Talk me out of Waldorf

[Aspasia]

I just got back from our homeschool conference where I attended a session on Waldorf homeschooling (which has always fascinated me). I was so enticed. The more I learn about it, the more I love it.

 

But I also know that I'm easily distracted when it comes to educational philosophies, at least lately. We decided five years ago that we would homeschool, and I've read and learned so much about the different philosophies. We have always leaned classical--heavily. But the last few months have been very confusing for me as I have opened up a lot to other philosophies. I know I can mix and match, and I very likely will (I'm still planning to use WTM language materials as well as a more traditional math curriculum), but I still need to figure out the rest.

 

So...tell me why I SHOULDN'T love Waldorf. Because right now, it's calling to me!

[Mandy in TN]

Incorporate whatever you want. If there are aspects of Waldorf that just call to you, then by all means use them. I do. ;)

 

In the why shouldn't you category, do an Internet search for Waldorf religion or anthroposophy. :o

 

I like some things about Waldorf, but I do not practice anthroposophy. I just take what I like.

 

HTH-

Mandy

[Matryoshka]

There were aspects of Waldorf that really, really drew me in when my kids were little. And there were aspects I thought were a bit loopy.

 

Some friends and I ended up doing a one-day-a-week Waldorf coop - for a couple of years we hired a Waldorf teacher, then we went it alone with the help of the Enki curriculum. We baked bread, had circle, did outdoor games and just playing outside, did handicrafts, art and watercolor, imaginative play, read stories, and all sat down to a hot lunch together.

 

It was lovely, and then the rest of the week we did other things entirely. I'm a big believer in take what you like, and leave what you don't.

[Hunter]

It can take up a LOT of money and a LOT of time before you decide which 9/10th of it you want to discard. I've learned things from studying Waldorf methods that I do use, but I'm not sure it was worth all the study, never mind the money. Seriously.

 

Bermuda is lovely at Easter, but few/none of us are there this week. Waldorf is lovely, but not everyone is supposed to go there even once, never mind live there. KWIM?

[Katydid]

I think it's really hard to fully do Waldorf if you are homeschooling several children of different ages because so much of the philosophy is introducing certain stories, ideas, etc. at specific stages of development.

[Hunter]

nm

[Wabi Sabi]

There were aspects of Waldorf that really, really drew me in when my kids were little. And there were aspects I thought were a bit loopy.

 

Some friends and I ended up doing a one-day-a-week Waldorf coop - for a couple of years we hired a Waldorf teacher, then we went it alone with the help of the Enki curriculum. We baked bread, had circle, did outdoor games and just playing outside, did handicrafts, art and watercolor, imaginative play, read stories, and all sat down to a hot lunch together.

 

It was lovely, and then the rest of the week we did other things entirely. I'm a big believer in take what you like, and leave what you don't.

 

My children do something similar: a bi-weekly class led by an Oak Meadow teacher. They make soup, bake bread, play outside, paint with watercolors, tell stories, put on plays, etc. It's really been perfect for us.

[Momling]

Google "Waldorf survivors" or "Waldorf critics" for reasons.

[Hunter]

I do use some of the preschool/kindergarten/home parts of waldorf. These don't affect curriculum. Rhythm and keeping things simple and tied to the seasons/months/days is grounding for me.

 

For curriculum, what I do is a combination of 1st ed. TWTM, Principal Approach and Waldorf methods. I create a LOT of handwritten and hand-drawn copywork for students to copy. I use books that appeal to my OCD tendencies and then I retell them in simpler language when need be, and create copywork.

 

I'm more likely to have a student COPY an outline than create one TWTM style. I'm more likely to have a student COPY a summary I wrote, than to narrate. These are Waldorf methods, rather than TWTM. I tend to do a lot of word study, and addition of Bible verses to the copywork. This is Principal Approach. Then we add border/form-drawing and color the page very lightly with a crayon.

 

We use a ton of color and we use crayons a lot. We use Prang crayons when we have them and Crayola when we don't. I have beeswax crayons, but we don't use. The softer the crayon, the more it smears. I don't like dealing with smears, and stained fingers, clothes, and furniture.

 

I tried studying storytelling, and writing my own stories to illustrate complex ideas and math. Big fail that is not worth my time. I do write summaries, and rewrite complex sentences into simple ones though, so I can use an advanced text with low level students. I don't write my own stories though.

[freeindeed]

I pick and choose, but my homeschool is "Waldorfy." Dd12 uses Oak Meadow 6 and dd5 uses Oak Meadow Preschool, A Child's Seasonal Treasury, and the Wynstone's Kindergarten series. Ds9 uses a unit study, but I incorporate Waldorf activities. I am definitely NOT an anthroposophy follower, so I just leave that out of what I do. The rhythm, circle time, songs, poems, and stories are especially beneficial to my special needs dd5.

[LBoogie]

Wow. Just researched Waldorf. Had no idea.

[Aspasia]

Wow. Just researched Waldorf. Had no idea.

 

What do you mean?

 

I googled "Waldorf survivors" and it did seem a little crazy. But that stuff seems to apply to people who have had their kids in Waldorf schools and feel that their children were being covertly indoctrinated into the "cult" of anthroposophy. I don't think that has to apply to homeschoolers. I personally don't buy into anthroposophy, and I do see how one could implement a Waldorf education without it being an influence at all. I am mainly drawn to what I assume most others are drawn to: the nature orientation, connection to the earth and its seasonal changes, art, stories, songs, etc.

 

I have a dd who is a little nature fairy at heart. On top of that, she is very story-oriented and loves to create. I just think this approach would really connect with her.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I won't speak to the spiritual stuff concerning Waldorf, it really is on you to do that research and make up your own mind, but I do want to say this:

 

Lots of us have found that we've spent a ton of money and looked down a dozen paths (and dragged our kids down more than a few) before we really solidified our educational philosophy and mission. Training a teacher takes time and money, even if you are training yourself; that's just part of the journey. I'm grateful for my own self-ed in that regard, and you will be, too. Don't think of it as vacillating unless you really are doing that. If you're giving ideas and methods a solid try and learning from those experiences, that's a good thing.

[DianeW88]

I was very Waldorfy with all my kiddos up through kindy or 1st grade. It was fabulous! Fun, easy, relaxed, lovely, playful, nature intense. Just a very sweet time and lots of lovely memories. We transitioned into more of a Charlotte Mason approach in the younger grades, and then classical in mid-elementary. I have always used unit studies as my methodology and continue to do so with my youngest. I'm sure my approach would be considered very eclectic, but it's worked for us.

