| Author | |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 11:38am | IP Logged
|
|
|
CrunchyMom wrote:
| I can't see how to separate Steiner and Waldorf. The educational method happens to have a different name from his founder, but Steiner, the man, invented anthroposophy AND Waldorf. No one would ask if Charlotte Mason's methods have to be associated with Charlotte Mason (or shaped by her worldview) or if Montessori has to do with Montessori. Their names are the "brand." I'm not sure why it makes any more sense to disassociate Waldorf from Steiner? |
|
|
This is a very good point. If it were called the "Steiner" method would we be more wary?
Quote:
| And, while I have chosen not to send my children to Catholic schools, one reason being that they are not "Catholic" enough for me, if I thought Catholicism itself was evil, I would not put my children in a Catholic school. They aren't THAT unCatholic. |
|
|
So true. It's why we started homeschooling in the first place and why one of my children who went to a Catholic high school this year won't be returning next year.
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 11:40am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Natalia wrote:
Just to clear my mind.
Everybody agrees that Steiner's writing or any other writing that is overtly New Age must be avoided.
Everybody agrees that we pay attention to the church and what she says.
Everybody agrees that each mother/parents here want what is best for their kids.
Everybody agrees that nobody here will willingly endangered their dc's souls.
Using beeswax crayons, silks, wet on wet watercolors,etc is not a sin.
The areas of disagreement are:
Did the Church condemned Steiner's writing or just issued a cautioning warning. If so what does this means practically?
Is using Waldorf inspired ideas the same as using Waldorf? are the Waldorf inspired ideas presented in Serendipity or other curricula like OM far enough from Waldorf to be safe for our dc?
Would using these curricula above make our dc comfortable with some other NA symbols and material later in life (because they could identify them with home)?
Did I get this right? am I missing something? |
|
|
That seems like a fairly accurate summation Natalia.
Though I was under the impression that Steiner being condemned was clarified and shown to be condemned not just warned against.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Angie Mc
Board Moderator
Joined: Jan 31 2005
Location: Arizona
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11400
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 11:41am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Natalia wrote:
Everybody agrees that Steiner's writing or any other writing that is overtly New Age must be avoided.
Everybody agrees that we pay attention to the church and what she says.
Everybody agrees that each mother/parents here want what is best for their kids.
Everybody agrees that nobody here will willingly endangered their dc's souls.
Using beeswax crayons, silks, wet on wet watercolors,etc is not a sin.
The areas of disagreement are:
Did the Church condemned Steiner's writing or just issued a cautioning warning. If so what does this means practically?
Is using Waldorf inspired ideas the same as using Waldorf? are the Waldorf inspired ideas presented in Serendipity or other curricula like OM far enough from Waldorf to be safe for our dc?
Would using these curricula above make our dc comfortable with some other NA symbols and material later in life (because they could identify them with home)?
Did I get this right? am I missing something? |
|
|
That's a great summary, Natalia. I will add a few areas of concern that members aren't facing but moderators are. These aren't to burden, side-track, or start discussion, but rather to be transparent and ask for prayers as we head into our spring retreat.
1. As a public board, what are our responsibilities to members?
2. As a board run by Catholics, what are our responsibilities to members?
3. What are the limits of this ministry, what do we do best?
4. How do we stay true to what brought us together while adapting to changing needs?
5. When in doubt, where should we err?
Some quick thoughts on these concerns:
1. We lean toward doing our best to first consider the needs of those who are new to the board, to homeschooling, and the faith. Contributing, experienced, and long-time members are the core of this ministry - THANK YOU! - and are in a less vulnerable position, regarding questions of faith and education, than those who are new.
2. As Catholics we are trying our best to present Church teachings straight from the Church herself. We are not experts.
3. Some limits of this ministry include being public and run by a group of volunteers. Some limits are innate to the medium - inability to share face-to-face, difficulties in communicating in the written word, etc. Some limits are about content - not being a "general" homeschooling board, but rather one that focuses on the Catholic faith and designing/adapting curriculum as home educators. Some are about how far into other areas of member interests should we go.
4. This may be the trickiest one of of all. How do we handle growth? How do we focus on what we share in common and not let differences divide us?
5. Right now, we're leaning toward, when in doubt, proceed with caution. Slow the pace down. Wait patiently for insight and direction.
If anyone has any feedback on these points, please feel free to contact me or any moderator or manager via PM. And please do keep praying for the intentions of the individual members here as well as this gathering as a whole. Thanks so much  .
ETA: I will be mostly away from my computer for the next week but will check my PMs as best as I can  .
