I *wish* I could afford to send my kid to Waldorf or Montessori schools... that's why we're on the waitlist for financial aid. I love both philosophies- different, yet similar with regard to alternative, hand-on learning.

I don't know what that is.

Waldorf is both a philosophy and an educational system. No one can predict the exact nature of the challenges our children will face in the future. Yet it is clear that intellectual flexibility, independent judgement and moral courage will be essential to their success as creative and responsible human beings. The Waldorf curriculum carefully balances academic, artistic and practical activities to prepare the child as thoroughly as possible for life’s experiences. Waldorf schooling also focuses upon nurturing the child’s self-confidence and self-reliance, while fostering his or her personal integrity and a sense of social and environmental interdependency and responsibility. Waldorf education is based on the profound insights of Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian educator, scientist and philosopher, regarding the nature of the developing child. The philosophy behind Waldorf Education recognizes that children have distinct, age-related educational and emotional needs according to their naturally unfolding stages of development. When it comes to toys, it is believed that children should have a small number of high-quality toys made from natural, living materials that stimulate discovery and creative play. They seek to recreate a simpler way of life, when less often equaled more, the few toys that children once had were treasured and loved to bits while inspiring imaginative play. In our throwaway, consumptive society very little care or affection goes towards the multitude of mass produced toys available on the market.

thanks.

I wanna be!!! We're moving towards it. I love so many things about Waldorf philosophy. In that debate where people were talkign about scientology i remembered thinking about Waldorf. It was begun by a man who was a member of a cult/ cult like religion but people have taken his ideas and worked theminto something totally wonderful. I know a woman who is sending her kids to the waldorf charter school is Oregon. They love it and it's a P.S. can you imagine?! Both parents attended Waldorf schools and want to educate their childrehn that way. THe mom runs an online dollmaking business.

Our town is a total anthroposiphical town. We have both a camphill and a waldorf school. Also we have two CSAs that are biodynamic. I would LOVE to send Isaac to the Waldorf school. But recently I've heard some bad stuff about bullying. Apparently there is little to no disapline in waldorf philosophy. Therefore teachers and authority figures stand by and let the children "work it out" amongst themselves. I'd like to talk to people who know more about it. What have you read about it? Like book titles, articles, what have you? I would read about it if I could.

We area Waldorf family all the way. We get a lot of play things out of http//www.novanatural.com

I shop at Nova Naturals too.... I'm working on being a Waldorf Mom!!!!!!

I detest the waldorf philosophy mainly because I find it and it's creator to be inseparable, and it's founder Rudolph Steiner was racist. What would my son learn if he were to attend a Waldorf school? This is what Steiner thought of native americans: SourceQuote:The group of people that Steiner found least appealing was the native American Indians. Even though these had a certain age in human life, Steiner considered their case to be connected with "the forces that have a lot to do with human extinction." 14 He described the Indians as "a degenerated human race", 15 which was the reason why they had succumbed to such a degree. "It isn't because of the whims of the Europeans that the Indian population has died out, but because of the Indian population had to acquire those forces that led it to die out." 16 While he ascribed an abnormously weak Ego to the Africans, the Indians had the opposite problem. This was also the cause of their skin color (or rather the skin color Steiner thought they had): "And they developed this Ego so strongly that it has gone into their skin color: They became copper-red. They have developed into decadence." 17 and there have been looks into racism at Waldorf schools: Source Quote:it is time to consider the possibility that some naive forms of racism are endemic to those who embrace anthroposophy without a strong critical sense for the real possibility that Steiner's speculations about the racial organization of culture and consciousness were wrong. After the incident in Milwaukee, with a minimum of attention on our part, a handful of similar stories from other Waldorf schools working with African American and Jewish populations began to emerge. These stories were told by the offended party only, and we cannot cite them as exacting evidence of racism in Waldorf. To sound an alarm, we need only to identify them as examples of the kind of race-related discussions that, despite their being easy to misstate, mishear, or misquote, can be found in Waldorf contexts. We cite them as evidence of nothing more than that the Waldorf community, likely because of Steiner's writings on race, is vulnerable to such misunderstandings. A white mother of a successful biracial (African American and white) child loved her son's Waldorf school but had to work constantly against teachers who would tell her of the evolutionary limits of Black children. A Jewish professor looking for altemative methods of schooling was told that a Jewish person could not be a Waldorf teacher. I think things deserve a critical look, especially from feminists and supposed anti racists. Or is a crunchy education more important then not supporting the teachings of a racist man?

