Editorial
He has written for Humanising Language Teaching about “Translating in the English Classroom” (8/6 November 2006) and “Traps in Teaching Grammar” (9/1 January 2007).

Rudolf Steiner and ELT? A Reply to Tony Cañadas’ Article

Stefan Rathert, Turkey

Stefan Rathert is a teacher at Kahramanmaraş University, Turkey.
E-mail: srathert@ksu.edu.tr

Menu

Introduction
Steiner, Waldorf education, Anthroposophy
Practical activities – Steiner and ELT?
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Tony Cañadas asks in HLT 11/4 August 2009 How Rudolf Steiner’s theories apply to ELT. Based on a set of principles which underlie Waldorf education and some remarks on anthroposophy Cañadas presents five practical activities, which the author claims to give “the child a real sense of freedom”.

For two main reasons, I think, Cañadas’ article cannot remain without contradiction. The first reason refers to the validity of Rudolf Steiner’s “theory” and the second one to the impact of Steiner’s ideas on teaching in general and on ELT exemplified in the activities given by Cañadas in particular. Therefore, discussing Cañadas article I shall also challenge views of anthroposophy.

Steiner, Waldorf education, Anthroposophy

Rudolf Steiner, who is introduced by Cañadas with not less than nine “professions”, is described as an advocate of a not more closely defined “ethical individualism”. Cañadas claims that Steiner’s ideas play a vital role in foreign language learning. The author then reports a set of principles that are applied in Waldorf schools. According to these principles children up to the age of seven

• should be exposed to “play, drawing, storytelling, nature study and natural things”,
• shouldn’t learn to read,
• should learn to write before they learn to read.

Moreover, “links between art and science” should be found, enthusiasm in children should be generated; instead of teaching “a particular set of beliefs” children should be provided with “a moral lead”, and learning should not be carried out for exams exclusively.

The problems I have with this set of principles is not only that I cannot understand what exactly is meant with “moral lead” or “nature study”/”natural things” or how the links between art and science are set up, but also that these principles are at least partially not well based on research. While it is undisputed that enthusiasm and learning for its own sake as well as integrating art in the everyday school life can have positive effects on learning, a minimum of fairness demands to emphasise on the fact that precepts such as children up to the age of seven shouldn’t learn to read or learning to write should precede learning to read, are subjects of controversy. There are some examples of imprecision in the terminology used to explain the principles, when Cañadas, for instance, says that Waldorf education helps develop young people “into free, moral and integrated individuals and to help every child to fulfill his or her destiny” (the quotation is identical to the introductory paragraph of the article “Waldorf education” in wikipedia – did Cañadas plagiarise the article or the article writer(s) Cañadas?). I would really like to know in what respect Waldorf education leads young people to “free, moral and integrated individuals” and what “free”, “moral” and “integrated” mean in this context, respectively.

There is little scientific basis that supports these principles; there is, however, a construct of ideas which builds the basis for these principles and which can be studied in the voluminous work of Rudolf Steiner himself. It is important to point out that Steiner’s ideas have not been expanded by other anthroposophists let alone have become a subject of questioning in the anthroposophical movement. Steiner, who defined his own doctrine as science, occult science, divine science or spiritual science (Geisteswissenschaft), described anthroposophy as a process of acquiring the ability of clairvoyance in order to see directly into spiritual reality. This process goes along with suppression of intellectualising. After running through such a process the clairvoyant will be enabled (as it was Steiner) to read the so-called Akasha Chronicle, an important (even if only existing in Steiner’s imagination!) source for Steiner’s doctrine. “This is not a chronicle in the ordinary sense of a historical text. Instead it consists in the supersensual traces of past events” (Hansson, 1991). It is of fundamental importance that the main source of anthroposophy remains hidden for those who have not reached the level of clairvoyance – “the source of insight in anthroposophy is a fiction for non-esotericist” (Badewien, 2006).

