what_ questions were asked, they could only tell me that they had in fact
gone to the school.
David McKay
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n349 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n349 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - PLANS letter to the Union
002 - mckay oro.net - Re: European experiences
003 - mckay oro.net - Re: European experiences
004 - mckay oro.net - non-Waldorf school transition
005 - mckay oro.net - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
006 - snell oro.net - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
007 - mckay oro.net - Re: Deception
008 - mckay oro.net - The Tale of the Violet
009 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
010 - mckay oro.net - Grand Jury Investigation
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: PLANS letter to the Union
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:23:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(Thanks to Dan Dugan for his help on this letter.)
Deby
3/14/97
Dear Editor,
The charter school movement has opened up publicly-funded education to a
wide diversity of approaches. The law is clear that religious education
must be excluded, but a golden opportunity exists for infiltration by
religious groups that conceal their true identity. Since charter schools
are overseen only by local school boards, a religious group with a good
front could get established in many places before it is discovered.
This has already occurred in at least three charter schools in
California. "Anthroposophy," an international religious sect, has
successfully promoted their religious school system "Waldorf education" to
school boards in Nevada County, San Diego, and Novato, California. The
Waldorf movement has always been deceitful about the relationship between
Anthroposophy and the schools. Private Waldorf schools around the world
claim to be non-sectarian while teaching the Anthroposophical world-view
and doctrine. Given their 75 years of practice at obfuscating this
relationship, the transition to public funding has been easy.
People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS) has organized to blow
the whistle on Waldorf's move to public funding. We are a network of
former Waldorf parents, teachers, and board members who have seen through
the institutionalized deception of the Waldorf movement. We are exposing
the true nature of Waldorf education, and won't rest until these schools
are back in the private sector where they belong.
Local school boards are unable to recognize the orchestrated deception
of religious sects that put up extremely attractive fronts. We need action
at local, state and national levels. We need the best investigators on
this case to get past the window dressing to the legal issue, violation of
the constitutional separation of church and state.
We're aware that parents of the children attending the Waldorf school
are happy. We're sure parents of students attending Catholic schools are
happy, but neither case is suitable for public funding. If Nevada
County's public officials don't address the church-state issue, it will
have to be settled in the courts, at a great expense to the community.
Let's stick to the issue. Public funds may not go to sectarian schools.
_____________________________
Debra Snell, PLANS President
Grass Valley, Ca (273-1005).
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.2 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: European experiences
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:57:57 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On 3/4/97 Marc Meriel wrote:
)Three of our four children were at the WS, two of them for nine years, first
)in Stuttgart and then in Schopfheim near Basel and I could agree with most of
)the critics I read on the list.
Good to see that not everyone over there is asleep and has the ability to
see the forest for the trees.
)However I would say that, without doubt, the non anthroposophian teacher has
)to attend numerous courses in Stuttgart or in Basel before he is allowed to
)play a decisive role in the school.
The same is true over here, and then you also get into the individual
"control" issues. At our local public WE school, the head of the College
of Teachers has successfully scared away _any_ teacher (Waldorf trained or
not) that has more education/experience that she feels will challenge her
views and control.
)As Rudolf Steiner had no time to get information about language teaching,
)English or French courses may vary from nothing to something according to the
)personal abilitiy of the teacher who receives no proper training except than
)anthroposophic guidelines (Russian, "yes", because it is a language that comes
)from the heart. French, "no", because it is too intellectual. English,
)"careful", because of disco music and internet)
German is _the_ language that is taught and some times Spanish in this
country. Also the children arn't taught _what_ they are saying in German.
)
)Art education is of course a scandal. Every child has to repeat the same
)motives and colours for years. If he deviates here from the norm he will be
)proposed for therapy teaching including special "curing" eurythmy (heil
)Eurythmie).
)
Very well said. I've never understood what WE methods of wet on wet had to
do with _real_ art or the teaching of it. It is _so_ limited, besides the
underlying Anthro reasons.
Having been involved in the art world most of my life (and how I earn my
living), as well as been an art docent in local schools in various grade
levels I was drawn to WE schools because of the claim that they are _very_
art oriented in not only the arts but that they teach the main lessons
through art. I became concerned when I offered to help in the class rooms,
but was told I didn't have the proper training and that the method/
information I was suggesting would "pre awaken" the children.
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.3 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: European experiences
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:57:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In a monthly periodical published locally, there was a recent contribution
by a 13 year old girl who has been attending public schools in Europe for
the last three years. She wrote about the differences of those schools to
our schools here and really likes them a lot. What I found educating for
me, and that helped shed some light on maybe why WE is accepted easier in
the European Public School system was this statement by her:
"Here is what I don't like about it: 1) The way we are taught. We mostly
recopy what the teacher writes on the blackboard into our "cahiers" or
notebooks. We need to know this pretty well by heart. Often after a test
we don't ever think about it again."
She could be describing a Waldorf School. In this country recopying is not
the main method of teaching or learning. When you are shown the main
lesson books that your child and the other children have done, you are lead
to believe that they were created from the oral presentation by the teacher
and that the illustrations are the childs original renderings. When you
realize that the lessons and art are copied from the blackboard by each
student, the main lesson books and the education that your child is
recieving is less than adequate, especially when it is stressed that WE
_is_ educationally superior to all other forms of education, since they are
teaching the "whole human being"!
"2) Some teachers read your scores on tests out loud in front of the whole
class. At the beginning when I was getting zeros, it was embarrassing! 3)
Many teachers humiliate you if you say something silly or make a mistake.
They show the rest of the class what you've done and laugh. 4) Grownups
consider themselves extremely superior and lately it's been getting to
me!!"
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.4 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: non-Waldorf school transition
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:57:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In a recent post (3/5/97) to the Waldorf List the question was asked:
"It is my understanding that Waldorf schools make a promise
to parents that Waldorf students will be at the same level
in academic subjects as children in non-Waldorf schools by
the third grade"
and was answered:
)) The belief that there
))is a three year promise comes from the agreement that Steiner made with
))the Dept. of Education in Stuttgart, 1919. [snip] Steiner, in the name of
))the Waldorf School, promised that children would reach the (then) normal
))goals by the end of the third, sixth and eighth grades. [snip] As far
))as we can tell,
))during the period 1919-1924, while the school was under Steiner's direct
))guidance, it was always a struggle to honor the agreement. This does not
))seem to be directly connected with the methods employed but more a result
))of the enormous amount that was presented in the class -- in other words,
))it seems to be a problem inherent in trying to educate the _whole_ human
))being in the same period of time normally required to teach only the
))cognitive aspects.
This claim to "educate the _whole_ human being" with WE is quite
interesting considering that all information for the main lesson books is
copied from what the teacher puts on the blackboard, including the
illustration. Does this "whole human being" imply some other sort of
education that doesn't fit in standard educational models and, is it what
many of us claim to be religious indoctrination? Also interesting that
even Steiner himself couldn't accomplish such a task.
))In our opinion, it is very difficult if not impossible to meet the goals of
))Waldorf education AND the cognitive/intellectual goals of most public
))schools in the classroom time available. The faculty at the Waldorf School
))in Stuttgart were unable to do it under Steiner's direct guidance, with a
))faculty of experienced, highly educated teachers, so it seems unlikely that
))with fewer hours of classroom time and without Steiner's direct guidance
))the goal would be easier to meet.
So to meet the goals of WE some things need to be left out like; reading,
math, _real_ art instruction, etc. Setting priorities _is_ important in
WE, just not most parents priorities for their childrens education.
))In any event, it does seem rather foolhardy to _promise_ that the public
))school goals will be met by the end of the third grade.
Well said, but to be more accurate it should be _maybe_ by the end of the
eighth grade, depending on how much educational enhancement is done by the
parents at home. At our public WE school, at Parent Council and Vision
meetings, many parents wanted _more_ spiritual/religious material in the
classroom and said they could supplement the standard educational stuff at
home. I think that is quite backwards for a Waldorf School that claims
"educational excellence" for it's motto (as do most I've seen).
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.5 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:58:02 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)Printed in The Union, Saturday, March 15,1997.
)
)'Does its teaching system work ? The proof is in the learning'
)
)As a subscriber to The Union, I recently read an opinion article regarding
)the Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School(TRACS) which my little girl
)attends. The article attacks the school as being deceptive and exploiting
)religious teachings.
This is one of the parents, Mr. Baker (whom I refered to in a previous
recent post) that at our "Vision" meetings was willing to have _more_
spiritual/religious educational teaching/material _and_ was willing to
supplement the standard educational material (reading, math, etc.) at home.
)
)It is disturbing that Pastor Morton did not interview a representative
)cross-section of the parent population which have children attending the
)TRACS prior to writing this misinformed article.
Pastor Morton did interview other parents, as well as one of the teachers
from the school whom also is a member of his church. The teacher and her
husband have been in WE for 18 years (she also has her public ed
credentials). When they told Pastor Morton that the information he had
been given was out-of-context and misleading as well as had been supplied
to him by disgruntled parents with no valid knowledge or information, they
offered to bring him some of their own books, brochures and class
curriculum materials. When the Pastor had read their information
thoroughly, he had to honestly tell them that the information that _they_
had provided him was _more_ incriminating as to the alligation of WE being
a religious education and in direct conflict with the separation of church
and state. Since Pastor Morton has his Doctorate in Comparitive Religion,
I think he would recognize one when he saw one.
)
)It is noteworthy to recognise that PAstor Morton has been invited many
)times over the course of the last several months to visit the classrooms,
)unannounced on an open policy. He declined this first hand opportunity to
)investigate the school and chose to write the article, irresponsibly. The
)school even offered to be present at the church's meeting regarding this
)concern and was again rejected.
He was invited, but _not_ for any "unannounced on an open policy", only by
prearranged appointment. He offered a second and separate meeting for the
school staff and interested parents.
[snip]
)Deception by TRACS was not at all what we have experienced.
Of coarse he wouldn't think there was any deception, this was the
spiritual "free" public Waldorf school him and his wife had thought they
always wanted.
)Initially, we attended several meetings with teachers and discussed
)observations and
)opinions of parents with kids in this type of education. We felt that the
)degree of parent participation in the school provided ample opportunities
)to monitor Waldorf teaching in the classroom.
Parent participation was mainly in things like organizing fund raisers,
festivals, playground improvements, office help, etc. Not class room
assistence. Besides, if you're totally enamored by WE and don't know what
to look for or how to interpret what you see or hear or don't think there
is anything to look for in the first place, but are one of those "newbees"
to Waldorf that say "as long as my child is happy" and "I don't know what
Anthroposophy is, but I don't think they teach it in the school", what else
would you expect someone like this to say?
)It has been our experience
)that questions have always been answered in sufficient detail and with
)genuine truth. We have never been disappointed.