[umsami]

There was a Waldorf Pre-K/Kindy near where I used to live. I remember visiting it (and having the home visits) for my son when he was that age. It may sound new-agey, but the energy at that place was just so soothing and nurturing. However, we couldn't afford the $5k tuition...so I bought the Christopherus Kindy book and sort of kind of followed some ideas from it, but we also did HWT (hey...at least the letter pieces are wood, not plastic), Right Start A, some Sonlight books, etc.

 

I will say that I'm Waldorf-inspired. I love rhythm and natural materials and the like (even though I have tons of plastic toys. :))

 

I love crafts, but can barely crochet and can't knit to save my life... so we did weaving and finger knitting.

 

I finally, after much searching, found a copy of the Oak Meadow 3rd grade curriculum. There were some things I liked, but my own hodge-podge curriculum I like better. I do love the stories in OM Kindy, though. So, we sort of kind of follow the Waldorf story ideas...fairy tales in 1st, trickster tales in 2nd, Old Testament/Creation in 3rd, etc. I do try and limit screen time (especially for younger grades--but realistically I limit, don't prohibit it).

 

We've use Right Start, Math Mammoth, and Beast Academy for Math (oh, and kids used Saxon at school). I liked them all and there wasn't a gnome in site. :)

 

I use a "real" handwriting/cursive curriculum, but I do ask my kids to draw something about what we're learning and copy something in their best handwriting in a book.

 

We do math pretty much every day. We do science pretty much every day. OK, we do everything pretty much every day. No real main lessons are planned, although some things take longer than other.

 

Try to go outside every day if possible. Try and be in nature more than I would normally be. (Not a nature person really.)

 

Moving to more whole foods, less processed crap.

 

Love the morning verses.

 

Ummm...that's about it.

[freeindeed]

There are some great free or inexpensive Waldorf resources. I've pinned lots to my homeschooling board on Pinterest. Here's the link: http://pinterest.com/happyhomescool/homeschooling/

[kiwik]

There are a number of Waldorf preschool teachers in my family. Some of the stuff is lovely but they seem to operate (at preschool level at least) on the assumption that the child is generally incapable. I hear a lot of the children can't understand numbers before age x, they shouldn't be encouraged to read before y. I have had it hinted that my sons toileting issues are due to him learning too much academic stuff. I think the academics are related to his giftedness and the bowel condition was inherited from his father. End of rant.

I do love the fact that the kids seem to retain their innocence a bit longer and i like the range of subjects they do at upper elementary and high school level.

 

[Hunter]

I just got back from our homeschool conference where I attended a session on Waldorf homeschooling (which has always fascinated me). I was so enticed. The more I learn about it, the more I love it.

 

But I also know that I'm easily distracted when it comes to educational philosophies, at least lately.

 

So...tell me why I SHOULDN'T love Waldorf. Because right now, it's calling to me!

 

 

What do you mean?

 

I have a dd who is a little nature fairy at heart. On top of that, she is very story-oriented and loves to create. I just think this approach would really connect with her.

 

 

:lol:

 

Do want us to enable or discourage you? I'm confused what you are looking for. I can do either one, but just need to know which it is. :D

[Matryoshka]

:lol:

 

Do want us to enable or discourage you? I'm confused what you are looking for. I can do either one, but just need to know which it is. :D

 

 

See, but we can help her do both. Take all you want from the tasty buffet... just don't drink the Kool-Aid. ;)

[Aspasia]

 

 

 

 

:lol:

 

Do want us to enable or discourage you? I'm confused what you are looking for. I can do either one, but just need to know which it is. :D

 

Exactly! See how confused I am? :)

 

No, in my original post I'm basically just asking for the cons of Waldorf, since right now I'm mainly seeing the pros. I want to weigh both sides before I take any kind of plunge (especially since most of these Waldorf materials are pricey!) The problem is, when I search the Internet for the cons of Waldorf, most of what I find is related to anthroposophy. Those discussions aren't particularly helpful for me, since I don't much care about that. It doesn't inform my life view and I don't really think it needs to inform a Waldorf-inspired education.

 

I guess I'm interested in people's opinions regarding the content covered and the methods for covering it. Is it enough? Is it effective? Does it prepare students for high school and college study? Stuff like that.

 

Thanks for forcing me to clarify my question. ;)

[momma2three]

It's based on some very, um, interesting views about child development. Since kids develop differently, it is probably spot on for many kids, while way off for plenty of others.

 

You can't actually divorce the philosophy from the religion, though it's absolutely possible to divorce many of the practices from the philosophy. The philosophy stems from the idea that children are reincarnated angels, and that until they fully reincarnate, they are partially other-worldly. Steiner thought that it takes 7 years for all of your cells to regenerate, so it's not until 7 that children lose their last traces of angel and become all-human. He thought it was dangerous to force worldly things on children under 7, including what we'd consider academic subjects. There are often lots of cracks about losing baby teeth and reading, but Steiner thought that was basically the sign that a child was ready to read. There's also something about height: kids have to grow at the right rate, or else there's something wrong with their development.

 

Many of the facets that make it seem so cozy and warm, including the colors (starting with rosy pink and going through the rainbow as kids get older) and the materials (wood, wool, silk, and cotton are warm materials, and thus help keep the child's soul warm: metal and plastic are cold materials, and will freeze the child's soul) have religious reasons behind them. There are even rules about which grains you're supposed to eat on each day. And don't even get me started on the dancing parts.

 

Delaying academics is kind of controversial, and I think it's great if it works for the kids, but Waldorf is actively against children under 7 having exposure to letters and numbers, and I can't get behind that. Friends who went to Waldorf schools are a mixed bag, and most don't feel like they got a great academic education at school: two of my friends who went to Waldorf schools have told me that their parents taught them to read and taught them lots of academic stuff they weren't getting in school.

 

It's one of those things that I'm drawn to certain parts. I have a little nature table, and I like a lot of the toys, and I like the handwork aspects. Many of the materials are beautiful. Overall, there's too much crazy for me personally, so the things I do that would match up with Waldorf I don't really think of as Waldorf-inspired, just as "a good idea that I happened to pull from Waldorf."

[briansmama]

I love Waldorf Ed, but the part I love most is that it is literature-based and centered on the development of the child. I personally love the delayed focus on academics (this is obviously not specific to Waldorf, as delayed formal academics is practiced all over the world, like in Finland, for example). But I do agree that children learn best when they are ready, and most young children do not need to be sitting at a desk working on academics. This often comes at the expense of something else.

 

I've learned that I don't need a curriculum to implement what I love most about Waldorf. And, when it comes to math and literature, Waldorf and Charlotte Mason are very similar, and there are plenty of really great free book lists/programs on CM available for free. CM flows more naturally for us, likely because it did not stem from anthroposophy.

