2 ms·

My son is in a Waldorf kindergarten. He loves it, especially the silly little rituals. I think of it as a trade-off. Most of the ideas Rudolf Steiner had are ha

by olau 10y ago

My son is in a Waldorf kindergarten. He loves it, especially the silly little rituals. I think of it as a trade-off. Most of the ideas Rudolf Steiner had are harmless, at least in the way they are practiced today, but others are clearly beneficial. Either that, or they attract teachers who spend more time reflecting on what's good for the children, as opposed to how to put some specific knowledge into their heads. I can, however, understand where your condescending attitude comes from. I used to wonder why churches and clerics were still a thing. Until someone from my family ended up in the local church council, and it sort of dawned on me, that actually, you do not need science to do a lot of things right. You can come from a down-right anti-scientific base and still be more skilled - scientifically better - at something than someone who doesn't believe in anything but quantum mechanics.

DasIch 10y ago
Of course they can do well and even better for some students. You shouldn't ignore why that is though. They are at an advantage because their students that are incredibly privileged. Steiner also made rather obvious improvements on the status quo but that doesn't mean he has found an optimal solution, if such a thing exists for pedagogy. Waldorf education has turned Steiner's ideas into an ideology and the movement is unable to reflect on what it's doing, why and that it might be wrong. This creates a culture that, just like religion, is fixed and cannot change without conflict. Science doesn't have that problem, the culture around it embraces change and improvement. An education policy that truly takes advantage of that, will eventually lead to institutions that outperform alternative ones like Waldorf schools.