I was at _every_ meeting that Mr. Baker and his wife were at and _many_
more for years before they ever showed up. At the meetings where the
questions were raised (Vision Work meetings) that went on for more than a
year (and they joined in past the half way point) many questions were
raised that _never_ got answered (or allowed). Questions like curriculum
checks and balances (testing), conflict resolution training, use of pencils
for the lower grades, other art styles besides wet on wet or the broad flat
crayons, continuing Ed for teachers, Dual credentialed teachers, remedial
training and special ed from _outside_ the Waldorf/Anthroposophy community,
etc. We weren't even allowed to put it up on the board for discussion at
these meetings.
)
)During our first year (1996) at this school, we observed a handful of
)discontented parents who apparently wanted for this charter school
)something other than "Waldorf inspired" curriculum. Due to limited funding,
)the school did not have a full-time administrator. The unresolved concerns
)of this group caused some of these parents to leave with a veneance. They
)continue to perpetuate misinformation in order to thwart progress of the
)charter.
This is so typical of Waldorf distortion and misinformation. Mr. Baker
wrongly states that what the parents who left wanted was a non-Waldorf
inspired school. That couldn't be further from the truth, we wanted a
Wldorf inspired school that incorperated "Best Practised Education" along
with "Dual Credentialed" teachers. As a founding member of this public
Waldorf school and on it's Charter Council, Parent Council, Enrollement
committee, etc., I know for a fact that that "handful of discontented
parents" was 60 families who had been part of the private Waldorf school
and were _very_ awake about the short commings of "Pure Waldorf", and even
though this was being called "Waldorf inspired" that was in words only!
The public Waldorf school had an administrator at the school two days a
week at first, and then after six months his time at the school increased
to three days a week. As far as funds went, the school was very well
funded since it is part of a rural school district with a high ADA (average
daily attendance) Funding (about 1,500.00/student more than other
districts).
)
)"Anthroposophy" was a new word for us, so we investigated through documents
)and conversations with teachers and administrators. Later we learned that
)anthroposophy means "study of man." The wisdom used to develop the Waldorf
)teaching method has proved to be quite insightful and has demonstrated
)success around the world for many years. Waldorf education prepares
)children for vocational programs, higher education and continued
)self-learning.
Boy did he buy into this hook, line and sinker! (The "documents" he refers
to were the beautiful full color brochures we sent him and his wife.) To
be fair, so had I and many on this list also. It is _very_ enticing on the
surface.
)
)My impression of the literature written by Rudolf Steiner is mixed. Some of
)Steiner's statements with regard to science appear less than impressive;
)however, I was intregued to find that general aspects of Steiner's
)pedigogical model paralleled my own childhood past. [snip]
So what did this have to do with the issue raised by Pastor Morton?
Nothing. Never in this article did Mr Baker make any substantial arguement
for the separation of church and state issue.
[snip]
)Pastor Morton has also stated that the school exploits religious teachings.
)Religious dogma has never been presented in our daughter's classroom. Our
)involvement in her classroom and closeness with other parents would
)certainly have revealed religious exploitation if it was present. Pastor
)Morton also stated that you can not separate Steiner's religious world view
)from Waldorf education (i.e., "you can't remove the pig from the pork").
)One can separate a Catholic, fundamental Christian or Baptist public school
)teacher from its curriculum just as well as any other spiritually based
)teacher in the public school system.
He misses the point here, the big difference is the Christan, Babtist or
Catholic religions is not what underlies Waldorf education. It is
Anthroposophy. You wouldn't have "Waldorf" education at all if you removed
it's Anthroposphical base and teaching methodology. He accusses Pastor
Morton of not checking things out, but I know he has not looked further
than what the teachers tell him, which is exactly what he wants to hear.
)
)The TRACS school is a brilliant assemblage of faculty and dedicated staff.
It is a discredit to the educational system.
)[snip] The school district is
)applauded for spearheading such an inovative alternative to teaching.
At a community fund raiser last week the "talk of the nite" was that the
school district is being investigated by the Grand Jury for it's
sponsorship of this Waldorf school and it's many illegal violations of the
education codes for Charter schools.
)I only hope that Pastor Morton and his supporters speak to more parents in
)TRACS. The proof is in the pudding.
Not only have they spoken to more parents, they continue to watch more and
more families exit the program this year. The classes are more out of
control this year than the two previous years. They (the school) are now
looking into hiring Ca. Credentialed teachers for much needed "damage
control". They feel the heat, and are trying to create ways to appease the
government overseeing that they are finally getting. Yes, the proof is in
the pudding, and no I don't want a bowl.
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.6 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 11:31:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Steve Baker writes in The Union,
))During our first year (1996) at this school, we observed a handful of
))discontented parents who apparently wanted for this charter school
))something other than "Waldorf inspired" curriculum. Due to limited funding,
))the school did not have a full-time administrator. The unresolved concerns
))of this group caused some of these parents to leave with a veneance. They
))continue to perpetuate misinformation in order to thwart progress of the
))charter.
What this "handful of parents" experienced was the faculty spreading fear
among the new parents that the school would be just another public school
without Anthroposophy. The founding group of parents, with support from 95%
of the entire parent body (as per a polling), wanted a _democratic_ process
verses a "faculty led" school. We were _no_ way asking for something other
than Waldorf-inspired.
The faculty continued to want AWSNA sanction, and that meant a faculty led
school. AWSNA representatives came to the school to tell the faculty that
AWSNA could not sanction them, no matter what, due to the church-state
issue. Still, the faculty spoke (in closed meetings which were overheard by
_several_ parents) with a few loyal-but-niave parents to do their dirty
work. When all but one parent voted for a democratic representation, one
parent, who admitted freely that she had taken the advice of the
administrator, tore up the ballets of the second grade class [in the school
parking lot] stating, "You are trying to destroy Anthroposophy!"(This
parent had _no_ idea what Anthroposophy was.) The second grade teacher
successfully appointed her own parent representative instead. (The one that
received only _one_ vote).
Stephen Baker knew _nothing_ of this incident. Nor was he at the Parent
Council meeting when the Anthroposophic parents (all _four_ of them)
stormed the meeting, crying and yelling, refusing to allow the elected
Robert's Rules of Order process to proceed. (This was observed in silence
by the Administrator and Faculty). After the meeting, the administrator was
overheard _by myself_ praising these parents and saying, "I admire you _so_
much for the guts you have to step forward". That is the day I became
completely convinced that the school was doomed.
Steve Baker's documents that he read consisted of the typical Waldorf
school brocures that obsfuscate the relationship between Anthroposophy and
Waldorf. I know what he received because I was on the committee that chose
and ordered the documents parents would receive if they wanted an
explanation. I can't say _if_ he investigated furthur. He may have.
Steve Baker's article is a classic parent that I hope to interview in a few
years to see if his position on WE is the same. He is an intellegent man
that the school is using to confuse the public. It is interesting that this
family seems to be swinging from one extreme to the other when it comes to
choosing an education for their "little girl". The pendulum tends to swing
both ways before coming to rest in the middle.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.7 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: Deception
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:41:12 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)In 'Conferences with Teachers',(Rudolf Steiner, 1919-21,Steiner Schools
)Fellowship, 1986 p.125)
)
)Steiner speaks of establishing more schools:
)
)"What should happen is that more and more people should get hold of the
)idea of what we might call our School Movement, the movement to have
)independent schools, so that a really big movement to have independent
)schools arises as part of the Threefold Movement. We might use the term
)standard school where it is opportune, though for my part I must confess
)I never liked the choice of definition - although it had to be chosen as it
) was opportune - because it does not sufficiantly emphasise that we do
) not want what the State means by a standard school, and that we
)attach more importance to the school being independent than being standard.
)Then it is bound to come about. The kind of standard school the present
)German government is aiming for is the direct opposite. Giving in to things
)like this would be grovelling to something we abhor. We must worm our way
)through. We have to be conscious of the fact that this is done in life -
)not through an inner provocation, then it would be the way Jesuits work -
)but done with a certain mental reservation in response to external
)requirements. We have to be conscious that in order to do what we want to
)do, at least, it is necessary to talk with the people, not because we want
)to but because we have to, and inwardly make fools of them."
When the private Waldorf school (Mariposa) was closing and the staff was
working on the paper work to get a Charter School and then got the Charter,
they would always refer to Mariposa and it's "history" for reasons why
this or that could or couldn't be done. I advised them that they couldn't
refer to the old school in the ways they were because that was in direct
conflict with the "Conversion Law", which doesn't allow private schools to
just convert to public schools. They did it anyway. When we were all
meeting doing the "Vision Work", and a lot of parents wanted "Waldorf
inspired" with "Best Practice Education" we were told that it _wouldn't be
Waldorf_ to just take some aspects of it and mix with other Ed. models, it
had to be all or nothing, "Pure Waldorf". Now because of all the heat
they are getting for being a "Pure Waldorf" religious school in the public
sector, they are saying they are a "Waldorf inspired" school and everything
_is_ very different now. Yea, and the Popes not Catholic anymore either.
In the post of 16 Mar 1997, "In defense of...", Mr. Baker states that a
handful of parents wanted the charter to be something other than "Waldorf
inspired" curriculum. That is so far from the _truth_ it's pathetic. The
60 families that left _wanted_ "WE inspired", but were told that wasn't
possible and _if we didn't like it_ we could go somewhere else.
So you can see how well Steiner's words and training still work today; "We
must worm our way through, .... We have to be conscious that in order to
*do what we want to do*, at least, it is necessary to talk with the people,
*not because we want to but because we have to*, AND INWARDLY MAKE FOOLS OF
THEM."
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.8 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: The Tale of the Violet
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:41:08 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
This was posted on the Waldorf List on 3/11/97:
)) Rudolf Steiner gave the story of the violet in Lecture Four of "The
))Kingdom of Childhood." ))I include it below, preceded and followed by
))some of his remarks.
))
))"I have shown you how you should teach with descriptive, imaginative
))pictures between the change of teeth and the ninth or tenth year, for
))what the children then receive from you will live on in their minds and
))souls as a natural development, right through their whole lives.
))
)) "This course is possible only if the feelings and ideas you awaken are
))not dead but living. To do this first of all you yourselves must acquire a
))feeling for the inward life of the soul. Teachers and educators must be
))patient with heir own self-education, with awakening something in the
))soul that indeed may sprout and grow. You then may be able to make the
))most wonderful discoveries, but if this is to be so you must not lose
))courage in your first endeavors.
))
)) "For you see, whenever you undertake a spiritual activity, you always
))must be able to bear being clumsy and awkward. People who cannot endure
))being clumsy and doing things stupidly and imperfectly at first never
))really will be able to do them perfectly in the end out of their own inner
))self. And especially in education first of all you must kindle in your
))own souls what you then have to work out for yourselves; but first it must
))be enkindled in the soul. If once or twice you have succeeded in thinking
))out a pictorial presentation of a lesson that you see impresses the
))children, then you will make a remarkable discovery about yourself. You
))will see that it becomes easier to invent such pictures, that by degrees
))you become inventive in a way you had never dreamed of. But for this you
))must have the courage to be very far from perfect to begin with...
