Faculty Meetings with Rudolf Steiner
GA 300c
2 June 1924, Stuttgart
Sixty-Seventh Meeting
A teacher reads aloud the ninth lecture from Practical Advice to Teachers and the curriculum directions given until this time as summarized by Mr. B.
Dr. Steiner: The foreign-language teachers were interested in hearing what directions have already been given. We should not forget there has been a certain difficulty in the foreign language class. In the past, students of the most differing ages came to us, so that we also needed to take new students in the higher class. We could assume that if a nine-year-old child came, he or she had already learned a certain amount. That was, however, not the situation with foreign languages. Children who had never learned a single word of French or English came into the fifth grade, so we could not establish a strict curriculum. It is still a question whether we are able to set up a specific curriculum for a given year or whether we can have only a general perspective we would follow as best we can throughout all the classes when we accept new children into the first grade.
Our teaching of foreign languages is somewhat independent. We consider what is taught in the first two hours to be the basis of education. In the future, we must treat our foreign language teaching somewhat more freely.
In general, we should teach a child in the first grade a foreign language, and we should teach foreign languages through speaking until the end of the third grade. We should avoid having the children learn words or phrases through translation. Instead, they should learn things directly from the word or phrase. Therefore, we should not associate a foreign word with the corresponding German word, but with the subject itself, and should always speak in the foreign language. That is particularly important until the end of the third grade. During that period, they should not even notice that grammar exists.
In working with longer pieces, do not be disturbed if the children learn a verse or a poem purely by sound, even though they may have little understanding of the content. In an extreme case, a child may learn four, six, or eight lines that he or she remembers only by the sounds. Under some circumstances, that could be of considerable help in learning the language, since the child would later learn to understand things memorized by sound. Quite clearly, poetic material is to be preferred over prose during the first three years. It is quite clear from this that we cannot view the individual years separately. Instead, we must handle them completely equally.
We now come to the fourth grade. Then it is best to no longer avoid the beginnings of grammar. However, do not make the children learn rules, but make visible the texts they have already learned. Thus, you develop the rules of grammar inductively, and once they have been formed, you should require the children to remember them, so that they then have rules. You should not fall prey to the extreme by thinking that children should learn no rules at all. Instead, you should develop the rules inductively, so that they will know them by heart. Remembering rules is part of the development of the I during the period from nine to ten years. We can support the development of the I by giving the children the rules of grammar in a logical way based upon the structure of the language.
You can then go from poetry to prose. Until the end of the third grade, you should hold prose to a minimum. Beginning in fourth grade, you can choose material such that the grammar and the material can be learned in parallel. For that, you should select only prose. We would make poetry pedantic if we only used it for abstracting grammatical rules, but prose can certainly be used for that. While using prose, you can gradually move into a kind of translation.
Of course, the foreign language teachers have tried to teach in this way until now. Nevertheless, it has come up that the teaching has been more from the direction of lexicography, and that you have not sought the connection between the subject and the foreign word. Instead, you made the connection between the German word and the foreign word. That is easier for the teacher, but it results in teaching languages in contrast to one another, so the feeling for the language is not properly developed.
We need to begin that in the fourth grade, but we need to limit ourselves primarily to teaching how words are formed.
In the fifth grade go on to syntax, continuing with it in the sixth grade into more complicated syntactic forms. The readings would, of course, follow in parallel. You should not have the children translate from German into the foreign language. Instead, have them write short essays and such things. You should work with such translations only by saying something short and then having the children express the same thing in the foreign language. Thus, you would have them say in the foreign language what they have heard in German. That is how you should work with translations until the end of sixth grade. In any event, you should completely avoid having them translate longer German passages directly into the foreign language.
On the other hand, the children should read a great deal, but their readings should contain much humor. The class should have an enjoyable discussion of everything connected with the readings, particularly concerning customs. You should discuss the living situations and attitudes of the people who speak the foreign language. Thus, you should include, in a humorous way, a study of the people and customs in the fifth and sixth grades. Also take idiomatic expressions into account in the fifth grade by including the sayings and idiomatic expressions contained in the foreign language, so that the children have a corresponding saying in that language for the various occasions in life where they would use a German saying. These are often expressed in a much different way.
For the seventh grade, the instruction should take into account that a large number of children will leave the school following the eighth grade. In the seventh and eighth grades, you should emphasize reading and working with the character of the language evident in sentences. Of course, it is important that they learn about the things that would occur in the everyday life of the people who speak the language. They should practice by reading texts and retelling things in the foreign language so that they gain a capacity for expression. You should have them translate only rarely. Have them retell what they have read, particularly dramatic things. Do not have them retell lyric or epic readings, but they can retell in their own words the dramatic things they have read. In the eighth grade, you should also teach them rudimentary things about poetry and meter in the foreign language. Also, in these two last classes, you should give a very brief overview of the literary history of the respective language.
