The Rudolf Steiner Archive

12. Speech at the Parents' Night

[ 1 ] Ladies and gentlemen! What I would like to present on this occasion is not so much a lecture as an opportunity to foster the broadest possible understanding among those involved in the administration and work of the Waldorf School and the parents of our school. The reason for this is that I truly consider this mutual understanding and cooperation between the teachers, other individuals involved in the administration of the Waldorf School, and the parents to be something extraordinarily necessary and significant.

[ 2 ] Allow me to begin with an experience I had just recently, in order to use this experience to illustrate how important the question I have alluded to is. Over the past few weeks, I’ve had the opportunity to participate in the celebrations held in Stratford-upon-Avon, England, to mark Shakespeare’s birthday. And this Shakespeare festival was, in fact, one that was entirely shaped by and influenced by issues of education. It was organized by individuals who are deeply interested in children’s education and public education. One could also say that, in a sense, the world of Shakespearean art took a back seat during the entire festival, for what was discussed were contemporary educational issues. On this occasion, one of the small—or perhaps even significant—effects of the educational course I held at Christmas at our Goetheanum in Dornach also became apparent; this course was attended by very people who were involved in organizing this Shakespeare celebration.

[ 3 ] Now there is a boarding school near London. It is not yet very large, but this boarding school is led by a person who attended the Dornach Course and was inspired there to introduce what we may now call Waldorf education—the Waldorf educational system—into this boarding school, perhaps even as it expands. We were invited to visit this educational institution. During the visit, various questions arose concerning the current administration and what could be done to transfer the spirit of the educational system cultivated here at the Waldorf School to that institution.

[ 4 ] One issue in particular came up for discussion, and that was this: the leaders said, “Yes, we actually manage quite well with the children; every year we take in the small number of children that we are able to accommodate given the size of our institution. But the most difficult part is working with the parents.” It is difficult because, after all, the older generation everywhere—and this is certainly an international phenomenon—holds very specific views today about how education must be conducted. There are many reasons why parents send their children to this or that institution. When it really comes down to deviating slightly from what they’ve grown accustomed to, disagreements between the school and the parents arise very easily. And that is something that is truly intolerable, especially in a free school system. Now, at the boarding school I am referring to, there are very specific difficulties of this nature. I do not intend to offer criticism, nor do I wish to make any recommendations. I simply want to speak about the facts. At this boarding school, even though it is a boarding school, there are no staff members at all. The school is run entirely by the children and teachers, which means that these students and teachers have to mop the floors, wash the dishes, plant the vegetables, and tend to the chickens so they lay eggs—I could go on and on. In addition, the children take on all sorts of tasks, giving the impression that things are run differently there than in some other boarding schools. The children also have to cook—in other words, they do everything from early morning until late evening. And it’s clear to see that the teachers and educators play an active role in this. Well, I don’t mean to recommend this or offer any criticism. I just want to present the facts. Then, when the children come home for vacation and describe what they have to do, their parents often feel that this is not the mental image they had and that they simply cannot understand it. That is why, in this case, it is quite difficult to maintain harmony with the parents. - I’m only citing this example to illustrate the feeling one has when it comes to taking education and instruction seriously—the feeling that it’s necessary to act and work in full harmony with the children’s parents.

[ 5 ] Well, we are, of course, in a different situation at the Waldorf School. We do not have a boarding school; we have a school, and we must teach the lessons while, of course, keeping the educational principle in mind. Nevertheless, you can rest assured of this: we must regard cooperation with parents as a fundamental element of everything we consider our task at the Waldorf School. In the course of running the school, countless questions continually arise regarding the children’s well-being and welfare, their progress, and their health—both physical and emotional—and these questions can only be resolved in collaboration with the parents. Therefore—and while we must, of course, take the circumstances into account—it should actually become increasingly necessary to expand these parent-teacher conferences and make them a more frequent feature of our school administration.

[ 6 ] Our Waldorf school is meant to be a free school not only in name but in its very essence, and precisely because it is meant to be such a free school, we rely on the support of parents to an exceptionally high degree. It is my conviction that nothing can bring all parents deeper satisfaction than our desire to work together with them.