))
)) "Let me give you an example of something that can sink into the child's
))soul so that it grows as the child grows, something that you can come
))back to in later years and use to arouse certain feelings. Nothing is
))more useful and fruitful in teaching than to give the children something
))in picture form between the seventh and eighth years, and later, perhaps
))in the fourteenth and fifteenth years, to come back to it again in some
))way or other...
))
)) "Now suppose for instance that we tell an imaginative story to a child
))of seven or eight. The child does not need to understand at once all the
))pictures contained in the story. I will describe later why this is not
))necessary. All that matters is that the child takes delight in the story
))because it is presented with a certain grace and charm. Suppose I were
))to tell the following story:
))
))---
))
)) "Once upon a time in a world where the sun peeped through the branches
))there lived a violet, a very modest violet under a tree with big leaves.
))And the violet was able to look through an opening at the top of the
))tree. As she looked through this broad opening in the treetop the violet
))saw the blue sky. The little violet saw the blue sky for the first time
))on this morning, because she had only just blossomed. Now the violet was
))frightened when she saw the blue sky--indeed she was overcome with fear,
))but she did not yet know why she felt such great fear. Then a dog ran by,
))not a good dog, a rather bad snappy dog. And the violet said to the dog:
))"Tell me, what is that up there, that is blue like me?" For the sky also
))was blue just as the violet was. And the dog in his wickedness said: "Oh,
))that is a great giant violet like you and this great violet has grown so
))big that it can crush you." Then the violet was more frightened than
))ever, because she believed that the violet up in the sky had got so big
))that it could crush her. And the violet folded her little petals together
))and did not want to look up to the big great violet any more, but hid
))herself under a big leaf that a puff of wind had just blown down from the
))tree. There she stayed all day long, hiding in her fear from the great
))big sky-violet.
))
)) "When morning came the violet had not slept all night, for she had
))spent the night wondering what to think of the great blue sky-violet who
))was said to be coming to crush her. And every moment she was expecting
))the first blow to come. But it did not come. In the morning the little
))violet crept out, as she was not in the least tired, for all night long
))she had been only thinking, and she was fresh and not tired (violets are
))tired when they sleep, they are not tired when they don't sleep!) and the
))first thing that the little violet saw was the rising sun and the rosy
))dawn. And when the violet saw the rosy dawn she had no fear. It made her
))glad at heart and happy to see the dawn. As the dawn faded the pale blue
))sky gradually appeared again and became bluer and bluer all the time, and
))the little violet thought again what the dog had said, that it was a
))great big violet and it would come and crush her.
))
)) "At that moment a lamb came by and the little violet again felt she
))must ask what that thing above her could be. "What is that up there?"
))asked the violet, and the lamb said, "That is a great big violet, blue
))like yourself." Then the violet began to be afraid again and thought she
))would only hear from the lamb what the wicked dog had told her. But the
))lamb was good and gentle, and because he had such good gentle eyes, the
))violet asked again, "Dear lamb, do tell me, will the great big violet up
))there come and crush me?" "Oh no," answered the lamb, "it will not crush
))you, that is a great big violet, and his love is much greater than your
))own love, even as he is much more blue than you are in your little blue
))form." And the violet understood at once that there was a great big
))violet who would not crush her, but who was so blue in order that he
))might have more love, and that the big violet would protect the little
))violet from everything in the world that might hurt her. Then the little
))violet felt so happy, because what she saw as blue in the great
))sky-violet appeared to her as divine Love, which was streaming toward her
))from all sides. And the little violet looked up all the time as if she
))wished to pray to the God of violets."
))
))--
))
)) "Now if you tell a story of this kind they will most certainly listen,
))for they always listen to such things. But you must tell it in the right
))mood, so that when the children have heard the story the somehow feel the
))need to live with it and turn it over inwardly in their souls. This is
))very important, and it all depends on whether discipline can be maintained
))in the class through the teacher's own feeling."
))
)))From Rudolf Steiner's "The Kingdom of Childhood", Lecture 4. Translation
))by Helen Fox copyright 1982. Revised translation Copyright 1994
))Anthroposophic Press.
))
))Then Rudolf Steiner describes how a teacher told stories that so
))captivated the children they kept on insisting he tell another and another
))until he quite lost control of the class and reached the point where he
))couldn't think of any more stories to tell. He goes on after the above
))story to discuss it and how the children will ask questions about the
))story and how you can answer them.
))
))----------------------------------------------------------
))Gerry Palo Denver, Colorado
))palo netcom.com
))
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.9 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 17:28:58 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
David, thanks for your brilliant deconstruction of the parent's letter to
the Union.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n349.10 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Grand Jury Investigation
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 21:10:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I got a call a week ago by one of the parents at the public Waldorf school
here, the South Yuba Charter School (was Twin Ridges Alternative Charter
School). He was _very_ upset and concerned because the County Grand Jury
had come by the school to investigate complaints it had recieved concerning
several issues.
The reason for this call was because my name was being spread around the
school as having something to do with the investigation and since he and
his family have been friends for years he had stood up for me, but was
concerned and wanted to know from me personally. I thanked him for his
friendship and courtesy and expressed my understanding of how he felt, but
told him that I had _not_ had anything to do with the Grand Jury. He went
on to tell me that the people from the GJ had barged into his sons 7th
grade class and interogated several children and the teacher. He was upset
that these people hadn't gotten any parental permission to question the
children and said it felt like some Nazi inquisition. I asked him if he
had talked to any of the staff at the school or did the info come from his
son? He said that he hadn't talked to the teacher or staff yet, but was
going to talk to the administrator the next day. I asked him why my name
had come forth, and he said that it had been a big shock to the community
when my family and I left, since I had been so much a part of making it all
happen, and that people were still angry over our leaving.
I called the GJ the next day to see what I could find out, but since the
Grand Juries investigation is all confidential as to what _was_ done and
_what_ questions were asked, they could only tell me that they had in fact
gone to the school.
David McKay
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n349 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n350 --------------
001 - snell oro.net - Re: Grand Jury Investigation
002 - mckay oro.net - Re: world-view of WE teachers
003 - snell oro.net - PLANS letter
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n350.1 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Investigation
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:46:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)I got a call a week ago by one of the parents at the public Waldorf school
)here, the South Yuba Charter School (was Twin Ridges Alternative Charter
)School).
David, The name is "The Yuba River School". Must have been named that
because of the power of the river this winter.
He was _very_ upset and concerned because the County Grand Jury
)had come by the school to investigate complaints it had recieved concerning
)several issues.
)
My son's sixth grade class from Nevada City School of the Arts hosted a
wonderful contra dance on Friday to raise money for a week long stay at
Yosmite. The Grand Jury visit was the talk of the evening.This class was
part of the 17 out of 22 families that left The Yuba River School last
year. But there was a tremendous amount of snickering and support for the
Jury asking questions.
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n350.2 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: world-view of WE teachers
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 17:21:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
))"For real effectiveness, it is essential to believe in one's parables as in
))absolute realities. And this can only be when one's thought is alive with
))spiritual knowledge. The true student of Anthroposophy need not torment
))himself to think it out...He believes in it with his whole might; and this
))belief streams as it were unseen from speaker to hearer, carrying
))conviction...His words and all that comes from him must receive feeling,
))warmth and colour from a truly anthroposophic way of thought."
))
))[Steiner, Rudolf. Education of the Child in the Light of Anthroposophy.
))(1909) Trans. George and Mary Adams. London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1975,
))p. 34.]
)
This is very revealing in how _deeply_ a good Antroposophical Waldorf
teacher must be to make sure they have reached the child in a _very_ deep
way so as to possibly awaken any latten DNA connection from reincarnation?
"For real effectiveness"; Parables as absolute realities = Stories taught
as fact, because "He believes in it with his whole might". True
Anthroposophists don't think, they just believe. They must come "from a
truly anthroposophic way of thought." It is with this kind of deep
training that a Waldorf teacher carries Anthroposophy into the class room,
without being to overt with knowledge the children wouldn't understand or
pre-awakened.
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n350.3 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: PLANS letter
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 18:51:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Tonight's paper contained PLANS letter to the editor. The paper titled it
"No public funding for Waldorf". I have received phone calls in support of
our message.
Deby
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n350 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n351 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n351.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: In defense of Twin Ridges Alternative Charter School
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 09:29:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
David and Deby, I hope you'll post your rebuttals to the Union, also.
-Dan Dugan (in Pittsburgh)
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n351 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n352 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - admin - what do you want to know?
002 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - parents' suit fails to compel Leiden (Netherlands) Waldorf sch
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n352.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: admin - what do you want to know?
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 02:19:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear friends, I'm sorry I've been so slow in responding to your posts and
emails. I'm in Pittsburgh at a professional conference, and my PowerBook
was broken for a couple of days. I'm catching up.
Welcome to all the new subscribers recently (you're getting the
subscription information file from me today). Please post your questions
about Waldorf to the list.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
secretary, PLANS
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n352.2 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: parents' suit fails to compel Leiden (Netherlands) Waldorf school to reveal
government report on alleged molestation to other parents
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1997 02:25:06 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The following three articles appeared in Dutch newspapers. Translated by
Herman de Tollenaere. Translator's comments are in [square brackets].
Perhaps Steve Premo can explain "rule nisi." -dD-
***
Robert Sikkes, "Parents sue Leiden Waldorf school. The management really
should admit the mistakes they have made at last", De Volkskrant, 13
February 1997
"What has happened to our daughter, may also happen to others. So, we want
parents to know what has happened at that school." The R. family shows big
files with letters from the school management and documents of the
government inspectorate of education. They feel so sick about the
continuous denial of their grievances that today, they will apply for a
rule nisi against the Rudolf Steiner Waldorf School in Leiden.
The main issues at the The Hague court will be whether the school will
admit the mistakes they have made at last, and whether they will notify the
other parents about the government inspectorate of education's conclusions.
Starting in 1993, their daughter was allegedly sexually harassed by the
class' teacher. He is said to have isolated the girl from her classmates.
His interest changed into a rejection during the final examination year: he
was consistently absent during discussions of her final examination work.
It was not easy to complain about this. There was no clear procedure. After
much fuss the school management declared that the complaint was wrong. It
informed the other parents about this decision. After this, things got
completely out of hand; finally, the remarkable application for a rule nisi
came. For it does not happen often that parents of high school students
take a school to court.