Love,
__________________
Angie Mc
Maimeo to Henry! Dave's wife, mom to Mrs. Devin+Michael Pope, Aiden 20,Ian 17,John Paul 11,Catherine (heaven 6/07)
About Me
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
SeaStar
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 16 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9068
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 11:43am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have been pondering...
beeswax, playsilks, wet on wet watercolor, felting, nature tables, main lesson books, fairies, math gnomes... is there another curriculum besides Waldorf that brings these materials all together and uses them all at one time?
I don't think beeswax crayons are bad. I don't think opening a box of watercolors in my house is going to let Rudolph Steiner loose in my home.
But I do want to stay away from Steiner and his philosophies. And he was the brains behind the Waldorf curriculum.
So how many of these materials can you use all together at one time and not call it Waldorf? When do you cross that line?
Maybe the answer is different for every family. I don't have answers. I wish I did.
__________________
Melinda, mom to ds ('02) and dd ('04)
SQUILT Music Appreciation
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 11:55am | IP Logged
|
|
|
So Melinda.. friendly conversation here..
Steiner's philosophies and methods will be recreated just because someone might use enough of the same items that Steiner also used?
No, because in order to avoid Steiner, you would then have to know what he used and limit how much of that you use. It must be possible to know nothing at all about Steiner and not fall into his errors.
I could easily use all sorts of arts and crafts, and fairy tales and mythology in my homeschool and if I am authentically Catholic in their use I will not be promoting Steiner.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CrunchyMom
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 03 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6385
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 12:17pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Melinda, I think perhaps it is more related to technique?
Beeswax crayons are crayons.
A Waldorf curriculum might say "Provide your child with x, y, and z color crayons for 1st grade." The underlying purpose might be related to Steiner's personal beliefs, Anthroposophy, about color, reincarnation, or racial purity. The same with playsilks. Kids have been using sheets for dress-up forever, but when the sheets all fall within a certain color spectrum, not based on you or your child's tastes but on a man's beliefs regarding color and inner healing, it starts to lend itself to an environment that is "comfortable" with New Age beliefs, as described by Alice and Lissa.
Just my take on a very gray area.
__________________
Lindsay
Five Boys(6/04) (6/06) (9/08)(3/11),(7/13), and 1 girl (5/16)
My Symphony
[URL=http://mysymphonygarden.blogspot.com/]Lost in the Cosmos[/UR
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
stefoodie
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 17 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8457
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 12:30pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
LisaR wrote:
I was very attracted to and repulsed by Waldorf at the same time- is this possible?. It reminded me so much of my Oregon, Trancendental Meditation and Natural upbringing. However, the more I read and studied, I realized these are not memories and familiarities that I would like to pass on to my children.
Thank you to Lissa and Alice for so eloquently putting into words what I had been yearning to articulate for some time. |
|
|
Lisa, I could have written your post. I always have/had the same ambivalent feelings about Waldorf. We almost put our 2nd child in a Waldorf school, based on e-mail and phone conversations with the school admin. Then we made a school visit and changed our mind. But the attraction caused me to purchase through the years many Waldorf-type materials, though I had always dragged my feet on learning the "how to's". So I'm very very thankful for this discussion and for the issues that have been clarified for me.
__________________
stef
mom to five
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
stefoodie
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 17 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8457
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 12:46pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
SeaStar wrote:
So how many of these materials can you use all together at one time and not call it Waldorf? When do you cross that line?
Maybe the answer is different for every family. I don't have answers. I wish I did. |
|
|
Well this is *my* answer, and what works for us. We have all of these materials.... but they're only a small percentage of what we have (Dick Blick's makes it difficult to have it any other way -- there's just too much fun stuff out there to limit oneself or one's kids to a group of art materials  ), and we don't focus on using them for any particular length of time or reason or through specific methods. They're just "there". If the children want to use them, they use them. If not they get donated or discarded.
I will be honest though and say that I'm slowly getting rid of them.... 2 reasons -- 1) this discussion, and 2) except for the playsilks which we dyed ourselves using MaryM's excellent tutorial, I can't see that there has been any real PREFERENCE for these materials. There has been no significant attachment formed (for which I am grateful). Watercolors are something else -- we've used them from day one, with different techniques, methods, etc., mostly based on what I learned in art school.
__________________
stef
mom to five
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
guitarnan
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Maryland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10883
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:02pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I love studying history, and one of the things you learn when you do this is in a formal way is to look behind the words at the motives that inspired the historian. Why did this person write this book about this particular subject? Often, what seems innocuous or even simplistic...isn't. This approach can also be applied to philosophies of education.
For me, it's not enough (and never has been) to just say, "That looks nice," and bring it home. I'm the type that has to read through textbooks, pre-read the books my children read and do a lot of research before I switch textbooks, materials or approaches. (I do this with other things in life, too - I even read my son's college history textbook last semester!)