[ 7 ] A free school is the Waldorf school. You see, ladies and gentlemen, what a free school is actually supposed to mean—this is something that must be said again and again, and that cannot be emphasized strongly enough, for the simple reason that today it is hardly possible for wider circles to recognize the absolute need for such a free school. We are up against centuries of prejudice, specifically in the following way:

[ 8 ] One need not look far back in the history of humanity to find that, to a considerable degree, the school system—particularly elementary education—was very free. But the freedom of the school system at that time had led to a very high number of illiterate people, and only a few individuals sought a formal education. Now, as human civilization developed, the desire to demand a certain educational foundation for social life grew increasingly strong in civilized regions. I cannot explain here exactly how this desire to demand a certain educational foundation for social life came about; but this desire arose at a time when people had renounced their devotion to the old gods and now expected all blessings and all that is good for the development of humanity from one God—the God-State. And Central Europe, in particular, was the region where people were especially eager to see in this “God-State” not only every other possible source of well-being, but also the source of well-being for the upbringing of children.

[ 9 ] It was once taken for granted that Parliament, large council meetings, and so on, were occasions where genius flourished. This was true even when the individuals participating in these parliamentary sessions did not seem particularly enlightened. The prevailing opinion was that when people come together, they become wise. And then they will be able to make the right decisions on all matters.

[ 10 ] There were, however, a few individuals who also possessed quite a good, deep understanding—such as the poet Rosegger—who held—forgive me for using such a word—a different opinion. Rosegger coined the saying: “One is a human being; several are people; many—those are animals.”

[ 11 ] That is put rather radically, but in any case it contradicts the view that has emerged, particularly in recent centuries, that one can find in everything that resembles the state the correct approach to raising children. And so our school system has simply grown, step by step, in the belief that it could not be any other way—that everything pertaining to the school system must necessarily be determined by the state.

[ 12 ] Well, a free school is one that enables teachers and educators to do everything that, based on their understanding of human nature, their understanding of the world, and their love for children, they directly consider essential and believe should be incorporated into the educational system. — A school that is not free is one where the teacher must ask: What is prescribed for the first grade, what is prescribed for the second grade, and how must the lesson be structured according to the law?

[ 13 ] A free school is one in which the teachers have a very specific understanding—which forms the basis of their work—of how a child grows, what physical and spiritual powers lie within the child, and which physical and spiritual powers need to be developed in the child; where the teacher can organize what he or she must do every day and every hour based on this understanding of human nature and out of love for children. People do not have a very strong sense of how fundamentally different the unfree school is from the free school. For the teacher’s true educational and instructional abilities can only develop in the free school.

[ 14 ] Because people currently have virtually no real sense of these things, that is why it is so difficult to make further progress with a free and liberated school system. We must not allow ourselves to harbor any illusions. Just a few hours before I traveled here, I received a letter informing me that, after a long period of effort to establish a school similar to this Waldorf School in another city in Germany, the proposal had been rejected. This is a clear sign that the current trend is not moving toward promoting a free school system. Therefore—and this is what I would like to urge the parents of our dear schoolchildren in particular—we must cherish and nurture this Waldorf School that we now have, that we have fought to establish, where, through the genuine, free initiative of the teaching staff, the children are to be shaped into well-rounded, capable, and healthy individuals. We must realize that, in the face of today’s prejudices, it will not be easy to establish anything else even remotely similar to this Waldorf School. And in this regard, we may already point out that this Waldorf School—even though it has been in existence for less than three years—is something that is currently, we may say, the subject of discussion throughout the entire civilized world. For you see, it is, after all, of some significance—think of what I said about that school near London—that a group of people have come together to establish a Waldorf school there.

[ 15 ] We can also consider this question from a much broader perspective. This perspective is that we are, after all, now faced with the necessity of doing something to ensure that the German spirit regains its rightful place in the world. But the German spirit—you can be assured of this—will only attain its significance if, above all else, the spiritual content of this German spirit is brought to prominence in the world. And once it is presented to the world in the right way, people will come to desire it. They will become aware that they need it.

[ 16 ] To achieve this, we must truly delve into the very depths of this German essence and create from within them. And this is particularly evident in such a vehement, at times tumultuous educational movement as the one witnessed at the Shakespeare Festival. This demonstrates that there is a need throughout the world: new impulses must be introduced into the educational system. It is a matter of concern for all of civilized humanity that we can no longer continue with the old forms.