There is no other way. All that the government inspectorate of education
can do, after investigating the complaint, is to report its findings to the
parents and to the school. M. van Haaren of the government inspectorate of
education declares: "We do not have the power for sanctions. The
inspectorate may only propose to the minister to act, if there is a danger
to educational quality." This happens but rarely.
Yet, the inspectorate is the first contact for parents who feel denied. At
the Leiden Waldorf School the teachers reacted to the family R.'s decision
with a remarkable letter: "as you did not withdraw your complaints, we
notify you that you will not be welcome at future school events." For the
evaluation of the final examination project, the daughter and her friends
were segregated at a separate session, at which the other students and
parents were not present. At the diploma award ceremony, the parents were
also not welcome.
Angrily, they took their daughter away from school immediately. The
investigation by the government inspectorate of education which had started
by then, took some months. Only after the daughter had left the school, the
inspectorate in November 1995 came to this conclusion: "You have complained
rightly about the defective reaction to your complaint by the management
and about the lack of a good pedagogical climate for your daughter." They
called the teacher's behavior to the girl as "passing her bounds". The
parents asked the school to notify the other parents of this verdict. But
the school refused.
After they themselves then had sent those conclusions to parents in the
former final examination class, the school management reacted angrily
again. "A mishmash of loose parts which give a completely distorted view",
the management wrote. Not only did the management send a "What? Me worry?"
letter to the parents. They also threatened the R. family with a lawyer,
who announced an application for a rule nisi. "The school wanted the
parents to stop to complain surreptitiously" the school's lawyer, E. van
Hilten, offers as an explanation for this. "For nothing illegal had
happened. Besides, to the teacher involved the case was very problematic."
Van Hilten reduced all conflicts in what she described as "a less fortunate
case" to the student's personal problems. However, the school never applied
for a rule nisi; according to the lawyer, because the school wanted this
case to be finished.
The parents did not want that. So, they decided to take the case to court
themselves. "We feel so hurt by the way in which the school has reacted to
our complaints, and then again by the way in which the school reacted to
the involvement of the government inspectorate of education, that we ask
for satisfaction."
***
Ruud Sep, "Cult type behavior by Steiner school. Former student demands
that the school should admit that her teacher harassed her sexually",
Leidsch Dagblad, 14 February 1997.
She was not allowed to be present at the diploma award ceremony, complaints
about sexual harassment by her class' teacher were not investigated
seriously, and the school set fellow students and their parents against her
and her parents. All this happened after her father [actually, her mother]
at a parents' meeting had asked critical questions on the alleged spiritual
surplus value of the Rudolf Steiner School.
According to the lawyer G. van Driem, the ex-student who is nineteen years'
old now, and her parents, are treated like "apostates". "It is very similar
to the way in which people who free themselves from a cult are treated by
the people who still are in the cult: if you do not belong to us anymore,
then we will shun you." Yesterday, she demanded in an application for a
rule nisi that the school should recognize in a letter to all parents that
it has failed; and that it also should pay 35,000 guilders in damages.
In the story which the presiding judge Van Delden heard yesterday, the
relationship to the class' teacher is central. The student had a good
relationship to the teacher for a long time. He helped her after she had
had a very traumatic experience. The friendship was so close that at one
time he and his wife came to visit his protegee in the South of France
where she spent her holidays.
However, though the relationship had been good at first, it worsened later.
When the young woman's therapist lectured at the Rudolf Steiner school
once, the teacher managed to shift attention to the student's individual
problems, against agreements which had been made. The relationship became
bad finally when her father at a parents' meeting sharply attacked the
class' teacher [actually, when her mother asked critical questions there on
the alleged spiritual surplus value of the school]. An old incident--long
ago, the teacher, during a volleyball game, had kept lying on top of the
student for longer than one might expect--in the light of the new
relationship was seen in a completely different light [Her parents only got
to know this at this meeting, so much later]. The teacher stood accused of
sexual harassment.
The school investigated this. The school said everything was fine. They
publicized these conclusions in a letter to all parents. Next, the
government inspectorate of education concluded that the school really did
make some mistakes. [There were four witness accounts against the teacher's
denial of sexual impropriety.] The student's parents sent those conclusions
to her former fellow students.
That was one year ago. Then, the school management really became angry; it
threatened the parents with an application for a rule nisi. A few months
later, they decided not to go ahead with this. Finally, the parents
themselves decided to apply for a rule nisi.
The ex-student said that she really needs the school admitting in public
that it has been wrong, because now she cannot tell her side of the story
to her former fellow students. They shun her. "All problems allegedly are
the school's fault", the school's lawyer somewhat cynically summarized his
opponents' views.
Presiding judge Van Delden did not really pass judgment yet yesterday. But
he made it clear what his decision will be in two weeks' time. "I cannot do
anything about this. If you would have been here one year earlier, then
maybe I would have been able to do something", Van Delden said. There was
no emergency any more, he said; so, a rule nisi was useless. The school did
make mistakes. "But that does not mean that I can sentence it", he
concluded after a two hour session.
For the ex-student, His Honor had no consolation, only advice. "You have to
face life like an adult. You will have to get used to the fact that other
people may make mistakes of which you may become the victim."
***
)From our reporter, "Mistakes by the Leiden Waldorf School 'not serious
enough' for rectification", De Volkskrant, 14 February 1997
The Rudolf Steiner Waldorf School in Leiden has made mistakes. However, the
presiding judge of the The Hague court does not think that they are serious
enough to compel the school to correct them in a letter to the parents and
teachers. So, on Thursday [13 February 1997] he rejected the demands by the
R. family in an application for a rule nisi. The family thought that the
school did neither react well to, nor did it recognize, their complaints
about sexual harassment and inadequate education for their daughter at the
school.
The conflict with the school arose when the school declared complaints
about a teacher to be unfounded. According to the parents, this teacher had
sexually harassed their daughter during a school-journey. When the students
did special work for their final examination, the daughter did not get any
assistance, contrary to usually in the school. When the parents did not
withdraw their complaints, they were no longer welcome at the final
examination diploma award ceremony.
However, the government inspectorate of education confirmed their
complaints on a number of points at the end of 1995. The inspectorate
considered that the school's reaction to the complaints had been
inadequate. The inspectorate also thought that the school's assistance to
the daughter working for her final examination had been wanting. The
inspectors described the teacher's behavior during the school-journey as
"passing her bounds".
The presiding judge thought that the school management, considering the
inspectorate's conclusions, might have recognized "somewhat more
generously" that it had been wrong. Nevertheless, according to him, it is
legally unnecessary to still do this now in public, in letters to the
parents and teachers. "Though mistakes have been made which should not have
been made, this still does not make an illegal act."
He also did not see the necessity of an application for a rule nisi now,
more than a year after the government inspectorate of education's report
was published. "Then, it maybe was still possible to correct something;
now, it is not any more". According to the parents, a court case at that
time would have caused too much anxiety to their daughter.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n352 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n353 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - SAVE waldorf-critics subscription information
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n353.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: SAVE waldorf-critics subscription information
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 12:22:57 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subscription information for waldorf-critics mailing list
version C - 3/24/97
replaces all previous versions which should be labeled "superceded" or
destroyed.
New in this version: fair use guidelines
***
INTRODUCTION
Please save this message. You may want to unsubscribe or subscribe again in
a hurry. I'm on several mailing lists, and to keep them under control I
keep a folder called "subscription information" with copies of the welcome
messages from various lists in it.
Doing anything with a mailing list means communicating with a robot, a list
manager program that only understands a few simple commands. There are two
popular programs that almost everybody uses, Listserv and Majordomo. Their
commands are similar but just different enough to trip you up. My service
provider, Best Internet Communications, has decided to write their own list
manager called BestServ. BestServ is, yet again, *similar* to Majordomo and
Listserv, but *different*... so pay attention!
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE
To unsubsuscribe, send an e-mail message *from the address you're
subscribed at* to:
waldorf-critics-request lists.best.com
The subject field has no effect on the operation.
In the message body put *only*:
unsubscribe
If you have your software set to append a signature automatically, turn the
signature off to avoid getting a long error message back.
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE
To subscribe or resubscribe, send an e-mail message to:
waldorf-critics-request lists.best.com
In the message body, put *only*:
subsingle
This will subscribe you to receive single messages, which is the best way
if you intend to participate in the dialogue. If you just want to read the
list, instead of "subsingle", in the message body put *only*:
subscribe
This will subscribe you to the digest version of the list, which waits for
a few messages to collect before sending them together as one message. This
is easier on the mail system, but it makes replying to messages a little
harder, because you have to edit the "subject" line of your reply, and put
"waldorf-critics lists.best.com" in the "To:" field.
The digest messages you receive will be "from" "waldorf-critics-errors".
That's not an error, it's just the way the BestServ program does it. It's
part of their system for avoiding the catastrophic loops that plague lists
that are run by the Majordomo and ListServ programs.
Please note that the address for subscribe/unsubscribe requests is the
address of the list robot, not the same as the address for posting messages
to the list.
To change from single to digest or vice versa, unsubscribe in the one form
and subscribe again in the other. This can be done in two lines of one
message, e.g.
unsubscribe
subscribe
POSTING MESSAGES TO THE LIST
Subscribers may post messages to the list by sending e-mail to:
waldorf-critics lists.best.com
You must post from the address you subscribed from!
Anything posted to the list is automatically sent to all subscribers.
Digest readers PLEASE change the "Subject:" field, and address your message
to waldorf-critics lists.best.com
ANONYMOUS POSTING
Some parents are reluctant to speak up about their questions about Waldorf
for fear of reprisals against their children by the faculty. Incidents of
this kind have been reported. Subscribers who want to make an anonymous
post may address it to:
waldorf-anon dandugan.com
It will be reviewed and posted at the moderator's discretion. There may be
a delay if your moderator is busy
ADMINISTRATION
If you want to invite someone to join, just give them the information in
this file.
Privacy: The list of subscriber addresses is private. Message writers
retain copyright on everything that they write, but postings to this list
are publications and may be copied, forwarded to other lists, or quoted
without notice. Though the distribution of this list is limited, you should
assume that your mother might see anything you write as she changes the
newspaper in the birdcage.
Archives are available on our web site,
http://www.waldorfcritics.org
Note that the "waldorf" must be lower case.
Your moderator operates an active business, so if there's some trouble with
your account and list messages to you start bouncing into my mailbox, I'll
just unsubscribe you. I won't email you because your account isn't working!
If the list seems to just disappear, send a test post to see if it's alive.
If that doesn't work try subscribing again. Message me, dan dandugan.com if
you can't figure things out.
MANAGING YOUR MAIL
When you belong to several mail lists, as I do, you can get a lot of mail,
perhaps hundreds of messages per day. I use Eudora Pro, which is well worth
paying for. What it has that the free version doesn't is the ability to
filter messages into different mailboxes automatically. I set up a mailbox
window for each mail list. Then when I don't have time to read a particular
list I can just delete them all.
