Waldorf Education

Waldorf education is a humanistic approach to education that was developed by Rudolph Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, in 1919.  The approach advocates creativity and stresses the role of the imagination in learning.  According to Why Waldorf Works, the approach helps students to gain a greater level of confidence than an ordinary school, as the students are encouraged to think independently, and are always rewarded to see their artwork hanging around the room.  Steiner proposed that there should be both a creative and an analytical side to learning, and believed that students needed to be taught in both ways at equal rates to help the children remain interested in what they were learning as they continued to learn and develop.

I completely agree that the Waldorf approach creates a more well rounded student, as each child is given a multidisciplinary style of learning.  Kids are required to take classes including drama, art, music, and other sorts of crafts in addition to the usual science, math, english, and social studies.  I believe that this approach can be closely tied to the idea of multiple intellligences, and the idea that every child is unique and that they are bound to be smart in different ways.  Everybody has their strong suits and their weaknesses, but it is important to let a child explore everything so that they can find out for themselves.  The teachers at schools that advocate for the Waldorf approach also seem to be happier, as they are given more leeway to decide upon the curriculum.  Lessons are more uniquely crafted to suit both the teacher and the students.  It seems as if the Waldorf approach provides a much more enthusiastic style of learning, and provides just what every student needs: encouragement. 

How to Properly Teach Kids About the Holidays

When I was in elementary school, we celebrated Thanksgiving and Columbus day by having a party and discussing how America was "discovered."  We were taught the rhyme that says "In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue.." and were told that this was the year he "founded" America (even though the Vikings had previously been to the land, and the Native Americans had been living there for thousands of years).  We also studied the "first Thanksgiving," and were taught that it was a day of celebration for the Pilgrims who survived the harsh travels from England.  To me, it was the day that the Pilgrims and the Native Americans sat down for their first meal together.  But is any of this really true?  Is it fair to teach children these same stories we learned as kids, even though we know they are false?

According to an article from Elementary School Issues, it is extremely important for us as educators to formulate a different way to teach kids about these holidays--and I completely agree.  Certainly it is a good idea to teach kids about the importance of giving thanks with the holiday soon approaching, but it is not fair to teach children stories that they will later find out are false.  It is incredibly important when teaching children about Thanksgiving to not refer to the "Indians" or "Native Americans" in the past tense, and to explain to kids that they still exist today.  Many Native Americans in todays society are pushing to rename Thanksgiving "Native American Day," in the hopes to educate the public about their proper history.  For them, the arrival of the Pilgrims was not a positive event whatsoever--it marked a day in which the the Pilgrims tried to impose their culture on them and take their land.  When teaching children about Thanksgiving, we should be very careful not to tell them falsehoods, so it would be a good idea to steer clear of putting on a pageant, such as I did in Elementary School, where kids dress as stereotypical Native Americans and Pilgrims.  Perhaps instead we should take the time to educate the kids about the culture of the Native Americans,  and to read a story from the perspective of a Native American.  Of course we should teach our kids to be Thankful for what they have and to celebrate Thanksgiving--we should just be careful to stay clear of the "first Thanksgiving" story that we were taught as kids.

Community Service

Recently there has been much discussion in the media about whether social justice is being properly taught within the classroom.  Assuming that issues pertaining to social justice should be discussed within the classroom, what are some ways that a teacher could integrate social justice into the classroom?  San Francisco State University has released an article with ten different recommendations, and one that really struck my interest was that community service should be a mandatory component for students to complete.

I had not thought about this conclusion until reading the article, but I completely agree that at least a small community service requirement should be given.  As stated in Creating Classrooms for Equity and Social Justice, "traditional classrooms often leave little room for student involvement and initiative."  What better way to get students involved within the community than to have them do community service?  The students will be taught what it means to give back to a community, and depending on what the task entails, it could potentially address many of the inequalities schools fail to confront.  For instance, one of the boys I babysit attends a private elementary school, and his class goes to the homeless shelter once a month to help feed the people there.  At first I was incredibly surprised to hear that the children were allowed to do that at such a young age, and I assumed that it would be quite a frightening experience for him--but while we were talking more about his experience, it became apparent that he truly enjoyed the trips to the homeless shelter.  He told me that he felt good while helping feed people that had less than he did, which was quite profound to hear from the mouth of an elementary-aged boy.  Hearing stories such as this leads me to believe that a community service component would be a great addition to the current curriculum.  I think community service would help the students learn first hand about social issues that may not regularly be covered within the classroom.  It would help the kids learn life lessons that are just as important as any math or spelling lesson could be.

The Educational Platforms of Obama and Romney

With the presidential election coming up in just a matter of days, one issue that is close to the heart of parents, teachers, and students alike is that of education.  To bring some light upon the subject, our class has been asked to research some of the major platform differences, and it certainly is hard to tell which sources are legitimate, as the liberal and conservative sources hold an equal bias--so I will try my best to leave out all biases in my synopsis.

Obama has previously freed states of the requirements of the Bush-era No Child Left Behind law.  No Child Left Behind focused on standardized testing, and schools were punished if they failed to meet the improvement standards.  Obama replaced NCLB with "Race to the Top" which rewards states for meeting the requirements rather than punishing them.  According to an article in The Quad, many republicans have labeled his plan as "Race to Nowhere," as they believe he is throwing the money away unnecessarily that is being given to the schools as a reward for meeting the expectations and goals set by the state.  Obama also supports a set of common academic standards known as the Common Core, and has successfully increased Pell Grants available to college students as well as other forms of financial aid.

The ideals of Romney's platform were a little harder to find since he does not yet have experience in office, but the main focus of many articles on the matter is that he supports Bush's No Child Left Behind law and has said that he will push congress to reinstate the law if he is elected into office.  His education platform has been named "A Chance for Every Child."  He has said that the testing, charter-school incentives, and teacher evaluation standards of "Race to the Top" are good standards to have, but he believes there should be less government intervention as far as education is concerned.  Romney also wants to get rid of the increased federal student aid given by Obama, as he believes it causes the tuition to increase.

Both Obama and Romney do seem to have pretty clear cut ideas as far as their educational platforms are concerned.  Of course there are many other topics to be considered as well with the election coming to a close, but the topic of education is one of the large focuses of the election indeed.  It will be interesting to see what happens!