 

The CM Help website is a great (free) resource for our family. I don't think I will ever stop learning about different methods of education. It's a passion of mine, and I enjoy reading about different theories of education. So, I don't think there is anything wrong with investigating Waldorf a bit further to find if there are aspects you may want to incorporate. We will likely do our Waldorf-inspired morning movement (circle) until my dc finish homeschooling!

[Pen]

Exactly! See how confused I am? :)

 

No, in my original post I'm basically just asking for the cons of Waldorf, since right now I'm mainly seeing the pros. I want to weigh both sides before I take any kind of plunge (especially since most of these Waldorf materials are pricey!) The problem is, when I search the Internet for the cons of Waldorf, most of what I find is related to anthroposophy. Those discussions aren't particularly helpful for me, since I don't much care about that. It doesn't inform my life view and I don't really think it needs to inform a Waldorf-inspired education.

 

I guess I'm interested in people's opinions regarding the content covered and the methods for covering it. Is it enough? Enough for what? What are your goals?

 

 

Is it effective? Probably depends on the individual child.

 

 

Does it prepare students for high school and college study? I think probably yes in spades in arts areas. Possibly so in liberal arts areas. Probably not in science and math areas, if that is to be a field of concentration...

 

that is, I'd say it does prepare a child to be able to graduate from high school with enough credits in math and science to go to college, but not to be taking, say, AP Calculus, AP Physics or AP Chemistry classes in high school.

It is not strong IME in logical thinking areas.

Maybe a child could take AP History or Literature with a Waldorf elementary school background without too much trouble though. Stuff like that.

 

Thanks for forcing me to clarify my question. ;)

 

 

 

I still love the art parts. I loved the sweet homey feel and look of the kindergartens. And I also liked that the students got a lot of practice with public speaking and performance (though that would not be the same in homeschool version). Personally, I liked some of the things that bother people too as being "religious", such as use of warmer materials (beeswax rather than cold clay) for the little ones, and I think that making round ball like shapes with hands does give a different (and even healthful) feeling than does gouging and pulling at it. I like the idea of working with the whole child and developing him or her as a whole, not advancing the mind too far beyond body and emotional development. I believe that there is a spiritual aspect to life, not just material aspects. And yet....

 

The surface appeal may not have as much substance behind it as one would like, or as the cost for it is--whether that is expensive homeschool materials or b&m tuition. I guess, if you can afford it for the good parts, and get other materials for where it is lacking, that would be great. Some people I know were using Waldorf for the social aspects and arts, and doing academics as afterschooling using better curricula. You could use Waldorf homeschooling materials for the arts parts and parts that seem to work for your child--and other materials where they do not, I suppose and do somewhat the same thing, minus the social and performing arts parts, which were pretty major components.

 

And yet...

 

And yet:

 

The academics did not work for my son. The delay was not good for him since he turned out to have dyslexia and also to be gifted, and so dealing with what then became a huge, huge gap between skills and interests was extremely challenging. Had I not bought into the delay, we would have discovered the problem earlier and been able to work on it before the gap had gotten so huge.

 

The reading methods they use simply did not work for him--and while I saw that they were okay-ish for some learners, I do not think they are the best of what now exists in academic areas for most learners--though possibly better than using only whole language (Waldorf used sight words). Sort of cutting edge methods for 100 years ago...word families for reading which was confusing to many children. The ones for whom it did not work gradually dropped out. It does work for some, I guess.

 

 

 

The math part was "sweet"--but ineffective for teaching him math (an area he excels in if taught in ways that work for him)...I expect it would be better for non-mathy kids....at least help them to enjoy math, with little stories of math gnomes or math squirrels or fairies or what have you, --though maybe, probably IMO, not to be excellent at it. Kids going into 8th grade who I met at his b and m Waldorf did not seem to know how to make change or calculate basic subtraction/addition with money in my experience. They did seem to learn that by the end of the year via pizza sales to raise class trip money. But that is a level way below what many other schools or methods are at in math at that point. It is probably okay for non STEM aims, but may close some doors unless the child is very motivated to make up for lost time.

 

Art is nice. But making everything artistic is not always the best way for everyone to learn everything. Sometimes a clearly written math problem with the columns in nice order and readable and usable is better than pretty colored crayoned ones, at least in terms of the math, rather than for the art. And even for the art, maybe it is better to do it with things other than math problems.

 

I think there is a lot of time and emphasis spent on things that do not demonstrably benefit the children. I think crafts are nice, but not all children actually love them--and maybe they can be done too much so that they are tedious drudgery instead of fun and special....both for the child and for the teacher. And that is probably true of both the b&M and homeschool versions of Waldorf.

 

My son Hated circle time, a big part of Waldorf. Thought it was stupid and babyish and a waste of time. Unfortunately circle was when they tried to present a number of things that were toward the academic side, so if circle was detested much was missed.

 

I think Waldorf is too much teacher led and does not enough allow the children to explore for themselves. As homeschoolers, my ds and his friends make up their own plays based on their interests and readings, instead of it being a teacher initiated exercise.

 

 

 

Science was almost non-existent and they even taught presumptively wrong things from a science pov. The idea was to try to preserve the magical world and innocent state of the child by keeping everything soft and non-intellectual...but some children--like my ds-- want to know what is actually known in a real factual way, and that was not allowed/discouraged there. At one point the children, to learn about how plants grow, put large easy to handle by little fingers squash seeds in little pots. A couple of days later when they got to school, their pots had blooming pansies growing in them that the teachers had provided, and to preserve their innocence and magic they were told those were the plants from the seeds they planted. Sweet, I guess. But really gives a wrong idea about how nature actually works. My ds came home and asked me about how a squash seed could make a pansy, and how it could go from nothing to flowering overnight. Because we keep a garden, my son already knew a lot about seed and plants and how long it takes to germinate and that the growth is a progress through seasons, and that from a squash seed will come some type of squash. Yet it was school, and the teachers were supposed to know things, so he was confused. I do not think you would have this trouble so much from a homeschool version. ... but if you go with Waldorf, it is worth looking at this aspect carefully. Incidentally, a lot of art/craft things that looked so lovely in Waldorf brochures and had been supposedly done by the children were actually done by teachers and parents. Kind of like the little potted pansies. The children were given the illusion of having made something, but really did not do much. I don't know if that is good or bad. I guess I prefer for my ds to know what he has actually done, and what he had help with, rather than to think he has capacities and skills far beyond the truth of the matter. Also some of my Wow feeling when I first looked soured some as I realized that much of the kid-stuff on the walls and display tables was largely grown-up made, or that the sample Main-Lesson books were adult made models, not what the children themselves actually would/could do.