I've heard lots of mamas talk about Waldorf in passing, but never looked into it too much. I'll definitely keep the info about the creator being racist in mind. I know lots of people talk about "Waldorf dolls" like they're special, but to me they seem like just normal handmade dolls (beautiful, of course). My school district has a Montessori-themed elementary school, and I'll probably send G to it when he comes of age. Even if their philosophy isn't perfect, I like the idea of them gearing the school towards *something*, rather than just following the typical public school patterns.

I have never heard any of this infromation about the creator, or about them being racist towards famillies or possible instructors.... thanks for the info Naivete..... like always you are an awesome educator.

yabinti wrote:I have never heard any of this infromation about the creator, or about them being racist towards famillies or possible instructors.... thanks for the info Naivete..... like always you are an awesome educator. ditto on that one. it's funny seeing these old posts come up. since then, i have change my focus and have become interested in sending my dd to a sudbury school. i like their philosophy and they work on a sliding scale. there's one about 15 minutes from my house.

I plan on homeschooling, but bringing in the hands on aspect.... totally leaving the racism aspect, obviously. But I'm glad this came up, because I didn't know any of what Naivete posted.

Amy Rox wrote:yabinti wrote:I have never heard any of this infromation about the creator, or about them being racist towards famillies or possible instructors.... thanks for the info Naivete..... like always you are an awesome educator. ditto on that one. it's funny seeing these old posts come up. since then, i have change my focus and have become interested in sending my dd to a sudbury school. i like their philosophy and they work on a sliding scale. there's one about 15 minutes from my house. I went to a Sudbury school for the last couple of years and LOVED it. If there's any way you can send your child, I would strongly encourage it. That said, I like parts of Waldorf and I've been reading a lot about it, lately, because I plan to homeschool (well, mostly unschool) my daughter. But I do know that Steiner also had a lot of sexist views, such as he thought that menstruating was unnatural and the like. I try to put part of that in the historical perspective, but to be honest, I wouldn't be comfortable sending my child to a Waldorf school. However, the Sudbury school I attended didn't survive. If it had, it would be a very hard choice between unschooling and Sudbury - I truly had a wonderful experience.

boigrrrlwonder wrote: I try to put part of that in the historical perspective, Okay, reading this, I realize how gross it is that I said that. (Trying to gloss over racism and sexism - ew!) I'm sorry about that.