[ 17 ] The fact is: through the principles cultivated in Waldorf schools, we have something to contribute to the questions being raised around the world regarding education and teaching. However, we also face almost all the prejudices of the entire world, and it is increasingly coming to the point where at least the lowest grades of the public school system are to be deprived of their freedom. It is extraordinarily difficult to fight against these prejudices. The Waldorf School can only fight back by truly drawing upon the free creative power of its teachers to bring out in the children what can only be brought out through such free creative power.

[ 18 ] To achieve this, however, we need the close, harmonious cooperation of parents. And at one of the parents’ meetings I was able to attend, I already pointed out that because we are striving for a free school system, we depend on finding understanding—deep understanding—among parents. If we find this understanding, then we will be able to work effectively. And then, perhaps, we will be able to bring to life what the Waldorf school is truly meant to be.

[ 19 ] At that time, I emphasized how our aim must be to draw from an understanding of the child’s essence and physical nature everything that is to become the subject of instruction and education. Such observation of children—since it is, after all, an observation of human beings—is only possible if one strives for an understanding of the whole human being, as is sought through anthroposophy. We must say again and again: We are not at all concerned with, for example, introducing anthroposophy into the school. Parents will have no cause to complain that we want to introduce anthroposophy as a worldview into the school. But just as we avoid introducing a worldview—anthroposophy—into the school, we would like to strive to apply that pedagogical skill—which can only come from anthroposophical training—in the conduct of lessons and in our approach to the child. - We have made the Catholic children available to the Catholic pastor and the Protestant children to the Protestant pastor, and we offer non-denominational religious instruction only to those whose parents specifically seek it. This, too, is entirely optional; it is provided only for those children who, in all likelihood, would otherwise not participate in any religious instruction at all. So we do not place the main emphasis on this. What we have to say regarding our worldview is intended for adults.

[ 20 ] But what, I would say, can make a person an anthroposophist—right down to the dexterity of their fingertips—is what makes them, in particular, a teacher, an educator. And the way children are treated, the way the content of teaching and education is handled—that is what should be strived for, so that children everywhere can naturally find their way into what is presented to them at school. Everywhere, careful consideration should be given to the question: What is appropriate for a child of a certain age?

[ 21 ] As you know, we do not begin teaching reading and writing the way it is often done today. By starting with writing, we develop the shapes of letters—which are otherwise unfamiliar to the child—out of that to which the child turns with inner comfort: a kind of artistic activity, an artistic sense of form. As a result, our children begin to learn to read and write a little later, because—if one takes the child’s nature into account—reading must come after writing.

[ 22 ] Now those who are accustomed to the old ways of thinking object to this and say: “Children learn to read and write much later here than in other schools.” — Why do children learn to read and write earlier in other schools? Because no one knows what age is best for learning to read and write. First, let us ask ourselves whether it is even justified to demand that a child be able to read and write with a certain degree of proficiency as early as the age of eight.

[ 23 ] If one extends these perspectives further, then more far-reaching views emerge, which we can experience in a remarkable way. Anyone who knows Goethe well also knows this: If one approaches Goethe with the academic standards expected of a twelve-year-old boy today and asks, “Did Goethe really master this?” — one will see that he could not have done so even at the age of sixteen, and yet he became Goethe. Austria had a significant poet, Robert Hamerling. Of course, in his youth he did not set out to become a poet—his genius made that happen—but he wanted to become a secondary school teacher. He had passed a teacher certification exam. His report card states that he demonstrated exceptionally good knowledge of Latin and Greek, but that he was unable to handle the German language and was therefore only suitable for teaching the lowest grade level. Yet he became Austria’s most significant modern poet. He wrote in German, not in Slovak.

[ 24 ] It is against the backdrop of life that educational approaches must be measured. And that is the essence of our educational approach: that we keep the child’s entire life in mind and that we know this: if we teach a child something in their seventh or eighth year, it must be taught in such a way that it grows with the child, so that the child still possesses it in their thirtieth or fortieth year—so that they benefit from it throughout their entire life. You see, it is precisely the case that those children who can read and write perfectly by the age of eight are, in terms of certain inner, psychological health impulses, stunted. Yes, truly stunted. It is a great blessing if, at the age of eight, one cannot yet read and write as is demanded today. It is a great blessing for physical and psychological health.

