Re: [wc] Re: wc troll infected. was: How important are the Temparaments in Waldorf education
- Hi Jenn,
You wrote: "I've only seen damage from public schools. Hideous damage."
While I am in favor of educational reform (pretty well everywhere) and have my own serious concerns with mainstream *and* private education I can honestly say that I've known some excellent public schools and teachers and have chatted with hundreds of young people in North America and Europe with positive things to say about their public school experiences. I wonder if your own personal experiences might be jading your views of public education today? Or have you really "ONLY seen damage from public schools?" The public versus private school discussion is useful, IMO, because apart from ideological differences between models of education, it points to problems of grouping children in school communities based on family income. In Brazil, for example, the widening gap between rich and poor can be traced to education. Poor kids go to public schools while rich kids do private. This dynamic is creeping across the Americas and bothered me very much during our time in Waldorf. It is - IMO - a crying shame and a reason I now fully support public education . . . with reforms.
You wrote: "So... as a rhetorical questions--where do you think children should go to get educated, alternatively?"
I'm not sure that speaking in terms of "public schools" as one group is of any more use than thinking that "alternative schools" are another like-minded group. Waldorf and Sudbury Valley models are both private/alternative but diametrically opposed ideologically. I believe public education needs WAY MORE diversity. It is starting to happen but stigmas often get in the way. "Alternative" still has a negative connotation. I am certainly in the minority and in some areas I might have more in common with you than with many of my Waldorf Critic peers - funny how that works, huh <g>? Much of that discussion is outside the scope of (and rules) this list but briefly: Standardized testing is usually a bad idea. Report cards? No thanks. Hell, I think institutionalized education is outdated and potentially harmful to many children. And there's a good chunk of research to back this up. Personally, I'm a fan of democratic ed, where children are directly involved in THEIR education (see, fe, John Dewey's 'Democracy and Education' for starters), but I also realize that *different strokes for different folks* is the way of a healthy tomorrow. One size does not fit all.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- On 25 May 2011 22:21, Frank Thomas Smith <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
>Who believes in the truth of the second sentence? I can't speak for
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "alicia h." <zzzooey@...> wrote:
> > On 18 May 2011 16:45, Frank Thomas Smith <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes the Millennium Trilogy is fiction, and despite being an all-time worldwide bestseller is a whopping good story -the first volume's title in Swedish is "Men Who Hate Women" in English: "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" (silly title). But Alicia, a Swede, doesn't like it, making her the only person in the world who doesn't (who I know). But then she doesn't like Waldorf education either. Maybe the rest of the WC denizens here don't either - which wouldn't surprise me.
> > > Frank
> > >
> > >
> > Forget what I wrote. Frank's entirely right. It *is* a whopping good
> > story. If you get past the first chapter(s).
> > But I'm still not a fan of waldorf, so I'm not sure about the implications...
> > -a
> But my dear Alicia, if you are a fan of Millennium you *must* be a fan of Waldorf. Just as if you were an anthroposophist you *must* be a Nazi or inclined to same, albeit unconsciously. You will of course recognize the first sentence to be nonsense. Why, then, do you fail to recognize the second sentence, often elaborated ad nauseum, not to mention ad hominem by Peter, as nonsense as well.
Peter, obviously, but I don't have the impression that that's what
he's saying... To say that to be an anthroposophist you must be a nazi
(and so forth) is as nonsensical as saying an anthroposophist couldn't
possibly be a nazi as well as an anthroposophist.