We now have ninth grade. There, you need to review grammar, but do it with some humor by always giving them humorous examples. Through such examples, you can go through all the grammar of the language in the course of the year. Of course, you do that in parallel with the exciting readings the class does.
In the tenth grade, emphasize the meter of the language by reading primarily poetry. In the eleventh grade, the readings should be mostly drama in parallel with some prose texts and a little about the aesthetics of the language. You can develop poetry from the dramatic readings, and you should continue that into lyric and epic poetry for the twelfth grade. There, the class should read a number of things related to the present and to the area where the foreign language is spoken. The students should, therefore, have some knowledge of modern foreign literature.
That is, then, the general curriculum we will want in the future. You should never read anything without making the children aware of the entire content. In the fourth and fifth grades, you can begin with the basics of grammar, but see that the children also speak.
I would like to say something else in regard to drama in the seventh and eighth grades. You could find, for example, some longer passage from one of Moliére’s comedies that you want to read. In a humorous way, you need to tell the children the content—be as detailed and dramatic as possible—then have them read the passage.
In the course of the past years, we have made small additions to what was said earlier, and we should leave it that way, in principle. They should begin their written work only at that stage presented in the course.
The teaching of ancient languages has, of course, a particular position, and it actually needs a special curriculum, which I will work out in more detail and give to you. You probably already know what we did previously and the things we slowly changed.
A teacher requests a seminar on languages and Dr. Steiner agrees.
Dr. Steiner: I would now like to hear about some of your teaching experiences since Easter.
A teacher asks about Bible stories for the third grade.
Dr. Steiner: I have seen that some of you use the Hebel edition of the Bible. My feeling is that we should use only the Schuster edition because of its exemplary structure. It is better not to work exactly with the text of the stories, but to present them freely. You should give only free renditions to the children, and the book itself is only a help for remembering and reviewing. In that case, the older Schuster edition is still the best; the new edition is not nearly so good. As interesting as it may be to read Hebel, if you want to read something you already know, it is not appropriate for teaching about the Bible, quite aside from the fact that the printing in the present edition is terrible. I think we should stay with the old Schuster edition. Its structure is really very good. On the other hand, it is rather pedantic and Catholic-oriented, but I do not think you run any danger of being too Catholic.
A religion teacher asks about the difference between working with the Bible stories in religion class and in the main lesson of the third grade.
Dr. Steiner: You can learn a great deal if you recall the principle for working with Bible stories in these two different places. When we teach Bible stories in the main lesson, that is, in the actual curriculum, we treat them as something generally human. We simply acquaint the children with the content of the Bible and do not give it any religious coloring at all. We treat the stories in a profane way; we present the content simply as classical literature, just like all other classical literature.
When we work with the Bible in religion class, we take the religious standpoint. We use these stories for teaching religion. If we approach this difference with some tact, that is, without giving any superficial explanations in the main lesson, then we can learn a great deal for our own pedagogical practice by working with this subtle difference. There is a difference in the “how,” an extraordinarily important difference in “how.”
What was told before is then read so that it is firmly seated. I cannot believe the Schuster Bible is poor reading material. The pictures are quite humorous and not at all bad. Perhaps a little cute, but not really sentimental. It is good enough as reading material for the third grade and can also serve as an introduction to reading Fraktur.
A teacher asks about difficulties with new students in the stenography class.
Dr. Steiner: The only thing we can do is to make stenography an elective. We will make it something the children should learn.
Suppose a student comes into the eleventh grade. In previous years, he had a Catholic teacher for natural history. Now he comes and says he wants to learn only Catholic natural history. There is nothing we can do to free him of that.
We are teaching the best stenographic system, Gabelsberger’s, and it is obligatory because in our modern times it is needed for a complete education. I do not think it is prejudice at all. It is the only system that has some inner coherence. The others are all simply artificial. We need to think about having this class in a lower grade.
A teacher: Don’t the first-grade children have too much school because of the language class?
Dr. Steiner: If you see the children are tired, it would be better to drop that subject in the first two grades rather than to try some sort of tricks. I would prefer that we teach the little children only two hours a day if that were possible.
The school doctor asks about curative eurythmy exercises.
Dr. Steiner: That can be only a question of using the time most efficiently. Some children are given curative eurythmy exercises for a particular period, and they should be done daily. The children will have to leave class for that. If they are doing some curative eurythmy exercises, then they are sick. Since it is a therapy, you should be able to remove the children from class at any time except during religion class. If they miss something in class, it is just karma. There can be no difficulties if curative eurythmy is given the importance it is due. No one should hold curative eurythmy in such low regard that a child is not allowed to go.
A teacher asks about Cavalieri’s perspective in twelfth-grade geometry.