What I've learned from all of the discussions and questions on this thread is 1) I must continue to do this type of research, but do more of it; and 2) as part of this process, I should take more care to find out what the Church has to say (or doesn't say) about education and philosophy.
__________________
Nancy in MD. Mom of ds (24) & dd (18); 31-year Navy wife, move coordinator and keeper of home fires. Writer and dance mom.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
LeeAnn
Forum Pro
Joined: May 25 2007
Location: Washington
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 470
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:08pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
CrunchyMom wrote:
| I can't see how to separate Steiner and Waldorf. |
|
|
This is a very good point. If it were called the "Steiner" method would we be more wary? |
|
|
I believe Waldorf schools in Europe are not called Waldorf schools but Steiner schools. So there is no difference.
In the USA however you find more Waldorf-inspired schools that may or may not be staffed by certified Waldorf teachers--meaning they may or may not have been educated in Waldorf-Steiner pedagogy from an anthroposophic college.
[In San Diego there are even public charter schools that are Waldorf-inspired...Harriet Tubman Elementary, if I remember correctly.]
__________________
my four children are 17, 15, 11 & 8 - all now attend public school - we read many 4Real recommended books at home
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:14pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
So Jodie and others....
I read Beatrix Potter tales, trying to get an avacado seed to sprout, used crayola crayons to make some letters and a drawing, did some watercolor painting, some wee sings fingerplays (10 fingers, little log cabin, and 2 apples if you need to know), said daily rosary, discussed our liturgical/season, and made a wall calendar.
All these are okay.
Unless you get the info laid out for you in the OM syllabus?
Because the only way anyone would see anything steiner/waldorf in that is if the had already read his teachings. (Nevermind whether his calling it his makes it so.)
Having not read his teachings enough to know, does that make it okay? Or worse?
Either way, what exactly do you see in those things that make then not okay for a Catholic homeschooler?
And yes, people everyday pick apart CM and Montessori and convert and meld it to their own ends - often leading to very different outcomes. Someone saying they are greatly inspired or influenced by another doesn't neccessarily mean much.
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Celeste
Forum Pro
Joined: April 03 2006
Location: Nebraska
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 263
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:18pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
LeeAnn wrote:
MicheleQ wrote:
| [QUOTE=CrunchyMom] I can't see how to separate Steiner and Waldorf. |
|
|
|
|
|
I found these on a Waldorf homeschooling site:
"Many people are drawn to Waldorf methods because they see the colorful and simple classrooms and they tend to believe that childhood is a magical time full of discussing trolls and fairies. But like it or not, Waldorf Education has its roots set strongly in the Anthroposophic Movement. A newcomer should pause and take a moment to think on what it is about “Waldorf” that attracts them and IF s/he even understands where it comes from….
"Many people are very interested in Waldorf philosophies but tend to want to turn away from anything Anthroposophical… I understand that and each person makes his or her own choice, however, I do firmly believe that respect for Anthroposophy should be acknowledged, because after all, if there was no Anthroposophy, there would be no Waldorf."
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:22pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Martha, I don't use Waldorf. pretty much I won't take the risk. But mostly I am not interested in using someone else's directions for most things anyway. I have never been tempted to look for anything like what you've said you want.
I am not a theologian, neither is my husband nor my priest. I have no one local to me that could say for sure if I was avoiding Steiner's teaching in a program that claimed inspiration from a condemned philosophy. I wouldn't be able to know what if anything was there.. and the prudent part of a prudential decision here is that we'd be able to get accurate information on things of that sort.
I very much do not think that if you take certain generic activities and put enough of them together that you get Steiner's philosophy.. that's giving it way to much power that there would be some sort of natural progression from *good* arts and crafts and traditional stories and history that would somehow meld into Steiner's methodology and error.
But I could not (myself or local resources).. come even close to the training of a professional theologian who could read about Steiner and help draw those type of conclusions.
For myself, it can not come from Waldorf.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:22pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Quote:
| For me, it's not enough (and never has been) to just say, "That looks nice," and bring it home. I'm the type that has to read through textbooks, pre-read the books my children read and do a lot of research before I switch textbooks, materials or approaches. |
|
|
Yes. Of course. I do that as well. If I was just getting whatever was pretty, I wouldn't bother with this thread. And it's why I'm actually looking through OM.
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:26pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
oh I guess I did miss saying one part of why I wouldn't take something that claims Waldorf. Why should I doubt that they are what they say they are? If a program says they're Waldorf, if it says they use Waldorf philosophy, yes even if it says they're inspired by Waldorf, they are claiming that Waldorf is a good thing when I know from the Church that it's full of errors.
I just won't choose to believe that the very people who made the program and claim Waldorf then don't include it.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
LisaR
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2226
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:47pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Martha wrote:
Unless you get the info laid out for you in the OM syllabus?