Having had a look at the process of acquiring knowledge in anthroposophy I shall give some brief comments on the anthroposophical view of child development and its impacts on Waldorf education. Anthroposophy claims a development of the human being in 7-year-periods following the stages of the physical body, the etheric body, the astral body and the ‘I’: The stage up to the age of 7, for example, is characterised by the only wish to imitate and not by curiosity (which is as we know inconsistent to insights of developmental psychology). Following Steiner’s doctrines which postulate repetition and imitation for young learners, critical thinking is harmful and intellectualism has to be avoided and is reserved for “I-bodies” (after the age of 21). The teacher in Waldorf schools functions as a “beloved authority” (Rudolf Steiner) – this is obviously an alternative draft to the concept of learner autonomy. Also Steiner’s belief in karma and reincarnation, which leads, for example, to the idea that a disabled person was a liar in his/her former life, should be mentioned when Waldorf education is dealt with. To give another example, left-handedness is seen as a sign of bad karma and therefore left-handed pupils are forced to become right-handed.

Throwing a glance at anthroposophy (without making a claim to be complete) I hope I have made clear that anthroposophy is not a science in academic terms and that Steiner’s work is not a theory but a collection of beliefs. Indeed, anthroposophy is a mixture of streams, influenced by philosophical and religious movements at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, namely the Theosophical Society, as Zander (2007) has worked out in a comprehensive study. Anthroposophy has always been an alternative draft to the impacts of Enlightenment (Aufklärung) with its strong focus on reason and to the predominance of natural science with its strong focus on the physical world. Having mentioned the time anthroposophy originated it is hardly surprising that Waldorf education (understood as the pedagogical outcome of anthroposophy) included, for instance, some ideas of Reformpädagogik (educational progressivism), which regarded practical orientation (for example role play) essential in the learning process. On the other hand – and in sharp contrast to educational progressivism, Waldorf education does not regard problem solving, critical thinking, learner autonomy desirable in the classroom (see Zander, 2007, chapter 15 for the pedagogical environment, in which Waldorf education originated, and its ambiguous relation to Reformpädagogik). This anti-intellectual approach and the obscure construct of ideas that back up Waldorf education make it in fact a reactionary education, and there are many reports describing school life as a sort of indoctrination of pupils, when, for example, the myths of Atlantis (about which Steiner learnt from the Akasha Chronicle) is taught as a reality in history lessons at German Waldorf schools (Colin, 2001).

Basis for the curricula of Waldorf schools are the writings of Steiner. Keeping that in mind, I could write in more detail about the unsurprising fact (since there are obviously racist passages in Steiner’s work) that Waldorf schools have been accused for imposing racist ideas on young people, or I could point out that – according to an official report – half of the Waldorf pupils are not admitted to the state school leaving examination (comparable to the A-levels in British school system) due to weak performance (Colin, 2001). But I should like to point out that there is an obvious interest and acceptance of Waldorf education and its institutions – Zander (2007) remarks to this point that a dogmatic and authoritarian theory does not exclusively lead to a bad pedagogy (p.1363). In fact, the “esoteric”, “holistic”, “creative”, “spiritual-aesthetic”, etc. approach of Waldorf schools, which paints an image that is strikingly different from the grey, loveless, demotivating picture of state school system, exerts a growing fascination over parents. The question is just if that what is under the surface keeps what the image promises.

Practical activities – Steiner and ELT?

In his description of Waldorf education and anthroposophy Cañadas draws a thoroughly positive picture and this description finds its continuation in the practical activities he presents. Studying these activities I could not really understand what the connection was to Waldorf education and anthroposophy as described by Cañadas in his article, let alone how they were specifically related to ELT. Of course, the activities are obviously designed to be carried out in an atmosphere of piece and quiet that is claimed to be typical for Waldorf education. There is no doubt that a positive atmosphere in the group of learners can result in better learning results. The activities presented by Cañadas, however, are so vague that they can mean all or nothing. It would be much more interesting for the reader if Cañadas had worked out how the activities could be embedded in a meaningful set of lesson aims in order to result in effective learning. In the activity “Free choice project”, for example, how are 11-12-year-old learners able to “choose a topic they want to talk about” and then to “talk about it for the rest of the class”. How is necessary vocabulary provided (according to Cañadas “the widest range of interest topics” is dealt with)? How is it made sure that the students who are listening are able to follow the talking student? What exactly is the focus of the “free choice project” on – speaking (what subskills?), listening? What are the aims of such a project, what will students have learnt after the project? To address the activity “Role play”: Wouldn’t it be worth reflecting on potential problems in administering a role play in which students have to choose a different sexual identity in order “to break-up with the barrier of traditional sexism?” Would this activity be such an enormous success as in Cañadas’ class if I tried it in my class with a proportion of 100% Muslim students?