naivete wrote:I detest the waldorf philosophy mainly because I find it and it's creator to be inseparable, and it's founder Rudolph Steiner was racist. What would my son learn if he were to attend a Waldorf school? This is what Steiner thought of native americans: SourceQuote:The group of people that Steiner found least appealing was the native American Indians. Even though these had a certain age in human life, Steiner considered their case to be connected with "the forces that have a lot to do with human extinction." 14 He described the Indians as "a degenerated human race", 15 which was the reason why they had succumbed to such a degree. "It isn't because of the whims of the Europeans that the Indian population has died out, but because of the Indian population had to acquire those forces that led it to die out." 16 While he ascribed an abnormously weak Ego to the Africans, the Indians had the opposite problem. This was also the cause of their skin color (or rather the skin color Steiner thought they had): "And they developed this Ego so strongly that it has gone into their skin color: They became copper-red. They have developed into decadence." 17 and there have been looks into racism at Waldorf schools: Source Quote:it is time to consider the possibility that some naive forms of racism are endemic to those who embrace anthroposophy without a strong critical sense for the real possibility that Steiner's speculations about the racial organization of culture and consciousness were wrong. After the incident in Milwaukee, with a minimum of attention on our part, a handful of similar stories from other Waldorf schools working with African American and Jewish populations began to emerge. These stories were told by the offended party only, and we cannot cite them as exacting evidence of racism in Waldorf. To sound an alarm, we need only to identify them as examples of the kind of race-related discussions that, despite their being easy to misstate, mishear, or misquote, can be found in Waldorf contexts. We cite them as evidence of nothing more than that the Waldorf community, likely because of Steiner's writings on race, is vulnerable to such misunderstandings. A white mother of a successful biracial (African American and white) child loved her son's Waldorf school but had to work constantly against teachers who would tell her of the evolutionary limits of Black children. A Jewish professor looking for altemative methods of schooling was told that a Jewish person could not be a Waldorf teacher. I think things deserve a critical look, especially from feminists and supposed anti racists. Or is a crunchy education more important then not supporting the teachings of a racist man? Wow, I honestly have never heard of Waldorf, but after reading this, I find it all to be appalling. Thanks for posting Naivete. And the white mother sending her black son there with the teachers who told her about "the evolutionary limits of Black children". That's really disgusting. I can't understand how she could see past that and continue to send her son there.

naivete wrote:I detest the waldorf philosophy mainly because I find it and it's creator to be inseparable, and it's founder Rudolph Steiner was racist. What would my son learn if he were to attend a Waldorf school? This is what Steiner thought of native americans: I think things deserve a critical look, especially from feminists and supposed anti racists. Or is a crunchy education more important then not supporting the teachings of a racist man? I agree. However, if you were to closely critique any educational, philosophical, religious, or psychological system, you would find fault. For example, I am appalled at the Montessori theory because of the simple fact that its founder, Maria Montessori was classist racist wretched woman. Not to mention the fact that the philosophy prohibits imaginative play entirely and also, role play. I could go on and on about how truly gross and offensive I feel Montessori is. Waldorf is the same. I detest the secular aspects of it and Rudolf Steiner, while brilliant in his idea to nurture the whole child and live simply and closely to the earth, was a racist and did have horrendous ideals. I think that, with any pre-determined set of beliefs, a person needs to research carefully and utilize the components that you are comfortable with. I love natural toys and avoid plastic at all costs. I like the idea of making your own toys and allowing children to utilize their imagination instead of relying on a battery operated or media saturated "imaginative play" but, do I let my kids still paint with the color black even though Waldorf says it's a no-no?? Of course. You raise important points naivete, if we did not know these things, we would not be able to make informed choices.

So because he has good ideals in some areas it's okay to promote him? I bet Hitler had some good ideals in some areas. You can nurture your child and use these ideals without attributing it to waldorf.

naivete wrote: You can nurture your child and use these ideals without attributing it to waldorf. You are right, absolutely you can do this. However, I did get those ideas from Waldorf so would it be fair to say I didn't? I learned from the philosophy. Good things and things I did not care for. However, all of the things I did take from Waldorf, weather good or bad, were still not my ideas and I feel the need to recognize that for myself.

Alright, justify.

Candy-eyed: What secular aspects of Waldorf do you detest? Niavete: Obviously candy-eyed and others have been influenced by Waldorf, and some of those influences have been positive. Do you think that it would be best for people influenced by Waldorf but reject it due to racism and sexism should deny that influence? Not mention it? Or mention it with the warning of its sexism and racism? Or something else entirely?