 

History, usually given a prominent place in Classical in the early years, was not there in the early Waldorf years. Too bad, since I think they can get a lot of history as stories at the early stages. But if you want them to only learn about fairies, well, it is very strong on fairies and fairy tales.

 

In terms of 'social studies' as it came out through what there was of tales, I had issues with the racial/ethnic bent toward Germanic tales ...and the gender bias toward delicate females who were passive or old evil hags, while the males were powerful and active in most of the stories--in the early years. There was a strong thread of blonde is good, dark evil; female is weak and passive, male is strong and active. This, like the teaching methods, seems, at best, antiquated to me now. I do not know if the early years homeschool materials are like this too, or not. I have heard that a Waldorf inspired curriculum called Enki is more multicultural. That may not be something that would be an issue for you and your homeschool. The dolls were typically left faceless so that the child could imagine any facial expression. But the hair was blonde and the cloth faces were light colored so the ethnicity/race was not so much left to imagination. Again, you could do this differently if you want to. I do not know what they do in Waldorf schools in Africa or Asia.

 

At this point, I still do not think my son is quite caught up to where he should be academically for his own abilities, and yet he is way ahead of where his former classmates seem to be. We were told that Waldorf goes slow at the beginning, but that the children then seem to surge ahead and be caught up by the end of 3d grade. I do not see that as being true. It appears that lost time is lost, and getting caught up is hard.

 

Children from my ds's b&m Waldorf did often go on to being honors students in high school and thence often went on to college, but nearly always that I am aware of in arts (music, drama, visual) or liberal arts/humanities type fields. I don't know of even one off hand who was doing extremely well in math and science areas as they were way behind in those areas. I do not mean that they were failing. They may well have had As (which may reflect in part the socioeconomics of who could go to a private Waldorf in the area)--but they were a couple of years behind where even our local public schoolers tend to be in terms of what they are doing when.

 

It gives a lot of pretty stuff to show off what you have been doing. Folders of art and Main Lesson books. And yet...

 

Perhaps to sum it up as a student (not my ds) who left Waldorf to homeschool put it--'Waldorf was a lot of fun, but I wasn't learning anything.'

 

That is no doubt an overstatement. I am sure he was learning something. But relatively little for the time, energy and expense.

[momma2three]

Thank you, Pen, for sharing your experiences. I have heard similar things.

 

People I know who went to Waldorf schools do seem to have fond memories, but also agree that the academics were not the strong point.

[kiwik]

To clarify from earlier. I like that they study religion and philosophy (or at least my cousin did). I don't like the fact that all the artwork looks exactly the same. I don't like the children will be damaged by giving them academics before 7. This is particularly annoying when you have the kind of child who starts to read and do maths at 3 or 4.

[happyhappyjoyjoy]

It's based on some very, um, interesting views about child development. Since kids develop differently, it is probably spot on for many kids, while way off for plenty of others.

 

You can't actually divorce the philosophy from the religion, though it's absolutely possible to divorce many of the practices from the philosophy.

 

 

It seems to me that when you take the practices you like they'll likely correlate to something else (charlotte mason, classical, etc...) and then it isn't really Waldorf anyway, It is just some things you liked that interested you that can also be found elsewhere. I personally can not participate in anything if I disagree with how it is founded.

[Aspasia]

Pen, thank you, thank you for taking the time to write all of that out! That is EXACTLY the kind of stuff I need to know.

 

So, it sounds like I might like the handcraft elements, the stories, the nature orientation, all the music and transition songs, the overall "wholesomeness" (which i try to cultivate at our house anyway). I like the idea of using stories to teach math. I think dd would benefit from that, but maybe more as a supplement than the sole approach to math. I like that they kind of make their own textbooks, but I did immediately recognize that as being pretty similar to notebooking.

 

I have to agree with kiwik about the art all looking the same--I have found that kind of creepy. And happyhappyjoyjoy makes a good point about much of the stuff correlating to other methods, particularly CM.

 

You ladies may have saved me $300. My husband thanks you. ;)

 

But I will probably keep looking at some of this stuff, because I do love the parts that I love. Right now my ideas about our homeschool look like this: WTM language arts, a traditional math curriculum, WTM history stretched over five or six years, child-led science (with books, videos, kits), CM/Waldorf music, art, literature. That's more or less what I've had in my mind all along (I wasn't going to do Waldorf LA, math, or science), so seeing it written out does help me see that buying a curriculum may not be worth my money.

 

Okay, maybe my conference high is over now. Kinda sad about that. :( But definitely glad that I didn't buy anything right away!

 

ETA: One more Waldorf thing that fascinates me: the lesson blocks. I'm considering that, but haven't looked into it too much yet. Any thoughts?

[Pen]

Pen, thank you, thank you for taking the time to write all of that out! That is EXACTLY the kind of stuff I need to know.

 

So, it sounds like I might like the handcraft elements, the stories, the nature orientation, all the music and transition songs, the overall "wholesomeness" (which i try to cultivate at our house anyway). I like the idea of using stories to teach math. I think dd would benefit from that, but maybe more as a supplement than the sole approach to math. I like that they kind of make their own textbooks, but I did immediately recognize that as being pretty similar to notebooking.

 

Sure, all of the wholesome part is very nice, moving, getting outdoors, handwork, home skills, food preparation and so on as part of early years school was great. (But need not have precluded some academic work.)

 

I'm not really sure how the Main Lesson Books compare to Notebooking. I mean I have seen both, and I know they are actually quite different, but it is hard to explain how exactly. The Main Lesson Book is a core part of Waldorf work in a way that Notebooking is usually not. The Main Lesson book is usually more teacher led and student copied. I love the idea of these, but they never really happened for my son, and what was actually done in the b&m school looked nothing like the models one sees. He liked making up his own "books"--and that creativity was actually squelched by Main Lesson Book idea. He then moved to research papers in Brave Writer style writing approach, without ever doing notebooking.

 

I have to agree with kiwik about the art all looking the same--I have found that kind of creepy.

 

The art is a form they have learned they can teach to the teachers to do and then have the children copy. It is basically a form of copywork, and so looks pretty much the same, just as written copywork from WWE or any source would look the same, and even the "essay" writings from many programs (IEW, WWS, etc.) people use here will be much the same, because they are based on the same materials following the same methods.

 

It is not art that is really about expressing individual creativity. I do not see it as creepy because I did some of it and understand that it is copywork, not meant to be original unique personal expressions. That does not mean the children do not learn from it. It is one of the few areas where I think Waldorf was quite effective.