Experience has taught me that it is, let’s say unrealistic, to say, “In my opinion students should never be obliged to do anything they don’t want to do.” It is unrealistic because students do not always learn when they are not guided by an instructor because they might be overwhelmed by the task and therefore unable to carry it out. In other words, telling students to speak about a topic they want to choose can result in silence. What is more, learning in the context of school is a structured process of acquiring skills or knowledge, and I simply don’t believe that the activities Cañadas presents really work. To be completely honest, they seem to me all sunshine and lollipops in their triviality. Finally: to praise the positive effects of relaxation through music and encouraging students to express their feelings (Hugging as a warmer exercise) is not really new.

Conclusion

I felt the need to write a reply to Tony Cañadas’ article for four reasons:

1. The description of Rudolf Steiner’s ideology given by Cañadas does not correspond to reality. Anthroposophy is not a theory let alone science, but an esoteric movement that is opposed to modernism defined as application of critical rationalism. To legitimate itself it claims to be science, a common strategy in European esoteric traditions (Hammer, 2001). Its scientific character is, however, generally not accepted in academic circles. It seems unrighteous not to point it out in an article about anthroposophy even if it is supported.
2. The style in which Cañadas reports the methods and aims of anthroposophy/Waldorf education implies that they help educate young people into “free, moral and integrated individuals” (Cañadas). In fact Waldorf education has become a matter of controversy in the way that it is accused of preventing young learners from developing critical thinking skills through a refusal of intellectualism.
3. Cañadas claims that Steiner’s theories “have a very important role in the learning of a new language” and Waldorf schools “have extraordinary innovations in the teaching world”. These claims are not proved or exemplified. Action-oriented teaching is definitely not an anthroposophical invention.
4. The practical activities presented by Cañadas are neither specifically connected to ELT nor do they reveal in how far they are genuine examples of Waldorf education. Even if we concede that they are only outlines of activities, they are prepared (and presented) so inadequately that it does not seem very convincing to think they might work in practice.

Humanising Language Teaching is a magazine that is open to new ideas away from the mainstream of ELT. This makes up the special charm of the magazine. HLT is also a magazine that publishes articles with a restricted academic demand – and there is nothing wrong about it. Nevertheless the editors should be careful about accepting papers that are based on abstruse “theories” and that try to put ideas into teaching reality that are highly controversial.

References

A remark: I had to use German literature in this article for two reasons: 1. Important literature on anthroposophy is published in German. 2. I am quite well informed about the situation in Waldorf schools in Germany but not in other countries; corresponding literature is mainly published in German. Allow me to apologize for doing so in an English-speaking magazine.

Badewien, J. (2006) Faszination Akasha-Chronik. Eine kritische Einführung in die Welt der Anthroposophie. Vortragsmanuskript. Tagung: Anthroposophie – kritische Reflexionen. Veranstaltet vom Kulturwissenschaftlichen Seminar, in Kooperation mit dem Graduiertenkolleg "Geschlecht als Wissenskategorie", Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 21.07.2006. Retrieved January 23, 2010 from: www2.hu-berlin.de

Tony Cañadas (2009) How do Rudolph Steiner’s Theories to E.L.T? HLT 11/4

Goldner, C. (2001) Äther-, Astral- und Ich-Leiber. Die obskure Welt von Anthroposophie und Waldorf-Pädagogik, in: Ribolits, E./Zuber, J. (Ed.): Karma und Aura statt Tafel und Kreide: Der Vormarsch der Esoterik im Bildungsbereich. Schulhefte-Verlag, Nr. 103, Wien, 2001. Retrieved January 23, 2010 from: www.fkpsych.de/psycho/anthroposophie.html

Hammer, O. (2001) Claiming Knowledge. Strategies of Epistemology from Theosophy to the New Age, E.J.Brill

Hansson, S.O. (1991) Is Anthroposophy Science? Conceptus XXV 64/1991, pp. 37-49.

Waldorf education (wikipedia article) Retrieved January 23, 2010 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf_education Zander, H. (2

007) Anthroposophie in Deutschland. Theosophische Weltanschauung und gesellschaftliche Praxis 1884-1945 (2 volumes), Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Please check the Train the Trainer course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the How to be a Teacher Trainer course at Pilgrims website.