[ 25 ] What needs to be nurtured must be drawn from the needs of human nature. One must have a subtle understanding of this, not just of what is right. It is easy to stand in front of a class and say something like: “This one says something right, that one says something wrong!”—and then to correct the wrong into the right; but this does not constitute a truly educational activity. It is entirely irrelevant to a child’s human development to have the child write essays and do schoolwork, to correct them, and for the child to realize that he or she has made mistakes. What is essential is having a keen sense for the mistakes children make. Children make mistakes in a hundred different ways. Every child makes mistakes differently, and if one has a keen sense of how differently children behave in relation to their mistakes, then one can figure out what needs to be done to help the children progress.

[ 26 ] Isn’t it true that, when it comes to life, people have different perspectives? A doctor does not have the same perspective on illness as a patient. You cannot expect a patient to be “in love” with specific illnesses. As for a doctor, one might say that he is a true doctor if he loves the illness. So it’s a matter of having a certain fondness for the interesting mistakes that children make; that’s how one truly comes to understand human nature. Forgive me if I sound radical. One must speak radically. For the teacher, it’s more interesting to track the mistakes than to focus on what the children do correctly. The teacher learns an extraordinary amount from those mistakes.

[ 27 ] But what does one need for all of this? For all of this, one needs that inner, active love for people and children, which is absolutely essential for a teacher. And that is when the countless questions arise. One is concerned about the physical and emotional well-being of this or that child. One has the child for a few hours a day; for the rest of the time, one must have the trust—the complete trust—of the child’s parents. And that is why the teachers and educators at our Waldorf School always appeal to this trust, and why they are so eager to work in harmony with the parents for the children’s well-being and welfare. In a school that lacks freedom, this is generally not pursued to the same extent. For there, the focus is on adhering to regulations, and as a result, there is sometimes very little understanding even for the concept of freedom in the school system.

[ 28 ] There are countries where, when you talk about a free school system, people respond: “Yes, that may be the case in Germany, where it’s necessary to establish free schools. But it’s not like that here; here, the teacher is free.” Teachers themselves say this. One can only be astonished that such a response is given. One is astonished because one sees that those who say this no longer have any inkling that they might feel unfree. They do what they are told. Since it does not occur to them that anything else could happen, they do not even feel that things could be any different.

[ 29 ] Just consider what a different situation you are in, particularly with regard to your view of the Waldorf school system, compared to other people. Other people have to make an effort when we tell them, “This is how we want to do it, because we believe it is the only right way”; they have to make an effort to understand that in the first place. I believe that the parents of Waldorf school children, in particular, can see directly in their own beloved children what is being done at the Waldorf school and how the entire school’s relationship with the child is conceived. One hopes that a time will come when parents, with regard to the Waldorf school system, can be content simply to be satisfied with what is accomplished within it. Today, anyone who sees firsthand, through their own flesh and blood, how this Waldorf school seeks to operate should become an active defender and advocate of the Waldorf school system.

[ 30 ] We also face all sorts of difficulties. You see, if we wanted to live up to our ideals, we would say: As we see it, this is how it should be: in the sixth, seventh, and eighth years, one should do this; in the ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth, that; and so on. If we could do that, the very best would come of it. We cannot do it; in a certain sense, we must strike a kind of compromise, for we cannot deprive children—the rising generation—of the opportunity to experience life in this way.

[ 31 ] We have therefore resolved to provide a free education for children from the age at which they enter elementary school until they turn nine, but at the same time—while incorporating what human nature requires—to nurture them in such a way that they can transition to another school. The same applies at ages twelve, fourteen, and fifteen. And if we are fortunate enough to be able to add further grades, we must even ensure that those young men and women who complete these grades are then able to transition to universities and technical colleges. We must ensure that the children can move on to these institutions. I believe that for a long time to come, we will not be given the opportunity, for example, to produce doctors or issue valid degrees at our universities. Then we would achieve much more. For now, we can do nothing else but bring first the children and then the young men and women to a level where they can acquire what is needed in public life without suffering any significant harm.

[ 32 ] We find ourselves in quite serious trouble here. You see, anyone who judges according to human nature—according to what is good for a person so that they may become a useful member of society later in life—will say to themselves: it is simply terrible to see the young men and women in today’s high schools and secondary schools at the ages of fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, and seventeen. They are becoming alienated from all of life. We must do whatever is absolutely necessary to ensure that, at the very least, their physical abilities develop to a reasonably practical level of skill. I often mention that today you find grown men who are unable to sew on a button themselves if one comes off. I say this merely by way of example. They are incapable of doing other things of a similar nature as well. Above all, they understand nothing of the world. A person must stand in the world with open eyes so that they may also have free hands to tackle anything. You see, that is why, at a certain age, such skills as spinning and weaving should be introduced in a basic way. Yes, but now, when students take their high school graduation exams at regular schools, they aren’t tested on weaving and spinning or other useful life skills—we also have to cover all sorts of things required for the exam. To do this, we need to organize our instruction in the most economical way possible. That is a special art in education and teaching.