 

I do not think it will hurt someone who would be a great artist any more than learning Suzuki music will stop someone from being a great musician, or copying a passage written by another person would stop them from becoming a great writer. It achieves some basic art competence in a manner they have found they can make work. So, they can do some art the way many children can do some long division. Sure, one long division looks a lot like another. It is not a genius level of mathematics. But there is a basic competence achieved.

 

They learn one way of doing something with watercolor (at least two actually--wet on wet and wet on dry). One way to work with crayons, blending colors and so on, and high quality materials used, so that it tends to quickly look more advanced than usual kid level crayon work. One way with beeswax. One way with clay. It is limited, yes, but it is a start, and by and large better than what I have seen in other places that are not special art magnet schools, or art institutes. And it is doable with a limited amount of practice--you do not need to spend years to master it just as Waldorf teachers can learn to do it during a two year training program.

 

More than that though, and important: It also feels very good to do the art the way they do it. It is soothing. And I think actually can be therapeutic. And for many children having something they can do that helps them calm and settle and center themselves is very helpful. There is indeed a spiritual (religious if you will) underpinning to why they do it as they do. That is actually true of much art if you go into it deeply enough. Western art is different than Islamic art or Asian art for reasons that have deep spiritual significances. And many cultures have art that looks similar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And happyhappyjoyjoy makes a good point about much of the stuff correlating to other methods, particularly CM.

 

You ladies may have saved me $300. My husband thanks you. ;)

 

But I will probably keep looking at some of this stuff, because I do love the parts that I love. Right now my ideas about our homeschool look like this: WTM language arts, a traditional math curriculum, WTM history stretched over five or six years, child-led science (with books, videos, kits), CM/Waldorf music, art, literature.

 

 

Waldorf students tended to be strong in music, but not so much because of what was done at Waldorf as for outside lessons, I think. I cannot speak to CM music. But I think you might be better off looking at something like Suzuki style lessons, or standard type piano or some such for music. But I think look to what is best way for your children to learn some music now in 2013 in your place and with your circumstances.

 

"Literature:" Waldorf had the teacher/parent tell (not read) a story to the child, and sometimes the child narrate it back or answer questions about it or do art about it, or act it out. I think that is similar to WTM and CM narrations--but the huge emphasis on the teacher as the storyteller (not reading to the child, but learning a story for oral presentation, and then presenting it without a book or notes) is not present in WTM or CM. There were no books in Waldorf in the early childhood years. We left at 1st grade and there were still no books used then. That is quite different. I do think that telling a story, rather than reading it is very special for young children. But I also think that books are okay to use. For myself I had to, since I have limited ability to memorize new things due to a brain injury. I can tell old stories I know like Goldilocks say, but cannot without great effort learn new ones, it seems. When I tried to do Waldorf at home the story telling was for me the hardest part.

 

 

 

That's more or less what I've had in my mind all along (I wasn't going to do Waldorf LA, math, or science), so seeing it written out does help me see that buying a curriculum may not be worth my money.

 

I think your plan sounds basically sound, and you no doubt will refine it as you actually try it out.

 

Okay, maybe my conference high is over now. Kinda sad about that. :( But definitely glad that I didn't buy anything right away!

 

ETA: One more Waldorf thing that fascinates me: the lesson blocks. I'm considering that, but haven't looked into it too much yet. Any thoughts?

 

 

I think you will figure out what works for you--intense work on a main area (lesson blocks), or a little bit of everything each day...or some other system...and it may change over time and with different circumstances. I ended up being a "do the next thing" homeschooler. And at this point, my son sets a good bit of his own lesson plans and how much of what he does each day. The more he can be self propelled, the better from my point of view. If we are doing something that takes a lot of time and focus we generally end up with something that looks like a lesson block. More often there is time for the main subjects we are doing on all or most days.

[Pen]

PS. If you are able to memorize and tell literature as oral stories rather than reading them, I encourage you to do so. Or to do what you can of that. Every bit of that that I did manage to do seems to be remembered as being very special by my son, and he will still ask for the few I managed (especially ones I made up just for him) even now that he is a preteen. I also would suggest not demanding a narration back. Sometimes it is enough just to listen and enjoy something. I would know he was with the story not by a narration but because when I tried to vary it because I thought that would be fun... have the 3 bears go out to work on their garden for instance, he would correct me and say, no, they did not go to work on their garden, they went for a walk. It always had to be just the same.

[Deee]

Steiner and Charlotte Mason were contempories, and both strongly influenced by Goethe. Hence some of the similarities. Charlotte Mason narrations differ from Waldorf's retellings largely by timing: Waldorf ALWAYS lets the children sleep on new info before working with it. So the story is told on day one, maybe a drawing or painting on day 2 and a writing task on day three. It's known as the three day rhythm and is very effective.

 

Don't write off Waldorf academics, at least in the homeschool setting. If you use a rigorous curriculum like Christopherus, your kids will be writing their own summaries by grade 6 and be very solid in maths. I'm not a huge fan of some of the science, but again, that's easy to control as homeschoolers. Some curricula are less "anthroposophical" than others. Live ed has stunning art, but loopy science. Christopherus is less visually attractive, but stronger academically.

D

[Hunter]

I stress some handcrafts with some of my students, but not for academic reasons. I'm a strong believer in teaching the mind, body and soul. I didn't prioritize literature and arts and electives until I started having different goals. My PTSD recovery taught me that the brain is just an organ, like any other organ, and cannot survive suspended on a soulless weak body. I have few academic goals for crafts, but do you use them for self-soothing, and I use the rhythm of knitting in particular for it's brain repair benefits.

 

My priorities and goals are quite different now than they were 10 and 20 years ago, now that I know more about brain damage and mental health.

 

I don't like the fact that all the artwork looks exactly the same.

 

This is one of the things I like best :D I prepare a lot of copywork that students are expected to copy exactly. This is one of the areas that makes me prefer Waldorf to CM and TWTM. Lots and lots of copywork. Students that like workbooks prefer copywork to narrations and other open ended assignments. I don't use workbooks for quite a few reasons and copywork and recitation are the only replacements that work for me.

[Mandy in TN]

I think Waldorf is too much teacher led and does not enough allow the children to explore for themselves. As homeschoolers, my ds and his friends make up their own plays based on their interests and readings, instead of it being a teacher initiated exercise.

This.

[Mandy in TN]

another recent Waldorf thread from the general board

 

And since Charlotte Mason has already been brought up :) , in the thread above, I said:

 

If you like some aspects of Waldorf, grab them and utilize them. I like nature tables. I don't like that TWTM classical education for elementary education avoids the upper levels of Bloom's revised taxonomy in favor of focusing intensely on the bottom two. I like how Waldorf materials naturally encourage the upper levels. Also, finger knitting was a much bigger hit with my little guy than legos. :-) However, I like all kinds of art materials and I am sure most of it is just wrong according to Waldorf. I like wet on wet watercolor, but I also like throwing Kosher salt on it and watching what happens and once I let my son paint leafless winter trees in black acrylic on his when it was dry. lol I am sure some Waldorf purest would be horrified.