E-MAIL CUSTOMS AND COURTESY
Please keep on the topic of Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy. Some people
pay by the message and will be unhappy to receive off-topic mail.
If you want to reply privately to the author of a message from the list,
after giving your software's reply command, just change the "To" field from
the list address to the person's personal address.
Maintaining "threads": Try to stick to one topic per message. When you
reply to a message, leave the subject line alone. This "maintains the
thread." Then people not interested in a particular discussion can delete
those messages without reading them.
Conversely, do change the "Subject" field when you're changing the topic.
Please try to make "Subject" lines meaningful, to help people who get lots
of mail.
Expect list traffic to be quite variable; sometimes a lot, sometimes nothing.
If you're going away for a while, consider unsubscribing. List messages might
overflow your mailbox at your service and obliterate important mail. Never
set up an automatic reply without unsubscribing from all mail lists first!
We expect members of the press to be on this list. We can be frank in our
opinions, but we should avoid libelous statements and try to check our
facts before flaming too outrageously.
ALL CAPS is SHOUTING and should not be used often. Emphasis may be added *thus*
or _thus_ or -thus-.
The writers of messages bear all responsibility for their content. If
something bothers you, say so publicly or in private mail to the writer.
Dan Dugan provides this unmoderated list as a public forum, and will not
censor messages or ban a subscriber unless repeated public complaints from other
subsribers are ineffective in controlling offensive postings.
COPYRIGHT AND FAIR USE
Email messages are the property of the writer; the copyright is implicit.
Mailing list postings fall in a gray area; there is no legal precedent. I
consider them to be publications, the same as a newsletter that is
distributed to a mailing list. The authors of the messages own the
copyrights unless it's stated otherwise. For critical and educational
purposes, portions of copyrighted materials may be quoted under the
doctrine of "fair use."
We have agreed with our provider to establish fair use guidelines. Our fair
use guidelines are:
1) Less than 500 words quoted.
2) Full bibliographic information or URL for the source.
3) Editing indicated by "(snip)", "...", or "***". Editorial additions in
[square brackets].
4) A significant amount of commentary added.
Thanks, Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com or plans dandugan.com)
-dD-
Dan Dugan Sound Design _/_/_/_/_/_/ Automatic Microphone Mixers
290 Napoleon St. _/ _/_/ _/ Nagra Sales and Service
San Francisco, CA 94124 _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ Custom CDs for Performance
voice (415) 821-9776 _/ _/_/ _/ E-mail dan dandugan.com
fax (415) 826-7699 _/_/_/_/_/_/ http://www.dandugan.com
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n353 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n354 --------------
001 - BTDunatt aol.com - Re: world-view of WE teachers
002 - snell oro.net - Welcome wsmith oro.net
003 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - (anon) Thanks to the list!
004 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - filling the vessel
005 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Barhydt: Dugan/Attorney General
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n354.1 ---------------
From: BTDunatt aol.com
Subject: Re: world-view of WE teachers
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 16:44:08 -0500 (EST)
Some time back Steve Premo asked me to clarify some remarks I had made about
the way the WE teachers come to agreements about decisions regarding
individual children. I am sorry to have taken so long getting back on that.
My source on the matter is in a rather delicate position at the moment, but
I have been permission to say this much for the time being.
When a group of WE teachers is discussing a matter which all are not in
agreement with, one teacher might say "Is there anyone else here who is on
level 5? I'm on level 5." Another might raise her hand and say, "I'm on
level 5." Another might say, "Level 7." I used those numbers arbitrarily;
my source doesn't pay much attention to this sort of thing, so these are
made-up numbers to use as an example. Perhaps the levels are not described
as "level 5, " but described as "5th level" and so on.
Votes are not taken according to level; consensus is the rule. However,
attention might be drawn to the attainment of a higher level in the hierarchy
of spiritual study, with the implication that the senior person is a greater
authority. WE teachers tend to pay heed to that kind of authority. As has
been pointed out by others on the list, one who is not an Anthroposophist
will have very little, if any, real influence.
Deby Snell mentioned that a "child study" was done on her son, and that she
was not notified about it or allowed to participate. A "child study" is
something that seems to me to be of a very personal nature, and a very
presumptuous one. I would be furious if it were my child. The teachers
discuss the shape of the child's nose and ears (and so forth), the type of
birth the child had, temperament, illnesses, and all the personal kind of
things that were asked in the application process. The analysis is based
upon Anthroposophy; the purpose is to categorize and analyze the child in
such a way as to decide what course of action or therapy should be taken.
The parents' or child's input are not considered necessary or desirable.
--BT
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n354.2 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Welcome wsmith oro.net
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 22:06:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Walter,
Welcome from a fellow oro.net subscriber. If you have any questions, feel
free to inquire. I tried to post you privately, but my message bounced
back.
Deby Snell
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n354.3 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: (anon) Thanks to the list!
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 02:08:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
[This message was received at waldorf-anon dandugan.com -dD-]
I'm a current Waldorf parent (one child in children's garden at an East Coast
school). I just wanted to let you know that your web page and critics list
provided a valuable service to me in making a decision about whether to
continue Waldorf education for my daughter. I've lurked for several months
now on both your and Lefty's lists and based on that and my readings (Waldorf
books, your articles on your WEB page, and other general books about children
and education esp. E.D. Hirsch's new book) I've decided to pull my daughter
out of Waldorf. The two main reasons are the religious aspect that underlies
the curriculum (being a traditional Christian, my beliefs are inconsistent
with anthroposophy) and my growing belief that later is not better when it
comes to education. My daughter, with a summer birthday that makes her 6
this August, would have spent another year in the children's garden. Work
that out and she's not being taught to read until she's 7 and 8 years old.
Way too late for a little girl who's chomping at the bit. Also, this being
her first year in Waldorf, I took this year to investigate further the
Steiner and anthroposophy angle and was more and more uncomfortable as I read
about it. Your information was useful in that it tied together some loose
ends that had been nagging like why they spend so much time on the
Zoroastrian myths which are just a footnote in many mythology studies. Now I
know! I also saw astrology charts in the 6th or 7th grade books and brushed
it off at first, thinking they were merely explaining what people used to
believe before they knew better.
Anyway, that's my brief version of a very exhausting exploration of Waldorf
education. Like you and others on this list, I was impressed by the warmth
and caring that I saw when I first went in. (And I must admit that I still
am impressed. I will also miss the beautiful home made crafts and the
quality art materials!) But I see now that their "child development" theory
and their curriculum stems from spiritual beliefs rather than scientific
evidence.
Thanks for a valuable service. You made my research process much easier than
it would have been otherwise. Keep up the good work.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n354.4 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: filling the vessel
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 12:40:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On March 17, Karl Forsyth wrote to the SJU Waldorf list:
(snip)
)Concerning the validity of Steiner's specific observations on our
)spiritual dimensions - these can (and should) be tested on some level, at
)least. For those who are spiritually challenged such as myself, the
)methods used to test these ideas may be limited to a pragmatic comparison
)of the theory to actual observations of behavior and results. Using this
)admittedly primitive approach, I have not yet seen the proverbial "fly in
)the ointment". Steiner seems to have been uncannily perceptive concerning
)how to teach effectively - the average Waldorf graduate is "above average"
)is just about any measure you care to apply, especially in those criteria
)that a healthy society would value over time.
(snip)
Forsyth has fallen into Steiner's "if it feels right, it must be true"
trap. I expect Waldorf students are way above average in many aspects, but
they may also be dismally retarded in others. Who knows? Waldorf people
don't do research.
(snip)
)One can do just about anything good for the wrong reason, and becoming a
)Waldorf teacher may be no exception. But the rigorous, deep & spiritual
)nature of the task serves to separate the wheat from the chaff perhaps
)more effectively than in many careers. The condescending
)characterisations of the adherents of a Waldorf education as outlined by
)Steiner (for example the recent one by Mark Bailey: "those who are enamored
)with the original statements and practices of Steiner and can do nothing
)with out asking "what would Steiner say?") are out of line and are not
)justified. I would be surprised if ANY Waldorf teacher makes it all the
)way through the training with such a "blindly obedient" orientation - such
)a mindset is completely foreign to the spirit of objective inquiry that
)pervades Waldorf education.
(snip)
Whew! Some would say that the "rigorous, deep and spiritual nature of the
task" ensures the employment of dysfunctional people as Waldorf teachers!
Forsyth has bought the "spirit of objective inquiry" propaganda hook, line
and sinker. "Objective inquiry" is the LAST thing you'll find when
Anthroposophists are around. It's amazing how different words and deeds can
be!
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n354.5 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Barhydt: Dugan/Attorney General
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 12:40:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
March 20, Ralph Barhydt wrote to the SJU Waldorf list:
(snip)
))In the State of California, Dan Dugan has lost many battles to defeat
))public Waldorf initiatives, specifically in Sacramento, San Diego, and
))Novato. He has now taken his fight to the State of California's
))Attorney General's office and AWSNA, among others, are having to deal
))with it.
We've just begun to fight. San Diego was a *fait accompli* before PLANS was
organized. Ditto Sacramento's public Waldorf. In Novato we got in just at
the end of the approval process. The school board was too committed to
consider backing out, and I don't think more then one or two members took
the brief testimony that they allowed seriously.
))I think that it is a shame that something has happened in Dan's life
))that would direct his soul's resources towards this vendetta and some
))of the unfortunate means that he chooses to employ. However, it is
))reality and I believe that we should maintain awareness of it.
Ralph, what happened was that my family was expelled from the San Francisco
Waldorf school for objecting to Steiner cult pseudoscience being taught in
the classrooms, to racism being promoted in Steiner books sold at the
school, and to the promotion of quackery through Anthroposophical medicine
lectures. My "soul's resources" are now directed (in my spare time, for
amusement and exercise of my philosophy muscles) toward revealing what I've
learned about Waldorf.
))One of the most important things about this list is that Lefty
))maintains it for (bold)(underline)supporters(/underline)(/bold) of WE
))to be able to discuss, share, inform and critically examine all aspects
))of WE. I believe that when we respond to the critics charges, when we
))understand the real basis of every charge (every charge has at least
))some small grain of some real truth regardless of how distorted it is),
))when we respond to each others questions and criticisms, we gain a
))better understanding and appreciation for WE and that WE continues to
))grow as a result.
You bet, Ralph. It *would* grow if self-criticism was part of the movement.
