Chapter 8- Case for Classic Waldorf
as 80% foundation for a Waldorf-Team Human K-12 Ed
Chapter Eight of a serializing of Growing Sustainable Children; and, Schools Worthy of Our Affection.
This is my best guess how, in the next 100 years, whole-child K-12 schooling can evolve worldwide.
DG-Waldorf-school growth curve
Naturally not every K-initiative blooms into a grade school. Cities such as St. Louis, MO required repeated, separate whole-child initiatives, until one of them took hold and grew into a Grades school. This pattern repeats often internationally.
I looked. I was unable to find any growth graph at all for Catholic nor for Montessori schools. I do understand both outnumber Waldorf schools by wide margins. As Waldorf private-independent saw a significant leveling off or decline in the USA since charters took over, I suspect charters had the same effect on Catholic and Montessori schools. Worldwide growth curves 2008–2018 for each form of education, interest me, if you know where any are.
Peter Curran’s Four Waldorf essentials
Peter Curran, graduate of Bowdoin College and long-time history teacher at The Waldorf School of Garden City, adopts a strategy similar to Henry Barnes’ in describing Waldorf education, but then ventilates it immediately to include, potentially, all schools.
Following his retirement in the late 1980s, Curran set down some of his ideas about Waldorf schools. He believed four “essentials” existed “without which no school (by whatever name) is a Waldorf School; and with which, any school is a Waldorf School.”
I. …As each child’s conscious awareness matures, it recapitulates the cultural epochs of all Mankind. Waldorf agrees with Emerson when he says all children go through a Greek period and a Roman period, etc. There is, then, a proper time and method, for particular subjects, to be taught.
II. Since no one destroys what one loves, reverence, awe and respect for the Earth should be fostered. An inkling of the spirituality of the Earth then comes into being.
III. An appreciation for the qualitative, as well as the quantitative, in all things, should be equally developed [this is shorthand for the awkward yet more precise “whole-brained” approach].
IV. Above all, the human being is honored as a spiritual (invisible) as well as a material-physical (visible) being.
International success of Waldorf theory-method
1985–1995, when AWSNA was active and robust, I remember being heartened by yearly reports how the first Waldorf school demonstration project was doing well in one new foreign country after another. Waldorf theory-method was adapting successfully to diverse local cultures, conditions and peoples. It was going viral! Waldorf trainees and teachers celebrated these reports of an ed framework 100 years old adapting itself naturally into multiple local cultures.
Q: Is there any culture without a Waldorf school in 2018?
A: Yes. Eskimo culture. Almost no more Eskimos. Those still around are too spread out.
The striking international success of Waldorf theory-method, across multiple major cultures, kept demonstrating the Waldorf approach as a solid foundation to build with, to build on. Some local assembly is always required.
Q: Can you provide a compare-contrast chart showing Waldorf in context with other additional, sustainable highly developed, highly nuanced holistic, whole-child, whole-person K-12 frameworks?
A: I would love to. What happens is by the time such charts are 2–3 years old, the K-12 school landscape is so changed, the chart is obsolete. Waldorf-methods doggedly remain the only sustainable and long-lived. Significant competitors proven to be sustainable, are still unknown to me. However, if Waldorf does NOT evolve in its second 100 years, significant whole-brained competitors will emerge.
The world might be more wonderful if Waldorf had had more robust competition.
Charter Waldorf and independent Waldorf folks are still freindly with each other. Staff and consultants can and do travel between these two circles — and why not?
So far to my knowledge, Classic Waldorf remains the only workable, easy to administrate, in-depth, system of K-12 whole-child ed yet proposed.
While all schools give at least lip service to matching curriculum topics and school “skills” to the most natural age in childhood to teach them in, Waldorf has 100 years of trial and error and documentation on this. This comprises a depth of “child development” wisdom and staged curriculum insights, approximately ten times of any other K-12 education known to the author as of 2021.
On the other hand, Waldorf’s historical skew towards introversion and abstractions, has made it less attractive and accessible to extraverts, who still run things generally.