[ 33 ] Let me give an example of something that happened to me personally. It was a long time ago—I, along with other siblings in a family, was entrusted with the task of raising and teaching an eleven-year-old child who had been given up on as far as education and upbringing were concerned. The boy was eleven years old, and to give me an idea of his abilities, I was shown a sketchbook in which he had expressed his artistic talents. This sketchbook had a huge hole right in the middle of the first page. He had only used an eraser. That was all he could do. He had also once taken an exam for the first grade of elementary school, but he knew nothing at all. As for his behavior, he often didn’t eat at the table but went into the kitchen and ate potato peels. It was difficult in all sorts of ways. I don’t want to describe it in detail. - The goal was to achieve as much as possible in the shortest possible time. I myself sometimes had to work for three hours to organize the material so that I could then teach the boy what he needed to learn in a quarter of an hour. After the second year, the boy had progressed to the point where he could attend high school. He had a massive hydrocephalus, which gradually got smaller.

[ 34 ] I want to cite this example because it illustrates what I mean by “economy in teaching.” Economy in teaching means never spending more time on anything with the children than is necessary for their physical and mental well-being. Such economy in teaching must be practiced especially today, because life demands so much. Teachers of Latin and Greek, for example, are in a difficult position, because we have much less time to devote to these subjects, and yet they must be taught in a way that meets the legitimate demands of intellectual life. We must strive in every area to avoid overburdening the child. In all these matters, I must say, we need the understanding cooperation of parents; we need harmonious collaboration with parents.

[ 35 ] Truly, the real successes—the ones that matter most in life—do not lie in some gifted student or another achieving something remarkable. The real successes lie in the vitality of life. And so it is always deeply satisfying to me when something happens that leads people to say that a certain child should be moved from one class to another because this or that goal needs to be achieved. Sometimes the teacher fights for every single child. These are true successes in the loving coexistence of the teaching staff and the children. Something comes of this; alongside it, the things to which so much importance is attached—whether the children are a little further along or a little behind—fade into the background.

[ 36 ] We are already faced with the fact that—to put it bluntly—we cannot possibly be praised by those whose views on today’s school system lead them to hold this opinion. It is always a mistake to believe that anything would be achieved if people who think that way were to praise us. If the situation were such that we were praised by today’s school authorities, or by those who believe that today’s school authorities are right, then we would not have needed to establish the Waldorf School at all.

[ 37 ] So it goes without saying that we depend on our parents to work together in harmony to provide an upbringing rooted in what is purely human. We need that today, including in social terms.

[ 38 ] Social issues will not be resolved by the way many people think today, but rather by placing the right people into social life. They will only be placed there if people can grow up healthy in both body and soul. There is very little we can do about what is unique to a person—what a person can learn based on their particular abilities. For, isn’t it true that if we can take any credit for educating and teaching a person so that they become the best they can be, then if we were to educate a Goethe, we as teachers would have to be at least a Goethe ourselves? We can do nothing about what a person becomes by nature; that is determined by other factors. What we can do is remove the obstacles so that a person may find within himself the strength to realize what is inherent in him. We can do this if we become true educators and if we are supported by our contemporaries.

[ 39 ] First and foremost, we can count on the support of the parents. We have found parents who are understanding. And what I have to say is also filled with a deep sense of gratitude. I am also deeply gratified that so many of you have come today. I hope we will be able to discuss specific points during the upcoming discussion; our teachers will be ready to answer any questions you may have. But I would like to highlight a few character traits.

[ 40 ] Recently, the Waldorf teaching staff and I also held a college course in the Netherlands. A prominent figure in the Waldorf school community, Miss vor Heydebrund, was in charge of leading the afternoon session, which focused on educational issues. It was one of the most interesting afternoons, because it became clear that educational issues today are ones that concern the entire world. — We know, of course, that we have no right to boast about how far we have come, so we do not wish to emphasize how far we have come.