Here's my feeling: It's easy to adapt the positive teachings of Waldorf's theories, when the negative ones do not directly affect you. If Waldorf and his followers (teachers) believe that there are "evolutionary limits [for] Black children", it's easy to skirt around that issue when you're not Black (or any POC) and you're children are not either. True, there is systemic racism in nearly everything and you can find fault in everything. Would I fight the racism in my public schools? Yes, I will fight for my rights and what my tax dollars are paying for. I will fight forms of systemic racism that is found in our general society today. Would I seek out and enlist the teachings of a racist, even if there are postive aspects, and bring his theories into my home? NO! But maybe that's because I am a Black woman and things like this offend and affect me directly. I don't have the privilege of being white, and therefore, possibly being able to see past the negative aspects of this man's theories and onto his brilliance(?).

thenewgurl wrote: Would I seek out and enlist the teaching of a racist, even if there are postive aspects, and bring his theories into my home? NO! Thank you for saying this, because that's sort of how I think. And that's why I think more people need to be educating about Waldorf's racism. The racist things he says are not mentioned in most of the contemporary books (though judging by the article posted, it's still alive and well). Anyway, I'm going to add a racism trigger to this.

Quote:It's easy to adapt the positive teachings of Waldorf's theories, when the negative ones do not directly affect you. If Waldorf and his followers (teachers) believe that there are "evolutionary limits [for] Black children", it's easy to skirt around that issue when you're not Black (or any POC) and you're children are not either. Word word word. This is why I adore you ;D And it's those not affected (ie - those with white privilege) ignoring things like these that lets things like these go free. It all comes down to the crunchy education of a white mama and her white children are more important then taking a stand against something that could hurt a POC mama and her POC children. Whether directly or indirectly it is the education of one over the hardship of another, which in itself is racist as it raises the importance of one over the other. Why attribute it to anything? I get my parenting and educating ideals from a vast array of places, but I don't call it anything, it's life, to be influenced and molded by several aspects. To call yourself a Waldorf mama because you like a few of the ideals is to promote it and thus promoting it's creator and his ideals. And the only reason I can see to cling onto the label is to make yourself appear more crunchy and liberal in the eyes of others, because instead of just having ideals, you're a *gasp* waldorf mama.

We have a Waldorf school not too far from us. Some close friends of ours sent their 2 children there, up to and including 8th grade (that's the highest grade this school has.). These friends of ours could not say enough positive things about it. Really, they would go on and on (lol!). They were so convincing that we considered sending our DD there, but I decided against it because: 1) After speaking to a few other parents who sent their children to this Waldorf school, I learned that each child gets assigned a teacher and homeroom, and keeps that teacher and the same children in their class for all of the years they attend. So, your first grade classroom teacher and all of your classmates just become your second grade, and then third grade, etc., etc. What if your child didn't like that teacher? Never experiencing a different teacher and not meeting new classmates seemed stifling . 2) After reading online about the philosophy of Waldorf, I didn't think it sounded like a good fit for my DD. Also, since it was so different from traditional public schools, and this Waldorf only went to 8th grade, I worried about how hard the transition would be for my DD when she left Waldorf for 9th grade at a different school. So, my experience I am sharing here only relates to the particular school in my area. I don't know if every single Waldorf is exactly the same (I'm sure they are at least very similar, though.) Montessori: My DD attended summer camp and pre-school just briefly at a Montessori school. It was horrendous. Here's an example: (She was 3 years old.) At lunch she didn't clean up her lunch and put it back into her lunch box fast enough, so the teacher yanked it all away from her and dumped it all, including the lunch box, into the trash. My poor little DD was so horrified she burst into tears. I yanked her out of that place so fast their heads are still spinning. This experience also is only regarding the local Montessori. From what I've heard, these schools do vary greatly, one from another.

Th discussions of racism in this thread prompted me to look into this further. I am really glad I did. Thanks for alerting myself and others to this abhorrent practice. Here is a report done on racism in Waldorf schools: Waldorf and Racism [S]imilar stories from other Waldorf schools working with African American and Jewish populations began to emerge. These stories were told by the offended party only, and we cannot cite them as exacting evidence of racism in Waldorf. To sound an alarm, we need only to identify them as examples of the kind of race-related discussions that, despite their being easy to misstate, mishear, or misquote, can be found in Waldorf contexts. We cite them as evidence of nothing more than that the Waldorf community, likely because of Steiner’s writings on race, is vulnerable to such misunderstandings. • A white mother of a successful biracial (African American and white) child loved her son’s Waldorf school but had to work constantly against teachers who would tell her of the evolutionary limits of Black children. • A Jewish professor looking for alternative methods of schooling was told that a Jewish person could not be a Waldorf teacher.