A workable perception of and model for The Land of Childhood
Once an adult accepts the Land of Childhood is primarily INvisible, only perceptible as Unconscious Patterns of Sensitive Periods, we are halfway towards a good foundation for attempts at Waldorf-Team Human K-12 ed.
Brief history of “whole — person”
Q: Why was “whole — person” ever coined? Why was the phrase needed? Aren’t the generic words “humanity” and “humankind” good enough?
A: No. This is really Iain McGilchrist’s topic. What we can say here is “humanity” and “humankind” were hijacked and made into an abstractions by the left-brain, “thingified” as NLP says. The connotations of male interests, Old Testament, stern father, and male competition were then allowed to seep in and dominate these tender abstractions.
During and after WW II, the paternalism of the USA was largely benevolent. Its truly human values demonstrated admirably in the Marshall Plan.
The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program) was an USA initiative to aid Western Europe, in which the United States gave over $13 billion (nearly $110 billion in 2016 US dollars) in economic assistance to help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan
Beginning 1955, male-dominated Western imperialism found tho it could not expand thru direct military coercion, tanks, planes, soldiers; it could expand thru economic imperialism, covert operations; and, the subtle persuasion and Hidden Persuaders of advertising.
The novel The Ugly American (1958) was an early effort, parallel to the Beat Generation, to come to grips with the ethical-moral failures of a male-dominated, Western, imperialistic vision of the human being, capable of expanding (growing) only thru military and/or economic coercion. The novel was a bestseller and sold four million copies, about 10 million copies in 2018 terms. To Learn More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ugly_American
In 1963, after the successful asassination of John F. Kennedy, older, masculine dominator traits began re-asserting themselves, Oligarchy rising — again.
Do you know of the 1964 Berkeley Free Speech riots? Children born after WW II, agitated, began pushing on, dysfunctional, male-dominator (of which James Bond was an icon) norms. The kids began pushing back on collective social assumptions wedded to left-brain-only Thinking, Thinking divorced and dissociated from healthy Feeling.
“The thinking man’s cigarette”
1950s-1960s advertising used “thinking-for-yourself” as a status symbol, attempting to appeal to newly college educated consumers, newly affluent and upwardly-mobile. 1950s-1960s advertising celebrated individual choice: make a choice or switch your choice.
To perceive the earlier, more blatant Hidden Persuaders (1957), we simply get in our Advertising Time Machine and travel back to adds of the late 1950s:
dg-thinking-mans-cigarette1–4 all circa 1963
FYI Mr. Google has no images whatsoever for: thinking woman’s cigarette. What came much later, 1990, was Virginia Slims cigarette ads, the feminine version of the thinking man smoker.
dg-Virginia Slims cigarette ad
See more V-Slims ads HERE
Q: Why don’t we see ads like this anymore?
A: We do but corporate persuasion in ads is now more commonly not so blatant. Persuasion is present more subtly, beneath the humor and novelty, often up to 5–10 layers, where it’s more difficult to perceive and refute.
After the death of JFK, the paternalistic American Dream abandoned the cultural high ground of values. “God is dead” and the religion of corporate consumerism took the place of God.
By the late 1960s, building on Carl Jung and the activity of the Assoc. of Humanistic Psychology, a more clear focus on the existence of and value of the Child Within emerged.
The Inner Child becomes a thing
A brief history of the “inner child” is difficult to write. I and others have tried. One short version is: The “inner child” came into its own and became a thing, after publication of Your Inner Child of the Past by Hugh Missildine (1963). This book remains the single — and almost only very coherent and practical — book ever written on the inner child.
Then what? Inner Child was used occasionally in Fritz Perls’ Gestalt Therapy (1948–1969?). When Transactional Analysis (TA) began and Born to Win (1971) eventually became a multi-million best seller, a very large fraction of counselors, therapists and psychotherapists, and progressive MD’s began talking to patients about unresolved disturbances in the inner child as causative factors in psychosomatic physical conditions.