 

Having an instructor presented as an almost omniscient guide, isn't a place from which I feel comfortable instructing. OTOH, while I like Montessori products, it is difficult to pull off the peer pressure, um peer guidance, group learning thing in a group of one. I know that, while I like having prepared materials and allowing some self-exploration, my youngest would never choose to move from subject to subject or activity to activity discovering things independently. He needs more guidance and instruction than Montessori would typically provide. So, I want to provide more direction than a Montessori teacher and less guidance than a Waldorf teacher.

 

I really like some Waldorf and some Montessori materials, but Charlotte Mason really guides me as far as the ideal for how I want to instruct.

 

I like to pull our curriculum together using several methods.

 

•a little bit of Waldorf- the part that emphasizes imagination and creativity in learning

 

•a little bit of Montessori- the part that emphasizes supporting a child's nature by allowing them self-exploration within prepared materials

 

•a chunk of Charlotte Mason style Classical- the part that emphasizes habit training, narration, living books, enjoyment of poetry and short lessons

 

My overriding homeschool philosophy is adapted entirely from Charlotte Mason.

 

My child is not a blank slate, but is a whole person complete with his own personality and capacity for good and evil. I respect that he is born whole and that his mind is naturally designed to learn. I can provide the nourishment of education for his mind to grow healthy through a learning lifestyle where he is trained to be disciplined not in subject matter but in life for "education is an atmosphere, a discipline, a life."

 

My child must be taught the difference between what he wants to do right now and his will to do what is appropriate/ right. He must also be taught to be careful not to rationalize something to be right simply because he wants it to be so. Along these lines, there can be no true happiness without first taking care of responsibilities. “…the chief responsibility which rests on them as persons is the acceptance or rejection of ideas. To help them in this choice we give them principles of conduct, and a wide range of the knowledge fitted to them.â€

 

"I am, I can, I ought, I will." is the place from which I instruct, because we achieve through diligence not through intelligence or imagination. I use habit training as a road to success, but I exercise this alongside the idea that “perhaps the business of teachers is to open as many doors as possible.â€

 

Sorry to the op, I know I just pulled other educators and my love of CM into a Waldorf thread, but I couldn't help myself. I recently purchased a couple of Waldorf middle school geometry products and spent quite a bit of time researching Waldorf middle school geometry on the web. So, I have been thinking about Waldorf, Montessori, and Charlotte Mason lately and what exactly it is that I am drawn to in their approaches to children and education and revisiting what I can take from that and utilize in my homeschool. What I typed above, I wrote awhile back with a few recent alterations. I am working on modifying it to better meet my youngest son's needs.

 

HTH-

Mandy

[Nicholas_mom]

PEN- I would like to quote her but it's sooooo long. I just want to say that I second her all post. I used Enki Education from Pre-school thru 3 rd Grade. I did the camps and the extra classes with the creator of the curriculum. In the middle of 3rd Grade I got a culture shock when I realized that my son was behind in math and science. :eek:

 

Turns out ds is gifted, too, so catching up in math and science is pretty easy with him. But, I was laying at night worrying of what I done for 6 months before I finally comed down. This year we did more Charlotte Mason and WTM stuff with some ENKI influences and he is loving it and learning whole lot more then he did when we did strictly ENKI.

 

Still, I would recommend doing the Waldorf thing in the early years, but definitely get into a math and science curriculai starting atleast Grade 3, if not in Grade 2.

 

Perhaps to sum it up as a student (not my ds) who left Waldorf to homeschool put it--'Waldorf was a lot of fun, but I wasn't learning anything.'

 

My son would say the same--- he liked Enki but he didn't learn anything, well, I'm not sure he would say he liked it ;) . He did like the finger knitting, and working with wool stuff and the stories.

 

BTW, there is a CM-Waldorf YAHOO Group, if you are interested :)

[Hunter]

 

I think Waldorf is too much teacher led and does not enough allow the children to explore for themselves. As homeschoolers, my ds and his friends make up their own plays based on their interests and readings, instead of it being a teacher initiated exercise.

 

 

:rofl:

 

This is just cracking me up. It's the strong teacher focus that appeals to me. It's mixes well with the Principle Approach "the teacher is the textbook" methods. Without workbooks and textbooks, I need SOMETHING other than the student to lead the lesson.

[Aspasia]

 

Sorry to the op, I know I just pulled other educators and my love of CM into a Waldorf thread, but I couldn't help myself. I recently purchased a couple of Waldorf middle school geometry products and spent quite a bit of time researching Waldorf middle school geometry on the web. So, I have been thinking about Waldorf, Montessori, and Charlotte Mason lately and what exactly it is that I am drawn to in their approaches to children and education and revisiting what I can take from that and utilize in my homeschool. What I typed above, I wrote awhile back with a few recent alterations. I am working on modifying it to better meet my youngest son's needs.

 

HTH-

Mandy

 

No, don't apologize! This is totally helpful for me!

[Aspasia]

Pen, the more you tell me, the more I realize that I just fundamentally don't know enough--anything, really--about Waldorf. I think I need to learn a lot more, and I want to, because what I know so far does strike a chord with me. Are there any resources that you (or any of the rest of you) particularly recommend? I have been working my way through a list of resources from the presenters at our conference and I've come across a few other things, but I'd love recommendations from you ladies, too.

 

Thanks again for all the info.

[freeindeed]

I can tell you that Waldorf inspired has been therapeutic and healing for my dd5. She has significant special needs (visually impaired, developmental delay, mental insufficiency, suspected ASD) as well as other issues stemming from the fact that she spent the majority of the first two years of her life being ignored in an orphanage. The daily/weekly/monthly rhythm is a lifesaver for her and for me, as well as for the rest of my family. The delayed focus on academics also suits her perfectly. She LOVES Circle Time and can sing/recite her verses beautifully. The toys made from natural materials are soothing to her. She has truly begun to blossom with the Waldorf method. This is a list of the books/curriculum I use with her:

 

http://www.oakmeadow.com/curriculum/preschool.php

http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/betty-jones/a-childs-seasonal-treasury/paperback/product-20347265.html

http://www.novanatural.com/winter-poems-songs-stories.html

http://www.novanatural.com/autumn-poems-songs-stories.html

http://www.novanatural.com/spring-poems-songs-stories.html

http://www.novanatural.com/summer-poems-songs-stories.html

 

Here are links to some of my blog posts that will give you an idea of what our schooling is like, and how Waldorf-inspired looks in our everyday life:

 

http://freeindeed-redkitchen.blogspot.com/2013/03/homeschooling-and-life-week-of-mar-4-8.html

http://freeindeed-redkitchen.blogspot.com/2013/03/homeschooling-week-of-march-11-15-2013.html

http://freeindeed-redkitchen.blogspot.com/2013/03/homeschooling-and-life-march-18-22-2013.html

http://freeindeed-redkitchen.blogspot.com/2013/03/happy-birthday-baby-girl.html

I hope this helps.