Dr. Steiner: Cavalieri’s perspective is more realistic. In it we see everything in small pieces. That perspective should be used wherever possible. It is designed for architecture. The architrave in the first Goetheanum was done in Cavalieri’s perspective, as though you were walking around a room while looking at the walls.
I want the children to have an equal opportunity to do all of the geometric constructions, for example, the sections through a cone, to sketch them freehand. They can do the actual drawing, the real construction, with a compass and a ruler.
A teacher asks about year-end reports.
Dr. Steiner: There is not much to say about the reports. The first school-year reports were really very interesting. Not giving grades was new; instead you evaluated the children in your own words. Many people received that in a very good way. You wrote the sentences with tremendous love. If you look at those reports today, you will see they were written out of love.
When I read some reports because someone complained, I found that for a large number of teachers writing the reports had gradually become a burden, just as in other schools, so that the teachers were happy when they were done. You can see they are no longer written with love. They have been formulated in the driest prose. It would be better if we used the 4, 3, 2, 1 grading system. We need to be more careful about how we write and be somewhat more creative. You should be more diligent and more loving, otherwise the result might be something like, “Can’t do anything, but will be better,” or, “Behavior leaves something to be desired,” and so forth. Then, the reports would no longer serve any purpose. I have nothing against it if you think it is too great a burden. Then we will have to swallow the bitter pill and give regular reports. That would be a shame, though. We cannot allow them simply to be written in the last week, but we cannot have any rules about them, because we would need a special rule for each student.
I was disturbed by S.T.’s report. When I decided to accept him, I said explicitly that we could not do so if we were going to be stuffy about it. We would have to be more open. That was when I was in J. We cannot have a Waldorf School and depend upon support if we set ourselves outside the world. It would have been much easier to say that we cannot accept such a student. The question was one of solving a more difficult problem, and thus that young boy came to us. I certainly did not hide the fact that we were subjecting ourselves to a real problem. I said all of that at the time. We needed to solve a problem: a boy who was very gifted for his age came into the ninth grade. Look at the questions he asked, but on the other side, he couldn’t do anything. He was lazy in every subject. But then he received a report that neglected everything that was said at the time. This drives me up the wall! It was written very pedantically, with no consideration of the special circumstances, and with no consideration of his psychology. I was just mortified by the faculty here. The report had no meaning for the boy, and his mother lost her head. The report was a wonderful example of disinterest. In this case, you did not seem to be as talented as usual. You wrote in the style of a very average middle school teacher.
You should write the reports for those who are to learn something about the child. You can tell the children what you have to say in a much more direct way throughout the year. The reports are for others to read. This report gives no indication whatsoever that the boy went through the most important year of his life and was very different at the end of the year than he was at the beginning. The positive things that occurred are not at all visible. We did not need to bring him to the Waldorf School to get such a report. Of course, you can take the position of a schoolmaster, but we should actually be much more open.
You need to write the reports with more love. You did not do that. You need to look at the individual students with more love. This report is sloppy, even superficially. Something like this looks bad. A report like this should be well organized and carefully written. You may have to describe the inner development of some children. If our teaching fails, it would be better not to take any risks if we fear things will get worse because the care needed for such an individual is not here.
A teacher asks whether L.K. from the third grade should go into the remedial class.
Dr. Steiner: Her mother is horrible. She was that way already as a young girl. It would not be appropriate to put the child into the remedial class where we should really have only children with some intellectual or emotional problems. K. is simply bad, and that would only be a punishment. She would not fit into the remedial class. Don’t put everyone in the remedial class.
A teacher: Should we consider K.E. in the fourth grade as normal?
Dr. Steiner: What is normal? You cannot draw some line. K.E. is not abnormal, but under such circumstances, you could put such a child in a lower grade.
A teacher asks about R.A. in the fifth grade, who had stolen something.
Dr. Steiner: For four years he has stolen nothing, but now he is beginning to steal. It is our task to make him into a proper young man. There must be something missing in the contact between the faculty and the children. If the children have genuine trust in the teachers, it is actually not at all possible for such moral problems to arise. You should certainly keep him in the class. He is not a kleptomaniac. He did it alone. You need to understand the children’s psychology better. It is possible that sometimes children do things because of a dare. It is also possible a hidden laziness exists. I certainly told him my mind quite clearly.
A teacher asks about a course in voice eurythmy.
Dr. Steiner: The eurythmy teachers and Mr. Baumann should have been at the tone eurythmy course in February.
In this case, the question is somewhat different. I began tone eurythmy in 1912. At that time a number of students came, Kisseleff, Baumann, and Wolfram. The course expanded when a number of eurythmists also came. Lori Smits continued it, but something foreign came into it then. This course should be used to make a new beginning. We will have to see how far we get. This is something that could be especially important. Since eurythmy is also done here in school, it could lead to closing the eurythmy class.