The Inner Child is difficult to separate from The Association for Humanistic Psychology (founded 1955, most active period: 1955–1975). AHP promoted, documented and spread many methods and successful therapy case studies of Inner Child work. In its early phases, AHP was Progressive academics, MD’s and housewives enthusiastic about humanism. In 1955 “Humanism” was not yet a mainstream meme.
Between 1955–1975 AHP continued to be the primary place for Progressive academics, MD’s and housewives to congregate. It quickly had a large influence in academia, then on graduate students; and finally, on everyone college-educated.
The two significant pockets of year-round activity at first were Philadelphia, PA, around The Children’s Inst. in Mt Airy, and San Francisco-Santa Cruz, activity from which NLP emerged in the early 1970s. Boston, MA and other Progressive pockets followed in the later 1970s.
“Whole-child” and “whole person” are 1970s permutations of “inner child.”
Whole-person > Whole Child > “Team Human”
Individuals may become more whole and free; yet, what if the challenge is replacing an expired civilization based on greed? Do you really want to go solo on this?
Progressive ideas travel quickly where and when they are demonstrated practically.
This was the case with Waldorf-methods in the 1980s-1990s especially. Apparently a vision of the whole-child can be communicated to parents and be brought to life anywhere it begins to be demonstrated. Local culture is always incorporated naturally.This is no guarantee of on-going, sure success. Cities in many countries have required repeated, separate whole-child initiatives until one of them took hold and grew into a Grades school.
A workable stage-development model exists
Wanting “whole-child education” is one thing. Manifesting a sustainable school requires leaping much further. I think this is why Classic Waldorf is such a revelation to many people. No other form of schooling I know of has a body of trial and error experimentation and literature to the 100 years of testing and literature based on RS’s ideas about child development.
I think once pointed out, it’s intuitively obvious to many, how a granular framework of child development can be used, as a framework, like a Christmas Tree, to hang on it, each tier (Grade) of tree ornaments (age-appropriate pieces of curriculum), for the child at each age 5 to 18.
Q: What’s at the top of this tree in your metaphor?
A: Any vision of our highest human capacity as conscious, balanced, wakeful awareness, local consensus agrees on. Any set of truly human values, which can inspire our more mundane activities, whichever values local consensus can come to agreement on. This happens uniquely in each school, in each group creating centripetal, center-seeking, coherence.
Q: Don’t Piaget and Erik Erickson’s stage-developmental theories support and underpin conventional K-12 curriculum and teaching?
A: In name only. If conventional public schools are the Emperor, he is naked here.
To be clear, Piaget’s 1936 developmental stages apply mostly to the development of cognition and Thinking. Erik Erickson’s later (1950, 1963) stage development theories apply more to characterological development — development of personality (changes in Feeling are acknowledged).
Both were embraced by humanistic psychology (1955–1985) and taught together as if they are complementary. Every counseling and every teacher training student was exposed to these and tested on them.
Q: Did conventional K-12 teaching and curriculum align themselves with these models of human development?
A: Not much from what I saw. Private Montessori schools famously align early childhood curriculum content and goals with Piaget’s stages. However if Montessori curriculum measures itself to stage-development wisdom past grade three — I could not find this. This may be intended. However, without a year by year parsing of curriculum topics; and, testing to see if the system is workable, after the marketing hoopla for a new system dies out, usually these systems have few adherents among working teachers keeping them alive. Waldorf’s K-12 curriculum system is a happy exception to this. Comments welcome.
Q: Did any stage-development theories become a common language for conventional public school teachers to measure their lesson planning choices against?
A: Not in the 100 inner city public schools I visited between 1991 and 2004. How about at your school?
It was a hundred times more common to find a mis-match between children’s actual ages and curriculum offered to them. One incident stands out, in a conventional Sacramento public school circa 2000, a lesson plan to teach kindergartners the categories of biology study. Thank God I was only an aide, not the teacher. The topic held the children’s interest for about 30 seconds.