[VeritasMama]

All of the things that people tend to "love" about Waldorf seem to me to be not exclusive to Waldorf. Oak Meadow seems very similiar to what we tried to accomplish at the preschool I taught in, and I had never heard of Waldorf at the time. We geared our currculum around the seasons and holidays, we had a "music and movement" class, and we had plenty of exploratory learning going on in various "centers."

 

I didn't hear about Waldorf until reading about the occult, when I came across Steiner. Anthroposy is "cultish," and teachers in Waldorf schools are encouraged to indoctrinate their students without alarming parents, i.e. not letting parents know.

 

Oak Meadow, from what I have seen, specifically takes out all references to anthroposy and eliminates many of the superstitious thinking that some are exposed to in Waldorf programs. I would see no problem using OM, but I would steer clear of official Waldorf materials because of our own religious beliefs.

 

IOW, I would take the good and leave the rest.

[Aspasia]

Freeindeed, thank you so much for those wonderful links! Your daughter is so lucky to have such dedicated parents! She's beautiful.

[briansmama]

 

ETA: One more Waldorf thing that fascinates me: the lesson blocks. I'm considering that, but haven't looked into it too much yet. Any thoughts?

 

 

After using the main lesson block method for the first few years with my oldest, I learned that by 3rd grade Waldorf schools and Waldorf-inspired homeschool curricula add daily "math tracks", and/or additional mini-lesson blocks to the schedule, in addition to daily movement (circle), music practice, foreign language, etc.

 

So, basically, by 3rd grade the daily schedule includes quite a few elements: movement (math facts practice, songs, poetry), form drawing/cursive, main lesson, recorder, math track, foreign language, and handwork or art, as well as any enrichment classes.

 

In theory, I LOVED the idea of a main lesson, where we would alternate between Lang arts (literature) and math, with each being the focus for a month or so. In reality though my ds stays more engaged with shorter lessons and more variety in his day (CM called this feasting on the variety of lessons).

 

It really depends on your child and on you. I was starting to lose steam by the 3rd week of math focus.

 

Also, main lesson books are different from the notebooking that I've seen in that the children create their own learning books, so notebooking worksheets are not used. Personally, I love this because I don't like notebooking worksheets where comprehension questions are expected to be answered, or children are asked to fill in blanks or pre-set forms.

 

We still use Main Lesson books for our CM lessons in 3rd grade. My ds can narrate his lesson by drawing a picture or writing about it. He also adds map work to his MLB. When we read a living book for science he draws the animal and labels it, along with some interesting facts. It's definitely uniquely his.

 

 

[SeaConquest]

Google "Waldorf survivors" or "Waldorf critics" for reasons.

 

I just want to give this a big fat ditto. There are two HUGE threads on Mothering.com about how much Waldorf has screwed up kids. Not my cup of tea at all. I find it cultish and frankly, based on the teachings of an anti-Semitic, racist.

[kiwik]

Of course the beauty of home schooling is you can take the best and leave the rest. You don't have to accept the loony bits to get what everyone agrees are the nice bits.

 

Eta.ok I read a bit of the Waldorf critics page and suspect the Steiner schools in NZ (not called Waldorf here for some reason) are less extreme. The local one is parent owned and operated and the teachers have standard NZ teaching qualifications in addition to the Waldorf ones - especially the kindy area which receives government funding.

[stripe]

I think their art is lovely, but a bit creepy somehow. I met a lovely lady from the local Waldorf school at a convention recently who helped my kids make a beeswax candle, and, given the dearth of art in most schools, I thought she was neat, and also had a very soothing personal manner. Anyway there is someone who teaches Waldorf art lessons as a weekend activity, and if I had more money, I might spring for it. I certainly don't have the $20,000/year to send a kid to their schools, and I think my husband would rather poke himself in the eye than pay that much to have his kids knit and dance all day long. I can do that for free! My mother would also be furious with me, as she thinks they are very academic lite. Anyway I think the skills at art are the most appealing thing about them, so if I were to emulate them, that's what I would do, not faceless dolls and gnome math problems.

[Hunter]

I must be so weird. :biggrinjester: I love the faceless dolls, especially the handkerchief dolls. I seem to only like/use the parts that everyone else here hates and has discarded.

[Mandy in TN]

I must be so weird. :biggrinjester: I love the faceless dolls, especially the handkerchief dolls. I seem to only like/use the parts that everyone else here hates and has discarded.

Well, I like the faceless dolls, but my son does not. I think that is a personal thing.

 

A far as the omniscient teacher hat, I can only wear it when I tutor and I have a specific topic that I must cover in a specific time frame. My worth as a tutor is based upon covering specific stated or unstated yet perceived academic information. So, maybe your liking of the omniscient teacher roll is the difference between tutoring and parenting?

 

As a parent, I have the responsibility of educating the whole child. Sure, I definitely want my child to meet academic milestones, but I don't want him to just be educated in subject matter. I really desire for him to be a responsible, decent, moral person who possesses positive and productive physical and mental habits. I want him to learn to apply these habits to whatever he chooses to do in life whether that is a tinker, a tailor, a soldier, or a sailor.

 

To this end, I feel that I must be more of a mother-guide kind of teacher and less of an omniscient teacher. Eventually my cover as omniscient teacher will be blown, but as a mother-guide who loves him I will, even when realized for the fallible human that I am, still be a mother-friend who loves him.

 

Mandy

[Hunter]

Well, I like the faceless dolls, but my son does not. I think that is a personal thing.

 

A far as the omniscient teacher hat, I can only wear it when I tutor and I have a specific topic that I must cover in a specific time frame. My worth as a tutor is based upon covering specific stated or unstated yet perceived academic information. So, maybe your liking of the omniscient teacher roll is the difference between tutoring and parenting?

 

As a parent, I have the responsibility of educating the whole child. Sure, I definitely want my child to meet academic milestones, but I don't want him to just be educated in subject matter. I really desire for him to be a responsible, decent, moral person who possesses positive and productive physical and mental habits. I want him to learn to apply these habits to whatever he chooses to do in life whether that is a tinker, a tailor, a soldier, or a sailor.