[ 41 ] The fact is that many people today recognize the inspiring nature of our school; what is still lacking, however, is active support so that the cause can gain further strength and spread more widely. It is perfectly understandable that parents want what is best for their children. But as things stand today, parents should also help us. It will be difficult for us to make headway on our own. We need help in every respect, for we need an ever-expanding circle of supporters so that we can overcome the prejudices against our educational approach. And above all, I say the following under a certain assumption and with the caveat that I want to be absolutely convinced that those sitting here have done everything they can financially. Let this assumption stand so that no one thinks I am trying to offend them. But the other fact remains: If we want to make progress, we need money!

[ 42 ] Yes, we need money! Now people say: But that’s not idealism. You anthroposophists, what kind of idealism are you preaching to us when you say you need money?

[ 43 ] Ladies and gentlemen! You see, idealism is, after all, built on shaky ground—that grand idealism that uses grandiose words and declares: “I am an idealist, but because I am an idealist, I despise my wallet; therefore, I will not soil my hands—I am far too great an idealist!”

[ 44 ] In particular, ideals are unlikely to be realized if people are too idealistic to get their hands too dirty when making financial sacrifices. We must also find the right tone toward the world that encourages people to offer us some support in this regard, which is still our great, terrible concern.

[ 45 ] After all, the Waldorf School is large as an individual school; it has enough students. It’s almost impossible to overlook it anymore. This is a concern that is taken very seriously. And certainly, we do not want to expand it beyond its current size; we want to undergo this expansion. But even then, as the number of students increases, so does the number of teachers. Since teachers cannot live on air alone, this requires funding.

[ 46 ] And here, ladies and gentlemen—I assume everyone has already done their part— the point is to spread the idea further so that idealists can be found out there as well—we must resolve, especially on the part of the parents, to support the Waldorf School in terms of its material foundation; otherwise, I fear that if we want to continue to maintain things well, we will soon have to give up sleeping out of worry. And then I also don’t know whether you’ll always have the necessary teaching staff at the school if the teachers have to give up sleeping.

[ 47 ] Today I wanted to allude to certain things with words that some of you may feel are too radical. But I do hope that I have been understood on some points. What matters most to me is that I am not understood merely in terms of individual points. I would like to be understood in the fundamental sense that, for us and for our work in the Waldorf school, a heartfelt understanding with the parents is essential. I wanted to point out the necessity of this heartfelt understanding precisely because it truly exists to such a high degree, and because the best way to make progress in this area is to lay the groundwork today.

[ 48 ] I would therefore like—through everything we aim to achieve in detail—and the following discussion can address this— I hope that through all these specific efforts at such parent meetings, the impetus will be provided for the warm harmony that exists between the educators, between the teaching staff and the parents, who will certainly have the deepest interest in ensuring that this harmony prevails, because the parents have entrusted the most precious thing they have to the teaching staff.

[ 49 ] Out of this awareness—and out of the teachers’ sense of responsibility toward the parents, who are their closest allies—and out of this collaboration, may the spirit that has already manifested itself to a satisfying degree in the Waldorf School continue to blossom ever more fully. It will grow and flourish all the more as this unity flourishes. The more this is the case, the more the other goal—the most beautiful goal for the human being—will be achieved: to educate the young people entrusted to the Waldorf School for human coexistence. There, the individual will have to stand firm in the face of life’s storms. When they stand in social life, able to find the right ways to cooperate with other people, then the various human and social issues will be resolved.

From the discussion at the parents' night

[ 50 ] A question is asked about the high school graduation exam.

[ 51 ] Dr. Steiner: For my part, I have only the following to say: On the whole, what I myself have put forward serves as the guiding principle. Through sound economic management, we must ensure that, for the most important stages of life, students are equipped to integrate directly into what is required of them today. We cannot be the ones to decide whether we consider this to be right or wrong. We must accept it. The question of whether what is required in the high school graduation exam is justified or unjustified does not arise for us. This must be achieved through economic means. So far, we have not yet been able to do so. I firmly believe that it will be possible to achieve this goal, even if it does not yet appear that way among those who are currently eligible. However, it is our principle that we prepare children at the appropriate age so that they can take the exam. The fact is that there are also external difficulties to overcome. It is necessary to approach the school without prejudice. I am, of course, aware that a student whom we have prepared to take an exam could still be failed. I gave you the example that it would be easy for me to fail even the examiners. Our goal is for students to be able to take the exam, regardless of our personal opinions on the matter. We do not want to educate according to some quirk; we want to teach according to real life. We must simply strive to prepare students for life as best we can while it is still possible.