More Waldorf graduates research
MARLENE, A 16-YEAR-OLD TENTH GRADER, had been a Waldorf student for all of her elementary school years. She tried the local public high school for ninth grade. In an interview with me, she emphasized that it was the “quality of the students’ thinking” that made her come running back to a Waldorf high school. Marlene enjoys playing several instruments, singing, making music with friends, drawing, painting, and “discovering what else interests me.” She attributes her broad range of interests and her love of learning to the opportunities provided by a Waldorf education (Easton, 1995, p. 246).
A tenth grade boy who had been in a Waldorf school only since ninth grade volunteered:
Before I came to Green Meadow Waldorf School, I was a jock. All I thought about was sports. I played baseball, soccer, hockey, and basketball, with no time for anything else. Here I became aware and open to other interests; music, poetry and eurythmy.(a movement art FN1) I still like sports but it’s no longer my whole life. (Easton, 1995, p. 275).
Successive interviews with more than 50 students, grades 7 to 12, reiterated this awareness that Waldorf schools provides “education with a difference.” Students speak of their school as a caring community. They recognize artistic work and the arts in the curriculum play a significant role in learning to think holistically about what is important in life. Students talk about learning to balance the intellectual with the artistic and the practical, to enjoy work but “not get lost in professionalism or materialism,” to be a “person beyond one’s work,” to “think for oneself and consider others” (pp. 2 9, 277). Many have strong social concerns that transcend their own self-interest: desire to help less privileged people, protect animals, and preserve the natural environment (Easton, 1995).
Waldorf educators strive to develop the aesthetic, spiritual, and interpersonal sensibilities of the child in ways that enrich, enliven, and reinforce intellectual knowing. By engaging the whole child in the learning process, “heart and hands, as well as head,” they find that children become more involved and enthusiastic about learning. Waldorf literature details its methods admirably.
In the United States, Waldorf schools are independent schools serving mostly students from families who can afford tuition; and, who like Steiner education. The great majority of schools have active scholarship programs for lower income families. In the U.S., the first school began in New York City in 1928. The movement in the U.S. grew slowly until 1965 when the eight existing schools formed the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America (AWSNA). There followed a period of escalating growth until now over 125 schools are affiliated with AWSNA (Jaeckel, 1996).
Excerpted from Educating the Whole Child, “Head, Heart, and Hands”: Learning from the Waldorf Experience Author(s): Freda Easton Source: Theory into Practice, Vol. 36, №2 …
The conventional fear of parents considering Classic Waldorf K-5 ed is, “Will my children become mired in childhood, not grow up, stay childified?”
In Classic Waldorf — when it works — children are invited to immerse themselves in the Land of Childhood, invited to complete all pre-puberty processes process — then after puberty — the whole agenda flips over. The invitations all change to wake up conscious awareness, focussing attention on conscious creation for both self and for others.
Can a K-12 curriculum system do this outside of Waldorf theory-method? I guess so. I haven’t seen this outside of Waldorf. I’m open to it.
Q: Why is this rare outside Waldorf?
A: First, parents mistrust the process of Childhood. Then after puberty, parents mistrust the process of critical-independent thinking.
Consider Grade 12 graduates of a successful Waldorf education. They have absorbed and extracted all the learning and benefits of being a child: They felt as a child feels, lived as a child lived, tolerated feeling childlike, learned what they could from authorities and adults, more expert than a child.
When Grade 12 Classic Waldorf grads get to college, the Waldorf graduates are done with childhood. At age 18–19 they are ready, willing, able and wanting to explore the learning and benefits possible thru being an adult. They want to feel — not more childlike — but more “at cause” and to feel and exercise their own growing individual, personal agency.
My notes from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC9QgaYNBnw&t=411s Watch for yourself. PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO for yourself to hear Eugene reporting on the significance of stuffed animals for Cornell University students.
To Learn More on how Waldorf grads cope
http://www.rosejourn.com/index.php/rose/article/viewFile/125/145