Too bad the SJU list is censored so "critical examination" is non-existent
there. There's so much crap (along with the good) in Waldorf that it really
needs some open windows. It's unfortunate that the doctrines of
Anthroposophy are so fragile that they can't stand the light of day.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n354 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n355 --------------
001 - mckay oro.net - Re: filling the vessel
002 - BTDunatt aol.com - Re: world-view of WE teachers
003 - John Suggate (j.suggate c - Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n354
004 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - web visitors top 3000
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n355.1 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: filling the vessel
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 16:04:40 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)On March 17, Karl Forsyth wrote to the SJU Waldorf list:
)
)(snip)
))Concerning the validity of Steiner's specific observations on our
))spiritual dimensions - these can (and should) be tested on some level, at
))least. For those who are spiritually challenged such as myself, the
))methods used to test these ideas may be limited to a pragmatic comparison
))of the theory to actual observations of behavior and results. Using this
))admittedly primitive approach, I have not yet seen the proverbial "fly in
))the ointment". Steiner seems to have been uncannily perceptive concerning
))how to teach effectively - the average Waldorf graduate is "above average"
))is just about any measure you care to apply, especially in those criteria
))that a healthy society would value over time.
)(snip)
Anyone that believes Steiner's method of teaching was "uncannily
perceptive" hasn't; 1) been very awake, 2) done much indepth _objective_
studying/research and 3) can't see the forest for the trees. As to WE
graduates being "above average", how can a claim like this be made, when
the WE faithful say "just about any measure you care to apply" type of
statement is so _pretentious_. I have known too many WE graduates that
needed a lot of remedial work to make do in the _real_ world of education.
)(snip)
))One can do just about anything good for the wrong reason, and becoming a
))Waldorf teacher may be no exception.
No, it is the _rule_ if you are to be a true Anthroposophical/Steiner
follower. Anyone looking to do something for the right reasons wouldn't
get involved in WE.
))But the rigorous, deep & spiritual
))nature of the task serves to separate the wheat from the chaff perhaps
))more effectively than in many careers.
Yes, in a disfunctional way, that is true. People with their critical
thinking skills still working leave or stay away,
)) The condescending
))characterisations of the adherents of a Waldorf education as outlined by
))Steiner (for example the recent one by Mark Bailey: "those who are enamored
))with the original statements and practices of Steiner and can do nothing
))with out asking "what would Steiner say?") are out of line and are not
))justified. I would be surprised if ANY Waldorf teacher makes it all the
))way through the training with such a "blindly obedient" orientation - such
))a mindset is completely foreign to the spirit of objective inquiry that
))pervades Waldorf education.
)(snip)
Boy is this person in for some very _big_ suprises! For nine years I've
met so many WE teachers and had know doubt that most just would not fit in
any main stream program.
)Dan:
)Whew! Some would say that the "rigorous, deep and spiritual nature of the
)task" ensures the employment of dysfunctional people as Waldorf teachers!
)Dan:
)Forsyth has bought the "spirit of objective inquiry" propaganda hook, line
)and sinker. "Objective inquiry" is the LAST thing you'll find when
)Anthroposophists are around. It's amazing how different words and deeds can
)be!
In the Waldorf/Steiner world it is amazing how _different_ the meaning
_behind_ the words and deeds _is_! The "Twilight Zone" seems tame compared
to Waldorf double-speak.
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n355.2 ---------------
From: BTDunatt aol.com
Subject: Re: world-view of WE teachers
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 20:48:50 -0500 (EST)
I neglected to note in my last post that the information discussed in it was
from only one school. That being said, I must add that I have no reason to
think there would be any real difference between one school and another on
these things. From everything I have heard from parents and staff in one
school or another, there seems to be an uncanny unity, based of course on
Anthroposophy being the basis of it all.
There is often the illusion that one WE school is more open (less tightly
Anthroposophist controlled) and another more narrow, until one talks with
people who have been in several schools and finally given up on the system.
Parents often have the idea that their picture of the "good" WE school, i.e.
their image of "Waldorf the way it is _supposed_ to be," is out there
somewhere. I have yet to hear of one that fits the image. It sounds as if
people are now hoping that the (supposedly) state run charter schools will be
the solution. That hope does not seem realistic. -BT
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n355.3 ---------------
From: John Suggate (j.suggate ch.steiner.school.nz)
Subject: Re: Digest waldorf-critics.v001.n354
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:14:02 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello all,
I've been a lurker on this list for quite some time, but do not have =
much time to respond to messages. I am a teacher in a Rudolf Steiner =
(Waldorf) school in New Zealand, and also involved in administration, =
and am a member of the Board of Trustees (a statutory body charged with =
the governance of the school as an "integrated" school - see below)
BT wrote:
)When a group of WE teachers is discussing a matter which all are not=20
)in
)agreement with, one teacher might say "Is there anyone else here who=20
)is on
)level 5? I'm on level 5." Another might raise her hand and say,=20
)"I'm on
)level 5." Another might say, "Level 7." I used those numbers =
arbitrarily;
)my source doesn't pay much attention to this sort of thing, so these=20
)are
)made-up numbers to use as an example. Perhaps the levels are not=20
)described
)as "level 5, " but described as "5th level" and so on.
I've never heard of this process, and can't think what it could mean!
With regard to what seems to be the central concern of this list - the =
separation of church and state issue in the US constitution, I thought =
you may like to hear how things are in NZ.
The government gets around the problem of aligning itself with one or =
other religion/philosophy in education by means of a piece of =
legislation that allows private schools to be "integrated" into the =
state system and thus be funded for all school operations (but not fixed =
assets which remain in the ownership of the "proprietor"). School's =
that choose to do so have a deed of agreement which protects there =
"special character", which may include specific or general =
religious/philosophical/spiritual contexts or be more to do with =
methodology. Integration is open to schools with any such affiliations, =
and provided the school meets basic requirements of organisation etc. =
the Minister of Education cannot refuse to integrate a school. In this =
way all religious/philosophical/spiritual/methodological approaches are =
treated equally and the tax dollars are returned in an equitable way to =
all parents for the education their children in the way they choose.=20
Integrated schools are required to be governed by a Board of Trustees =
(who have clearly specified legal requirements placed upon them) in the =
same way as state owned schools. Membership of Boards is made up of: =
members elected by the parents, one by the staff, one by the senior =
students where the school has a high school, and the principal. In an =
integrated school provision is made for the proprietor to appoint =
additional members to safeguard the special character. The number of =
elected members must exceed the number of appointed members.
Integrated schools are required to be audited by Government approved =
auditors and reviewed by the Education Review Office (both in terms of =
fulfilling statutory requirements and in terms of its effectiveness). =
All schools in NZ (state, integrated, private) are required to teach =
according to the National Curriculum Statements, and may only appoint =
registered teachers to permanent positions.
This model seems to work pretty well and seems to have the support of =
all major stake-holders in NZ.
Regards to all
John.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------------------
John Suggate 22 Keswick St, Christchurch 8002, New Zealand.
E-mail: mailto:j.suggate ch.steiner.school.nz
Home Page: http://www.ch.steiner.school.nz/staff/jsuggate.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------------------------------------------------
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n355.4 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: web visitors top 3000
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 02:31:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Web Counter reports over 3000 visits to the PLANS web site since August, 1996.
-dD-
http://www.waldorfcritics.org
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n355 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n356 --------------
001 - wrensong monitor.net - Responsibility & accountability
002 - wrensong monitor.net - Re: Responsibility & accountability
003 - wrensong monitor.net - Re: Responsibility & accountability
004 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - (Faiman) correction to blue eyes/sky story
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n356.1 ---------------
From: wrensong monitor.net
Subject: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 13:29:13 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199702261814.KAA18519 lists1.best.com)
)J Schwartz wrote in response to Daniel Saykaly:
) I agree that your bad experiences are still bad, and the
))wrongs done to your family are still wrong; I disagree that Waldorf
))education and methodology in general, as opposed to WE as practiced
))by a specific group of teachers, caused them. We may need to agree to
))disagree on this one.
Daniel Saykaly responded:
)How cozy and how comfortable. Evil befalls others in the WE school system,
)the
)system does nothing to enforce change to prevent evil happening again, and
)we are all to pleasantly 'agree to disagree'.
)
)If the AWSNA does not impose standards on its schools, then it is directly
)responsible for the abuses that occur in its schools. If it lets every group
)of teachers function as they see fit - with or without hiring rules, teacher
)code, complaints procedure that _works_, etc., then the AWSNA is saying that
)the occasional (frequent?) evil outcome is a necessary price WE pays for
)'absolute freedom' for teachers.
)
)Any WCAers with legal experience who know whether this opens the AWSNA up to
)legal pursuit as being co-responsible in mis-education, assault, etc.?
*******************************************************************************
I spoke with an old friend the other day who had found herself
upset all over again over events that happened in the WE school our
children had once been in. News items about cults had opened up old wounds
for her.
We discussed a number of incidents, and it made me see that it's
time to mention some of them here. She is considering how much she can tell
about other friends' experiences without hurting anyone--and how much she
feels o.k. telling about her own family's. She will be thinking about it
and talking it over with her husband this next week.
At the time our children were at the school, there were many
unsettling incidents that happened on the playground in the unsupervised
environment. Little boys were being beaten up, and bullying was seriously
out of control. Children would come home worried and upset. Some parents
were closer to what was going on than others, and tried unsuccessfully to
convince the teachers to supervise the playground. There was rarely a
teacher out there. It was especially disturbing in light of the fact that
the boys being beaten up were not the kind of children who would ordinarily
be involved in fighting or bringing on that kind of negative attention.
An anxious parent spoke to a teacher who told her that those
children were dealing with "past life karma" they needed to work out
together. The same parent finally called a member of the College (there is
a specific protocol you are supposed to follow in filing complaints) and
told him she had observed children climbing the (high) playstructure on
stilts, children dragging other children around by ropes, children bullying
and using fowl language--but no teachers supervising. The teacher
answered, "You are not an initiate, and therefore you cannot understand the
kind of energies we're dealing with here." When the stunned parent reported
this back to another teacher, she was met with wide eyes, "He told you
THAT?" The implication was that he had seriously erred in letting a cat
out of a bag.
One of the concerns some parents had was that their little girls
were continually having their dresses pulled up by boys. This was very
disturbing to the girls. When they screamed, it was only the girls who
were reprimanded for causing a disturbance. Finally a "Friday Is Skirts
Up" policy was started by a teacher so as to placate everyone--that way the
girls could have Monday thru Thursday as days their skirts were not to be
pulled up. The girls, as you might imagine, were not amused. I don't
remember the outcome, but I would hope it was finally handled after one
little girl angrily proposed a "Boys Pants Down Day."
There was a lot of parent time and energy that went into trying to
make the playground a safe place, but the teachers never seemed to share
the concern. One parent who dropped out ran into a parent (an
Anthroposophist) the following fall who had stayed. The other parent, who
had formerly been warm and friendly, was aloof, and commented "Oh....it's
just so lovely and peaceful there this year. Everyone who had problems
with the school is gone, and those left are people who really *want* to be
there." She was someone who had not cared to look at any of the problems
that were being brought up. It was back to Business As Usual until the next
batch of trouble making parents would arrive in a year or two.