[ 52 ] In Central Europe, there are still some possibilities at present; in Russia, there are none left. We must be grateful for these few possibilities. If we instill these few possibilities in our children, there will be more of them in the next generation.

[ 53 ] I want to make it very clear that we are not crazy people who say, for example, that children should only be able to do this or that. Whatever is required in the exams—even if we don’t always agree with it, even if we privately consider it twisted—we still go along with it, while taking into account everything we deem necessary for the good of humanity.

[ 54 ] Question: Wouldn't it be possible to schedule classes in the morning?

[ 55 ] Dr. Steiner: Isn’t it true that when it comes to questions like these, it’s never just one perspective or another that comes into play? People say one should teach from seven to one. Well, you see, I’d like to point out a few principles here. When I held my Christmas course, during the sessions devoted to answering questions, the question was also raised: What about fatigue? I mentioned that it is entirely in keeping with our educational philosophy not to scatter the children’s attention by having religion in one class and zoology in the next, but rather to structure lessons in such a way that the children’s attention can remain focused. That is why we organize our lessons so that a specific subject area is covered over the course of several weeks, throughout a longer school period. This is a perspective derived from a special understanding of the nature of the child.

[ 56 ] The question arises as to whether the children do not become tired. - Here one must point out that, in principle, our lessons are conducted in such a way that, between the ages of seven and twelve, we do not rely at all on the children’s mental faculties—because that would be wrong—but rather on the rhythmic system, on the participation of the soul, which is connected to the rhythmic respiratory and circulatory systems. You must bear in mind that when a person becomes tired, it is not their rhythmic system that tires, but rather their mental and limb systems. If the heart and lungs were to tire as well, they could not remain active throughout a person’s entire life. It is the other systems that tire. By relying on the rhythmic system during these years, we do not tire the children as much as they would otherwise be made to.

[ 57 ] Therefore, when fatigue tests are conducted in experimental psychology and it is claimed that students are so tired after three-quarters of an hour that they must take a break, this merely demonstrates that instruction is being provided incorrectly—that the child is being unduly fatigued. Otherwise, that fatigue threshold would not be reached. The goal is to structure instruction so skillfully that such fatigue does not set in. This can only be achieved slowly and gradually, since school practices in this regard can only be developed step by step.

[ 58 ] Yes, you see, ladies and gentlemen, a child can be protected from fatigue to a very high degree if he or she is properly educated and taught. But not the teachers; they have to use their minds. And if one were to implement this—which is pedagogically sound—namely, keeping instruction in one person’s hands as much as possible, then I would like to know what a teacher would look like who is expected to teach from seven in the morning until one o’clock. And that is precisely what must be taken into account first and foremost. It makes a difference whether, with teachers who would be exhausted by ten o’clock after having to teach from seven to ten, one would continue to strain these teachers from ten o’clock onward. That is not something one can wish for, as much as I would wish that children living far away did not have to travel two hours just to attend one class. But that is, after all, only the exception. It’s an exaggeration. And secondly, one has to make certain compromises if anything is to be achieved. Of course, we cannot organize instruction for all children in the way that would be ideal for those who live so far out. It’s only natural that this cannot happen. So even in matters like these, one must take realistic circumstances into account.

[ 59 ] In any case, our approach is such that, in the mornings—as far as practicable—we offer instruction that appeals to the spirit and soul. The afternoon sessions are devoted to eurythmy and the arts. The curriculum is structured throughout the day to correspond to the child’s age and nature. But it would lead to problems—which would then be met with great dissatisfaction—if all instruction were held from seven in the morning until one in the afternoon. A complicated system would be necessary. It would have to be quite different. Then I’d like to see what would happen if we had the children at the Waldorf School every day from seven to one, and afterward they were left entirely to their own devices—I’d like to see what kinds of notes would turn up with complaints because all sorts of misbehavior would be brought home. You’d have the children’s drowsiness combined with the misbehavior they’d bring back from those afternoons, and that would add up to the teachers’ drowsiness. Then there would be some really terrible things written on those notes.

[ 60 ] There are many different perspectives to consider. We must emphasize that, of course, such matters are taken into account—that is, precisely because it is unavoidable to move classes to the afternoon, we have already considered the reasons that would preclude such a move.