That is what Naivete posted on page one of this thread

naivete wrote: Why attribute it to anything? I get my parenting and educating ideals from a vast array of places, but I don't call it anything, it's life, to be influenced and molded by several aspects. To call yourself a Waldorf mama because you like a few of the ideals is to promote it and thus promoting it's creator and his ideals. And the only reason I can see to cling onto the label is to make yourself appear more crunchy and liberal in the eyes of others, because instead of just having ideals, you're a *gasp* waldorf mama. So, then your offense is with the fact that I labeled myself at all? I actually don't go around wearing a badge or t-shirt or anything. Perhaps I should have worded this thread differently in the title. I felt that I had made it fairly clear that I did not exclusively practice Waldorf or any other form of parenting exclusively. I am not denying that Rudolf Steiner was a man with racist ideals or that it is not still alive and well in his practices today. I am not denying that, as a person with white privilege, it is easier for me to not be hurt and offended by the less desirable ideals within any philosophy. I feel that your point has been made and it was a good point to bring up. I do not see the need to judge, ridicule or belittle any person with different ideologies than your own, no matter how offensive they are to you. I don't like Montessori, but I acknowledge that some people feel it is right for them. I don't like anti-choicers but respect their right to a choice. I genuinely apologize if this thread in itself was hurtful to you or any other POC.

.. so it's now wrong to judge things for being offensive due to the fact that they offend you? it's called sticking up for yourself. I judge anti choicers, because they put limits and judgements on others. I judge racists because they put their beliefs on others in a way that can really trigger or negatively affect them and hurt them. I also judge those who see racism as just some thang that doesn't really matter. If you don't like that judgement? Don't stick up for the few beliefs of a man whose other beliefs are outright ridiculous, racist and hurtful. that's hardly the point of this site, now is it. I don't care what you label yourself, I care about the fact that you're making excuses and continuing to, in the face of something that is racist. Which in itself, is racist. Cheers, though.

Yeah, you like to judge. I notice that. I also notice, you are very quick to call out individuals for appropriation, racism, anti-woman language, etc. What I have had difficulty understanding for quite some time now is that you seem to feel, as POC, that appropriation does not apply to you. For example Naivete: "I've noticed a few people on this board praising "New Native" products, slings, etc, which really I didn't expect to see here. Stereotypes in ANY manner are offensive, whether they seem complimentary or not. New Native calls itself New Native, and I quote from one of their own company reps, "Native cultures have a deep connection to the Earth and show a reverance and harmony that we seem to have lost...". There's more of the email, but eh, you get the point. To use the stereotype that Native Americans are mythical, and deeply connected, and one-with-nature creatures, to promote products is absolutely no different then using offensive stereotypes to promote a product. It's cultural appropriation, misguided and stereotypical in the name of capitalism with little regard to those who are being exploited by being turned into a brand name. So tell me, those of you who love New Native products: Whether or not the product is quality, why would you support and endorse a company that uses cultural stereotypes to sell their product?" Hmm, why would you and yet..... Naivete: "I bought a new native sling off Ebay for 10 bucks, it works with newborns but you need an infant pillow for it to work with newborns, which is like 30 bucks in it's own and I can't find it second hand for cheaper. (And I know, ew to the name, but eh) " Eh, yeah, what's a little appropriation support when you need the product hey??? Frankly, I just don't have a lot of faith in anything you say because I find it hard to respect an individual who says one thing, then, when it is convenient for them, does the exact opposite. I kinda like the practice what you preach theory. I apologize for not triggering this post and for not offering more research into the theory itself so that all of the aspects and avenues could be explored.