The majority of people I've known who send their children to
Waldorf schools have decided that the idea of public school is unthinkable.
This makes them feel that they have to hang in and make it work or try to
"trust" and let it be. I got so tired of hearing the word "trust" mouthed
as if it were some kind virtue that separated the open and enlightened from
the rabble.
A further complication is that many parents find such "community"
around the campus, the wonderful festivals, and all that goes with being
"Waldorf parents." This makes them very reluctant to see problems, to make
waves--or to listen to troublemakers.
I used to regularly hear one parent or another discuss how
miserable their child was for one reason or another, but they would do
little or nothing to get the child out of the damaging situation. After
appealing unsuccessfully to the teacher and then to the College, the child
would stay in the situation.
Those particular parents were so full of their own neediness and
longing for those beautiful pastel rooms, beeswax crayon drawings, and all
the rest, that their children were made to stay there as a vehicle for
their parents' access--the mothers especially. I mentioned this to several
of them *after* they finally took their children out.
In every case, I was met with the sheepish acknowledgment that it
was exactly what they were doing. They hadn't realized it at the time, and
were surprised to hear that I had been observing it all along. In turn, I
was surprised to hear that they had not been aware of what seemed so
obvious all the times I saw them peering so longlingly into the beautiful
cloistered classrooms. The few parents did get into those classrooms, by
the way, were those few who were needed to teach a handicraft like knitting.
This does not mean to imply that all children are unhappy in WE!
Many are perfectly happy there. I'm just making the point that some parents
feel so personally fulfilled in the cultlike community that they are able
to ignore or deny what they see, even when it affects their own children.
The friend I spoke with yesterday recalled how she had been "shunned" after
finally leaving the school. It had been painful enough to let go of her
dream, but then being cut off from the community she that meant so much to
her made it that much worse.
The WE system is essentially set up in such a way that the teachers
are responsible and accountable only to themselves to interpret
Anthroposophy and apply it to the schools, without interference, in
whatever way they choose.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n356.2 ---------------
From: wrensong monitor.net
Subject: Re: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 20:00:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199702261814.KAA18519 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199703292126.NAA02458 lists1.best.com)
There are also incidents that I had closer personal struggle with
around the issue of playground safety. Lack of supervision was a frequent
problem, but it was all the worse because of the types of hazards out in
the yard. I frequently went around and gathered up all the large boards
(1'x 6's), many with rusty nails poking out of them, and carried them to a
grassy section of field out of eyesight of the kindergarten. They would
often be back when I came at pick up time. I never found out who found them
and carried them back. Obviously, they didn't bother the teachers. I did
find that these particular teachers were gracious and grateful for attempts
I made to keep things in safe condition.
I used to find the boards laid out across monkey bars, sometimes
with one end just an inch or two from an end bar and the other end sticking
out a few feet where a child could easily walk out on it. Often they were
stood on end against the trunk of a tree that had high branches. Children
would somehow work their way up the plank and climb into the high
horizontal branches of the tree where there was nothing to hold onto but
the branch itself. If the plank were not balanced perfectly against the
trunk the child could fall with it and come down hard on top of it.
A friend heard that the teachers believed the angels were watching
over the children, and that it was that belief that made them so easy going
about supervision. I found this hard to believe, but one of the teachers
was later heard to remark dreamily that sometimes you'll see a child lean
out from a branch in a tree, and you think he's about to slip, but he then
doesn't, "and you realize that the angels are watching him."
The notion of "the angels watching" has been mentioned enough that
I now believe it is probably a real part of the problem. It makes me want
to ask what the angels are doing when children drown in pools, get hit by
cars while riding bikes or get killed in wars or places like Auschwitz. The
school might at least have given us a waiver to sign with our application
that said, "I understand that my child's supervision will be undertaken
almost soley by the angels. I therefore agree not to hold the teachers or
school responsible for any injuries on the school property."
One morning a mother came to the school during kindergarten hours
and found her little girl down by the side of the road, out of sight of the
building. She hadn't been missed inside the classroom. The mother, who felt
her daughter was dangerously capable of wandering off, spoke to the teacher
about it and was assured it would not happen again. It was all repeated.
When it happened the third time there were even other children out there
with her, and again they had not been missed. The mother stormed straight
to the office--I still remember the determined expression on her face.
Finally enough fuss was made to get the teacher's attention, and the
incidents stopped. I think this was largely due to the intervention of a
level headed member of the staff.
The same school had been held responsible years earlier by a court
when a little girl had ended up with scissors through her skull when she
was playing outside with a teacher's scissors. My understanding is that she
was permanently and severely brain injured, and that there is now a state
school law about childrens' access to dangerous tools that has come out of
that incident.
I've heard reports from parents of children in other WE schools as
well about safety neglect and lack of supervision, so there must be a
common underlying philosophical glitch in the WE sytem (Anthroposophy)
concerning these things. I have never heard similar complaints about public
schools.
Interestingly enough, I did hear a WE parent express the strong
opinion that WE school that public school playground supervision is too
controlling, and that such supervision was not wanted there. I also
remember a parent quite earnestly saying to me that she was "so grateful"
her son had that school to go to, because "_________ has a mean streak--he
can be very cruel--and that just wouldn't be *allowed* in a public school."
I had such a hard time understanding her reasoning that I didn't know how
to reply to it. She was a nice person, but her son was one of the bullies
who had been making other children miserable.
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n356.3 ---------------
From: wrensong monitor.net
Subject: Re: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 22:07:08 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: (199703292126.NAA02458 lists1.best.com)
(199702261814.KAA18519 lists1.best.com)
In-Reply-To: (199703300358.TAA20047 lists1.best.com)
((Interestingly enough, I did hear a WE parent express the strong
opinion that WE school that public school playground supervision is too
controlling, and that such supervision was not wanted there.))
This part of my last post contains a typo which changes its meaning. It
should read that "a We parent expressed the strong opinion that public
school playground supervision is too controlling...[etc.]."
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n356.4 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: (Faiman) correction to blue eyes/sky story
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 03:13:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The following message is from Neil Faiman. I think Neil is right; I have
Gorman's book and probably fabulated the story in my mind from that. Thanks
to Neil for the correction. I'd looked for the reference but couldn't find
it.
Admitting the details were wrong, I do think I got the attitude right, tho.
I'll have to find a new story to illustrate it!
-Dan Dugan
***
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 15:39:15 EST
From: Neil Faiman ~ ZKO2-3/N30 ~ DTN 381-2065 28-Mar-1997 1539 -0400
(faiman gemevn.ENET.dec.com)
Subject: Correction to a WCA posting
Dan,
I was just perusing the WCA archives, and came across this passage from a
message that you wrote on February 22:
) And it stuck in my mind. This anthropomorphic portrayal of nature to
) children is very Waldorf; I've read similar things elsewhere. I remember
) one Waldorf mentor advising that when a child asked why the sky was blue,
) the answer could be "to reflect the blue of your eyes."
Your memory has apparently played you false here. The passage that you have
misremembered in fact conveys a rather different message. Further, it seems to
have been picked up on by several other contributors to your mailing list,
including one who was moved to write:
) I wonder if anyone else cringed at the thought of the blue-eyed child
) wondering why her brown-eyed neighbor doesn't deserve such a reflection of
) *his* eyes...
I am sure that you have no desire to have contributed another myth to the
folklore about Waldorf education, so I hope that you will be willing to
make the
following correction (you are welcome simply to forward this message to your
mailing list verbatim):
The actual passage is from Meg Gorman's pamphlet, _Confessions of a Waldorf
School Parent_, and is reproduced below. Note that (1) Gardner does not
advocate anthropomorphising (or personifying) anything to children, and (2) the
comment about blue eyes was the child's unprompted comment, not the parent's or
the mentor's.
Regards,
Neil Faiman
==============================================================================
At a previous lecture, this time by John Gardner of the Garden
City Waldorf Teacher Training Institute, I was presented with a
different problem: the best way to answer the "whys" of small
children. Both my husband and I had made great efforts to explain
the world to our children in a scientific way. This was not so
much become this came naturally (the endless "whys" had become
something of a burden to us), but because we thought that this was
the most honest and educational way to explain things to our
children. For example, before Waldorf, if the children had asked
why a tree was so big, we would have told them how trees age and
lay down xylem rings every year. The evening that I heard Mr.
Gardner speak, he lectured on the way small children learn. He
felt it was useless and even damaging to use our phenomenological
and rational approach in answering the questions of children under
seven. As an example, he pointed to the flowers on the lecture
stage. "If a small child asks you, 'Why are the flowers so
yellow?', you should not give a description of plant pigmentation.
You should say instead, 'They certainly are yellow, aren't they?'
Then," Mr. Gardner told us, "the child will give you a gift from
his own perception of the world, and you will be better able to
understand one another." I didn't buy this one bit, and I went
away from the lecture with what was becoming a familiar mixture of
curiosity and skepticism about the Waldorf way of doing things.
However, a few days later, I had a chance to try out Mr. Gardner's
theory. On a lovely spring day, as I walked my four-year-old
daughter in the park, she looked up at me and asked, "Mommy, why
is the sky so blue?" Before hearing Mr. Gardner's lecture, I would
have come up with some explanation of outer space and the earth's
atmosphere. Absolutely gleeful at this opportunity to prove Mr.
Gardner wrong, I answered innocently, "It certainly is blue, isn't
it?"
There was a pregnant pause. Finally, she replied, "Mommy, I know
why the sky is so blue. It's because of your blue eyes." It was
a sacred moment for both of us. My poetic heart beat wildly, and
I looked with awe at this vast unknown who was my daughter. I
began to have a new sense of the small child's world. Perhaps Mr.
Gardner was right. I certainly had received a gift.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n356 ---------------
-------------- BEGIN waldorf-critics.v001.n357 --------------
001 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: Responsibility & accountability
002 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - Re: Responsibility & accountability
003 - dan dandugan.com (Dan Dug - uniformity & charters (was world-view of WE teachers)
004 - snell oro.net - Re: Responsibility & accountability
005 - mckay oro.net - Re: uniformity & charters (was world-view of WE teachers)
006 - wrensong monitor.net - Re: Responsibility & accountability
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n357.1 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 16:49:50 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
wrensong monitor.net wrote,
) The notion of "the angels watching" has been mentioned enough that
)I now believe it is probably a real part of the problem. It makes me want
)to ask what the angels are doing when children drown in pools, get hit by
)cars while riding bikes or get killed in wars or places like Auschwitz. The
)school might at least have given us a waiver to sign with our application
)that said, "I understand that my child's supervision will be undertaken
)almost soley by the angels. I therefore agree not to hold the teachers or
)school responsible for any injuries on the school property."