[ 61 ] A father demands that students be examined by a committee of Waldorf teachers during their high school graduation exams.

[ 62 ] Dr. Steiner: This is not a pedagogical question. We are dealing with pedagogical impulses. Our sole concern must be to do what I have mentioned—to take into account what is in keeping with human nature and to ensure that children are not torn away from life. Of course, life is such that certain opportunities may arise in the early years. I ask you to bear in mind that, in forming this judgment—whether a child will be able to pass the exam or not—we are exposed to certain dangers.

[ 63 ] What do you think would happen if it were to happen that a boy or girl here graduated from school and took an exam, and there were a guarantee that they would not fail? In some cases, difficulties with exams have been anticipated, and such a student has been sent to us. By seeking, as educators, what I have indicated, we will continue to make progress toward finding a way for the children to pass their exams. — Those with ill will could systematically prove that this is not the case.

[ 64 ] It is not our responsibility to ensure that an officially appointed commissioner is present for the examination. If the parents wish for this [examination by Waldorf teachers], then that is something the parents would have to arrange. It is not in keeping with Waldorf pedagogy. It is a matter of expediency, which would have to be resolved in an opportunistic manner—and perhaps even by the parents themselves. —It is not our concern to be excluded from issuing valid report cards; however, we will then have to view the matter from a pedagogical standpoint. That it makes sense from a pedagogical standpoint—after spending years with the students—to then subject them to a final exam, that this is supposed to make sense—I would like someone to prove that to me. We know what we have to say about a student when he or she reaches the appropriate age and leaves the class. If an assessment is needed for some other specific purpose, then it can be done. It is not, strictly speaking, an educational matter. Anyone with experience in this field knows that one can gauge a student’s abilities much better without exams than through them. We have no reason to work toward administering these exams, because it does not follow from our educational principles.

[ 65 ] The text raises the issue of discipline and a respectful attitude toward teachers.

[ 66 ] Dr. Steiner: If you are asking whether there is genuine devotion wherever Waldorf pedagogy is not practiced... it is absolutely essential that devotion—reverence for the teacher, love for the teacher—arise in a natural way. Otherwise, it is worthless. Any devotion that is forced—that is, in a sense, based on the school’s rules and regulations—has no value for human development. The fact is that one consistently finds that when children are educated in such a way that their own nature is the guiding principle, they are most likely to come to revere their teachers. There is no cause for complaint. Of course, it cannot be denied that certain things occur that do not exactly speak in favor of devotion. But what matters is how much value there is in the devotion that arises from love, and how much more valuable the other kind is—which, after all, is directed only toward the teachers and educators when they are facing the students, and diminishes when they have their backs turned. - One must not create a mental image of things as if every child simply does whatever it wants. The fact is that the children are gaining more and more trust in the teaching staff.

[ 67 ] It is precisely in this regard that the progress has been truly extraordinary. Anyone who can compare will simply find that the progress made over the past two years with regard to discipline has been truly extraordinary. In fact, when we first brought the children in, we had to figure out how to maintain discipline and the like. Now, the situation is actually on an entirely different level. We have achieved the very most simply because the relationship between teacher and child is a natural one. There is a huge difference between the current level of discipline and that of a year and a half ago.

[ 68 ] These matters must not be judged from a perspective imposed from the outside. One must look at the Waldorf School itself. Devotion simply cannot be drummed into children—though I do not mean to suggest that certain other things might already be drummed into them. Devotion must be acquired in a different way. One can understand the anxieties that exist in this regard. However, even in this regard, it is necessary to overcome such anxiety and focus more on what emerges as the result and outcome of the Waldorf School.

[ 69 ] Let a few years pass and let our school continue to operate; then we’ll talk again about whether we’ve succeeded in having the exams administered. We’ll discuss it then. We’re convinced that, for the most part, they will be administered. And we are also convinced that the fear is certainly unjustified—that our school method will lead to what can indeed be observed in abundance where the strictest school discipline prevails. I have seen there, at both the lowest and highest school levels, that devotion is not in very good shape. I believe that one should not establish the dogma that devotion flourishes only where there is coercive education, whereas where our method of education prevails, it might happen that children make fun of their teachers behind their backs. If one approaches the child in the right way with a friendly admonition, it is better than a slap in the face.