 

To this end, I feel that I must be more of a mother-guide kind of teacher and less of an omniscient teacher. Eventually my cover as omniscient teacher will be blown, but as a mother-guide who loves him I will, even when realized for the fallible human that I am, still be a mother-friend who loves him.

 

Mandy

 

Hmmm, I'm not sure how to respond. I'm assuming you are referring to multiple of my posts over the past couple years, rather than just this thread, and I don't have the context of all you are personally referring to, or not referring to.

 

I didn't want to not respond at all, but I'm not sure I want to pursue this topic now and here. It feels kind of wide and OT, and I'm not sure where it will go, what you are expecting, or what the benefit to you, me or others would be.

 

To discuss this, I would need a new thread, and a specific TOPIC, that everyone could participate in discussing pros and cons and methods of that TOPIC. Something that is not FOCUSED on ME. I have to be vague and sometimes ever so slightly misleading with pronouns and specifics to protect identities and make sure everyone is safe from things I choose not to discuss here.

 

I tell stories here to illustrate the points I want to make, but I generally don't just chat for the sake of chatting, and cannot fully explain or defend or be courtroom accurate about what I do, and with whom, and why.

 

It sounds like you might have an interesting topic to discuss. :001_smile: If so, I'll attempt to participate the best I can, within my comfort zone.

[kiwik]

No Hunter I like the dolls too and a lot of the preschool stuff my relatives do (the are all Lindy teachers). I just don't like the assumption that children shouldn't do academic stuff and the storytelling voice irritates me as an adult (might be fine for a child).

 

 

[Pen]

.... If you use a rigorous curriculum like Christopherus, your kids will be writing their own summaries by grade 6 and be very solid in maths. ...

 

 

Can you be more specific about this?

 

Solid in what level maths at grade 6? My concern about maths was not that the children were not learning it in a solid way--assuming it was a method that fit that child, and while the story method was not suited well to my ds, it sounds like it likely would be for OP's dd. As I wrote, I think the ones going on to public high school may well have gotten A's (our top grade level), but maybe only be ready for pre-algebra (rather than Algebra 1) in 9th grade. That is, I think they were solid with what they knew, but 1 year behind what, at least in the states, is typical for a college bound student, and 2 or 3 years behind what might be typical for a STEM student. They also did not seem to have good algebraic or logic thinking from what I saw. Geometry understanding seemed stronger, perhaps from the form drawing or hands-on activities like putting nails in a board and winding colored threads to make patterns. The samples I saw for grade 6 of Oak Meadow, which is Waldorf inspired, appeared to have maths at a roughly 5th grade level of other common homeschool math programs, say, Math Mammoth, and also 4th/5th grade level for our local public schools. What I saw of the maths was that it would not close doors into fields that use some math, such as, say, nursing, law, business, music, farming, building trades, or architecture. But without playing catch up it looked like it might well close doors into engineering, physics, or medicine (as doctor or veterinarian--not as nurse or technician). If OP's dc are not "mathy" or "sciency" so to speak, that may not matter--but it also might be that one would not know if they might be more so given some other approach--perhaps something like Singapore, or Beast, or the many other options out there.

 

 

I did have some Christopherus materials for grade 2, but am not familiar with what it is doing by grade 6.

 

What would a child-written summary at grade 6 for a Christopherus educated child look like?

[Pen]

Pen, the more you tell me, the more I realize that I just fundamentally don't know enough--anything, really--about Waldorf. I think I need to learn a lot more, and I want to, because what I know so far does strike a chord with me. Are there any resources that you (or any of the rest of you) particularly recommend? I have been working my way through a list of resources from the presenters at our conference and I've come across a few other things, but I'd love recommendations from you ladies, too.

 

Thanks again for all the info.

 

 

 

What you want in some ways is terribly hard because it is a lot like asking for an understanding of Catholic school education. There are so many aspects to that, and parts that you might like and parts that you might not like, and even if you had a curriculum from that had the positive parts you like, without whatever you did not like, maybe the underlying philosophical/religious aspects might or might not be an issue for you. And then too, would that be the underlying aspects as manifested during the Inquisition or during Vatican 2? For some, a Catholic education might be the way forward--Wangari Maathai who I greatly respect and honor, for example, found it so.

 

 

Beyond some of what others have posted here as places to begin like the Waldorf Critics, you could also look at some things on where you can read actual Steiner writings about education (or other subjects).

 

Incidentally, I recently met up with some parents who own a biodynamic farm and are fairly devoted to anthroposophical philosophy (biodynamics was also started by Steiner), and so I would have thought they would have chosen Waldorf, and yet are sending their young children to a Montessori school because they feel it has enough of the natural materials and wholesomeness they wanted, but does not so much stint the academics. So I think there is a recognized academics issue even with people who have no issues with the underlying anthroposophic philosophy.

 

It is perhaps harder with Waldorf because the surface beauty makes it harder to see what may be underneath that.

 

I think another issue to consider (though you can work against it being a problem in your own home school) is whether all the doing, all the special crafts and so on, projects, festivals...end up creating, something I saw in the b&m setting--too much for the child. To the point of the children feeling entitled and acting spoiled, brats....and at the same time too much in the sense of the "hurried child" phenomenon (not simplicity, even though this is supposed to be a Waldorf goal, but the opposite of simplicity). Parents and teachers tended to be burnt out--and while the kids seemed to enjoy it, I am not sure that the more, more, more was good for them. It was like all cake, all Christmas presents, all the time--I mean that metaphorically, not literally. I do not find the art especially creepy. But there was a point when yet another cutesy knitted gnome, yet another precious festival, yet another teacher led circle time or teacher led was cloying, the big kids sometimes used terms like Waldorky or Walbarfy. The boys ( I do not want to be sexist, but it was boys I saw do this not the girls) sometimes took their darling hand made faceless dollies and swung them into each other like Nerf bats, or bashed them on the ground or otherwise showed frustration with the idea of taking care of the dear "babies" (dolls) the way the teachers instructed. Sometimes maybe just a workbook is enough.

 

 

For children of workers in a cigarette factory, where Waldorf began, I think it must have been an improvement on whatever they otherwise had had. It may, over all, be an improvement over many public schools these days, notwithstanding the academic issues, just for the comparative wholesomeness. It (but what exact "it" I do not know) might be just right for your homeschool.

 

...Perhaps for your own learning you need to get some of the actual materials--a year of Live Ed, the Christopherus overview book, and or Enki for something like Waldorf, but more multicultural. And then use them in full or in part as seems to work for you.

 

I have thought of trying to write a book that gave just the art part of Waldorf, since that to me seems to be what it had at its best and nothing I have seen seems all that good for homeschoolers to "get it."