This is rich. Do you think it should become part of our Waldorf disclosure
document?
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n357.2 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: Re: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 16:49:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
wrensong monitor.net wrote,
) One of the concerns some parents had was that their little girls
)were continually having their dresses pulled up by boys. This was very
)disturbing to the girls. When they screamed, it was only the girls who
)were reprimanded for causing a disturbance. Finally a "Friday Is Skirts
)Up" policy was started by a teacher so as to placate everyone--that way the
)girls could have Monday thru Thursday as days their skirts were not to be
)pulled up. The girls, as you might imagine, were not amused. I don't
)remember the outcome, but I would hope it was finally handled after one
)little girl angrily proposed a "Boys Pants Down Day."
I talked with an elderly graduate of the New York Steiner School who hated
her time there. While she was there in the thirties there were some boys
from Nazi families who were allowed to act up, including pulling up girls'
skirts, and she was punished for defending herself.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n357.3 ---------------
From: dan dandugan.com (Dan Dugan)
Subject: uniformity & charters (was world-view of WE teachers)
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 16:49:54 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
BT wrote,
)There is often the illusion that one WE school is more open (less tightly
)Anthroposophist controlled) and another more narrow, until one talks with
)people who have been in several schools and finally given up on the system.
) Parents often have the idea that their picture of the "good" WE school, i.e.
)their image of "Waldorf the way it is _supposed_ to be," is out there
)somewhere. I have yet to hear of one that fits the image. It sounds as if
)people are now hoping that the (supposedly) state run charter schools will be
)the solution. That hope does not seem realistic. -BT
We hear over and over again "things like that don't happen at *our*
school." But they are amazingly uniform, despite all the talk about
"freedom." The dream of Waldorf only exists when people look only at the
surface, which most parents seem to be happy to do forever.
Two charters I've visited, the Yuba River School (formerly Twin Ridges
Alternative Charter School) is an orthodox Waldorf school, and despite
claiming to have credentialed teachers, the new Novato charter school
appears to be little different from any other Waldorf school, except the
taxpayers pay for it!
Charter schools are *not* "state run." They are state *funded*. They are
run locally with, at least in California, really minimal supervision from
the chartering school district. Why should they bother? Charter schools are
supposed to be "free market," and the district has only to collect a
percentage of the pupil fees for administrative overhead, and do nothing. A
cash cow for the school district.
-Dan Dugan
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n357.4 ---------------
From: snell oro.net
Subject: Re: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:15:36 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)wrensong monitor.net wrote,
)
)) The notion of "the angels watching" has been mentioned enough that
))I now believe it is probably a real part of the problem. It makes me want
))to ask what the angels are doing when children drown in pools, get hit by
))cars while riding bikes or get killed in wars or places like Auschwitz. The
))school might at least have given us a waiver to sign with our application
))that said, "I understand that my child's supervision will be undertaken
))almost soley by the angels. I therefore agree not to hold the teachers or
))school responsible for any injuries on the school property."
)
)This is rich. Do you think it should become part of our Waldorf disclosure
)document?
)
)-Dan Dugan
Deby adds,
I have witnessed many questionable practices on the playground such as
children tying up their Waldorf teacher very tightly with ropes at recess,
or Kindergarten teachers' allowing children to climb extremely tall trees,
while the teacher looks on from afar. One disconcerting event involved my
son's kindergarten class, whose teacher took them on an "impulsive" field
trip to the river in her trash heap of a car with no insurance, not enough
seatbelts, and far too little supervision available to be safe around _any_
water. When parents came to pick up our kids, the school was empty, not
even a note left saying where the class had disappeared to...(The parents
_all_ threw a fit.)
My own son was intimidated by the playground bullies. His teacher responded
to my concern with, "Max just needs to learn how to play." He was so upset
by the bullies who "drug" him around the playground that he would hide
under the table. I pulled him out of that kindergarten to place him in the
home Waldorf kindergarten (that allowed the tree climbing, starting of
fires in the fireplace, and swimming with little supervision...)
I attended an Anthroposophic funeral for a child that "hung" himself while
playing with ropes [at home], and was pretty appalled by the eulogy given
by his second grade teacher. He opened the service by saying, "I'm glad so
and so died." (This child was half black and half white.) His point being
that this child could evolve into a higher being sooner than later. Another
parent (whose own child drowned in a bathtub one year earlier) spoke. She
said, "You can't hide your children from death". Both deaths were
investigated by authorities, but no charges brought forth.
Full disclosure statement ? You bet. But I think this would apply more to
private than public Waldorf schools, as the public schools _do_ seem to
supervise the kids on the playground. At the now "Yuba River School",
teachers are assigned playground duty. Gives them plenty of time to pick on
the kids they are targeting to "leave the school."
Deby
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n357.5 ---------------
From: mckay oro.net
Subject: Re: uniformity & charters (was world-view of WE teachers)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 15:57:38 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
)BT wrote,
)
))There is often the illusion that one WE school is more open (less tightly
))Anthroposophist controlled) and another more narrow, until one talks with
))people who have been in several schools and finally given up on the system.
)) Parents often have the idea that their picture of the "good" WE school, i.e.
))their image of "Waldorf the way it is _supposed_ to be," is out there
))somewhere. I have yet to hear of one that fits the image. It sounds as if
))people are now hoping that the (supposedly) state run charter schools will be
))the solution. That hope does not seem realistic. -BT
)
)We hear over and over again "things like that don't happen at *our*
)school." But they are amazingly uniform, despite all the talk about
)"freedom." The dream of Waldorf only exists when people look only at the
)surface, which most parents seem to be happy to do forever.
)Dan D.:
)Two charters I've visited, the Yuba River School (formerly Twin Ridges
)Alternative Charter School) is an orthodox Waldorf school, and despite
)claiming to have credentialed teachers, the new Novato charter school
)appears to be little different from any other Waldorf school, except the
)taxpayers pay for it!
)
)Charter schools are *not* "state run." They are state *funded*. They are
)run locally with, at least in California, really minimal supervision from
)the chartering school district. Why should they bother? Charter schools are
)supposed to be "free market," and the district has only to collect a
)percentage of the pupil fees for administrative overhead, and do nothing. A
)cash cow for the school district.
This last paragraph is _very_ right on target for the reasons why the
Waldorf Charter schools are having so much success staying open against all
the excellent documentation and complaints, including the separation of
church and state issue. It's not that the local school boards don't always
understand _what_ thye are getting into, but rather, the finacial boon
that comes with Charter Schools. It's "easy money" and can be a great way
to pull in "lost" enrollees back to your district. I have no doubt that
"money" is the bottom line driving force in this issue. With Anthroposophy
being the foundation of WE, and being so hard to pronounce, let alone
understand _how_ it is so interwoven into the curriculum, it is easy to see
why most public school officials don't want to take the time it really
takes to educate themselves enough to make a proper decision. Since there
is lots of "easy" money waiting for any struggling district thru Charter
schools, and timely decisions for use of those monies is the driving force,
how much time do you think they are going to spend to try and figure out
something as esoteric as WE?
David McKay
--------------- MESSAGE waldorf-critics.v001.n357.6 ---------------
From: wrensong monitor.net
Subject: Re: Responsibility & accountability
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 19:30:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: (199703311812.KAA14556 lists1.best.com)
Deby Snell said:
)Full disclosure statement ? You bet. But I think this would apply more to
)private than public Waldorf schools, as the public schools _do_ seem to
)supervise the kids on the playground. At the now "Yuba River School",
)teachers are assigned playground duty. Gives them plenty of time to pick on
)the kids they are targeting to "leave the school."
That is the first place I've heard of where there is supervision.
Did you personally observe it on a regular basis? There were teachers
assigned to playground duty in the school I was speaking of too--they just
didn't come outside to do it. There was one level headed staff person who
commented that he couldn't understand it, but he wasn't a teacher at the
time.
I once phoned up a family who had left the school to verify for
myself whether a bizarre story I had heard was true--that their little girl
had been "hanged" (although not injured) by 3rd grade boys from a
playstructure. I wasn't willing to accept something like that as true
unless I heard it directly from the parents. The mother was very sweet and
reluctant to say anything negative about the school at first. She tried to
leave it with a vague "it just didn't work for us," but I persisted with my
question.
She started out very softly, but started to get more and more
emotional about it. She said some boys had tied a rope around her
daughter's neck and left her hanging from a playstructure, her feet barely
skimming the ground. After the children had all returned to class, a
friend happened to be going out to use a restroom, found the girl and got
her down. It was two days later before the mother heard about it from one
of her daughter's friends. She asked her daughter why she hadn't told her
about it. The reply was "Well, Teacher told me it must have been my fault.
She said it must have been something I did to bring it on."
I said, "Oh--so that's when you left the school." She sighed sadly
and said, "No, I'm afraid it wasn't." She had been one of those parents who
was not willing to let go of WE easily.
She told me how miserable her sons had been, and that it had been
their unhappiness that had finally made it impossible to go on there. She
said, "Do you know how awful it makes you feel to hear you child come home
talking about being put into a dunce cap..." She got to telling me about
all the complaints her sons had, so we didn't get to the subject of the
dunce caps.
That night I couldn't get to sleep from thinking about dunce caps
being used, so I called back the next day to get myself clear on whether I
had understood correctly. One of the boys answered and we talked for a
long time. He told me how much he and his brother and sister loved public
school and the teachers they had met there, and how much they had hated the
years at the Waldorf school.
He complained about the teachers and the other children very
bitterly. One of his complaints was that the older kids would often bully
them and do things like taking their balls away from them. He said there
was "never a teacher anywhere around" to supervise the playground. I asked
what would happen if he went to find a teacher to help, and he said they
would say, "I'll be right there" but wouldn't come.
I started to ask about the dunce caps. "I heard that dunce caps
were used? My child is the sensitive type who really tries hard to please
and" but he knew what I was about to say and blurted out bitterly, "Oh, it
doesn't matter! It happens to that kind too--it happens to everybody!" I
wasn't sure if he had heard me right and whether he was talking about dunce
caps or something else, but he went on, so that I got sidetracked again.
One of the points he made was about how much more *interesting* he
found school now and how much more he was learning. My guess is that the
dunce caps were probably just one incompetent teacher's idea for trying to
maintain classroom discipline. I doubt very much that they're an accepted
WE practice, but I certainly got a lot of helpful information while trying
to find out about them.
The remarks about how much more that boy was learning brought to
mind how my own kindergartener was complaining about not "learning" things
at school. I had finally asked him what he wanted to learn. He looked at
me incredulously and answered, "All sorts of stuff! I want to learn about
science and--you know--stuff!" I knew he didn't have a hope or a prayer of
learning there the kinds of things he was referring to until he got to a
much higher grade.
--------------- END waldorf-critics.v001.n357 ---------------