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 se