Because the only way anyone would see anything steiner/waldorf in that is if the had already read his teachings. (Nevermind whether his calling it his makes it so.)
Having not read his teachings enough to know, does that make it okay? Or worse? |
|
|
I could not financially support any organization which provided materials supporting Steiner and his works.
I would ask myself, is this a need or a want for myself and my family?
When I did some soul searching about some of this a few weeks back, I realized the spiritual cost/risk would be far too great and certainly not necessary for our home.
we are only held culpable for what we know, however, I, like guitarnan and perhaps many others feel compelled to dive in and research the origins, intent, and source of almost anything that I bring into my home, whether it be specifically for our homeschool, or media, etc.
this is work sometimes!!
This is why I am SO grateful for 4Real for allowing and facilitating such rich discussions such as these.
I need the support and encouragement to really dig deep and learn more, even if it is painful, or even if I don't want to sometimes!
I even have been able to apply the foundation of this thread to other issues I've encountered.
I can think of other organizations and groups which even might look very "catholic" and appealing from the outside, but if one were to study the History, Intent, or life of the founder, for example, it would not point to Truth and Beauty as it might appear to at first glance.
I did a bit of reading on four different Waldorf websites, following the FAQ's links and the parent links.
They all spoke about how the intent, through even the smallest of paint strokes or simplest of rhymes is to "light the way" or "lead" the child gently to discover for themselves the beauty of Steiner's philosophy.
__________________
Lisa
dh Tim '92
Joseph 17
Paul 14
Thomas 11
Dominic 8
Maria Gianna 5
Isaac Vincent 9/21/10! and...
many little saints in heaven!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:50pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
No I would not presume they wouldn't have waldorf elements or other errors. Just as I wouldn't buy protestant stuff and not expect errors.
For the most part I have done my best to avoid both as they are both founded on error. (One made up by Steiner. The other the opinions of heretics.)
However, I sit here looking at this OM stuff and am not exaggerating when I say that if someone finds this upsetting, then I fail to see how abeka would less than blasphemy. Truely, OM does not attempt to teach religion at all, much less teach it falsely. I see nothing NA.
I think Steiner is given more credit than he earned. I think there very much would be a waldorf style without him. Bc it appears waldorf is simply a mixture learning methods, many of which were being developed by CM or MM or others at approx the same periods.
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Natalia
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1343
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
For me there is a question that begs to be asked. If Waldorf can't be separated from Steiner, where does that leave Serendipity? What percent of Serendipity is Waldorf inspired, influenced or whatever other term there is?
BTW, I am not trying to stir up trouble or hurt anybodies feelings, I think if we want to be honest and be congruent with the purpose of this forum, this is a question that needs to be dealt with, I think.
Hitting post with trepidation,
__________________
Natalia
http://pannuestrodecadadia.blogspot.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
LisaR
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2226
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 1:59pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Martha wrote:
However, I sit here looking at this OM stuff and am not exaggerating when I say that if someone finds this upsetting, then I fail to see how abeka would less than blasphemy. Truely, OM does not attempt to teach religion at all, much less teach it falsely. I see nothing NA.
I think Steiner is given more credit than he earned. |
|
|
did you see all of the parent resources at OM website? it took one click for me to be in the thick of blasphemy.
I can look at Abeka (yuck, IMHO) and at least see that these are my separated brethern, the same with other Christian homeschool suppliers. This,(Waldorf) however, does not have a foundation even 10% on truth.
The Saints wrote often about their struggles with evil, which often would come to them under the auspices of something beautiful, tantilizing, soothing.
I think of the serpent in the garden. if the serpent were super-annoying and obviously evil, Eve would most likely have had an easier go of it.
Natalia, I am grappling with your same question.
__________________
Lisa
dh Tim '92
Joseph 17
Paul 14
Thomas 11
Dominic 8
Maria Gianna 5
Isaac Vincent 9/21/10! and...
many little saints in heaven!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2010 at 2:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Natalia, I think that's a fair question. I think that it also can be very tricky to discuss on a board. It's so hard to read tone and body language.
I've posted my opinion clearly just a bit ago. If it claims Waldorf, then I won't choose to doubt it.
I have never looked at Serendipity at all to even know if it does claim Waldorf in any way or not.
And I don't doubt the good intentions of Catholics who choose to use something I see as questionable. I think there may still be a lot of confusion over the seriousness of the Church's documents that condemn Steiner and what that actually means. And because it's outside of the norm, we may all tend to revert to the more typical "take whats good and leave the rest.. because we can't wrap our brains around the difference or why that one might be worse than others.. because we can see how bad some things are.
But then maybe that's exactly why it's condemned because it is hard to see just how bad it is for most of us without serious theological training.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Philosophy of Education
Topic: Article on Waldorf elements (
Topic Closed)