Dr. Schubert, Dr. Kolisko, and anyone else who can should attend the curative pedagogy course.
Miss Michels will go to the agricultural course. Someone will have to take over the children at that time.
Siebenundsechzigste Konferenz
Am Nachmittag des 1. Juni war die vierte ordentliche Mitgliederversammlung des Vereins Freie Waldorfschule. Rudolf Steiner sprach über den Verkehr der Lehrer mit den Elternhäusern im Sinne der Waldorfschul-Pädagogik. «So ist nicht ein Grundsatz, nicht irgendein pädagogisches Prinzip, das den Waldorflehrer auffordert, den Weg zu den Eltern zu finden, sondern das innigste Bedürfnis des Herzens, wie überhaupt die Waldorfschul-Pädagogik in ihrem innersten Wesen eine Herzenspädagogik ist.» Es war die Frage aufgetaucht, ob die Klassen nicht zu groß seien. Steiners Antwort: «Aus pädagogischen Gründen kleine Klassen einzurichten, rechnet mit einer pädagogischen Schwäche.» (GA 298, 5. 182, 185)
Am nächsten Tag war Konferenz. Am Tag darauf verließ Steiner Stuttgart. und bereitete sich auf die große Tagung in Koberwitz zur Begründung der biologisch-dynamischen Wirtschaftsweise vor (Landwirtschaftlicher Kurs, GA 327). Nach einer Abschlussveranstaltung in Weimar fuhr Rudolf Steiner über Stuttgart zurück nach Dornach. Er kam am 19. Juni wieder in Stuttgart an und hielt eine Konferenz ab.
Themen: Grundlegendes zur Fremdsprachendidaktik und Grammatik. Erzählstoff der 3. Klasse im Verhältnis zum Religionsunterricht. Der Stenografieunterricht und seine Probleme. Über die Stellung der Heileurythmie. Die Last des Zeugnisse-Schreibens. Der Schüler A. V. — sein Zeugnis und seine Behandlung. Das Verhältnis des Religionsunterrichts und der Sonntagshandlungen zur Christengemeinschaft. Poetik, Sprachbetrachtungen.
Bemerkungen: Es gab so viele neue Lehrer, dass es nötig geworden war, wieder einmal ganz genau die Methodik und Didaktik des Fremdsprachenunterrichtes darzustellen.
Man erspürt aber auch die Resignation Steiners gegenüber dem Nichtkönnen der Lehrer. Wenn die Probleme in Stenografie nicht zu überwinden seien, dann solle der Unterricht eben «nicht (mehr) obligatorisch sein». Wenn die Zeugnisse zur Last werden und nicht mehr aus Liebe geschrieben werden können, dann sind Zensuren eben besser. Er fühlte sich von den Lehrern «in gewisser Weise desavouiert», weil sie den ganz besonderen Schüler, den er zur Schule gebracht hatte, den hochbegabten A. V., nur nach pedantischen Maßstäben beurteilt hatten. «Es ist auf den individuellen Fall keine Rücksicht genommen worden. Er ist ja schwer zu behandeln, aber es ist nicht der nötige Wille zum Individualisieren da. Ich muss es radikal sagen, sonst wird es nicht genügend klar aufgefasst.»
Steiners Groß- und Weitherzigkeit war zu erleben in der Art, wie er Christengemeinschaft und den freien Religionsunterricht nicht als gegensätzlich betrachten konnte und daher nur ein freundschaftliches Nebeneinander empfahl.
Vorsitz: Rudolf Steinen Zu Beginn wird aus dem fr Methodisch-Didaktischen Kurs» der neunte Vortrag vorgelesen, und die bisher schon gegebenen Lehrplananweisungen werden von Herrn Boy zusammengestellt.
RUDOLF STE1NER: Die Sprachlehrer haben sich interessiert, was bisher schon gegeben worden ist. Man darf nicht vergessen, dass wir bisher im Sprachunterricht eine gewisse Schwierigkeit hatten. Wir haben zwar im Allgemeinen erlebt, dass zu uns Schüler der verschiedensten Altersstufen kamen, wir mussten immer wiederum neue Schüler auch in die höheren Klassen aufnehmen, konnten aber im Allgemeinen annehmen, dass, wenn ein neunjähriges Kind kommt, es schon vorher bis zu einer bestimmten Stufe etwas gelernt hatte. Das war für den Sprachunterricht nicht der Fall. Wir bekamen einfach in die 5. Klasse Kinder herein, die noch nie ein französisches oder englisches Wort gelernt hatten, sodass im Grunde genommen, in der Art und Weise, wie wir mit Schülermaterial versorgt wurden, wir einen strengen Lehrplan nicht aufstellen konnten. Es ist auch die Frage, ob wir ihn weiter aufstellen können für das einzelne Jahr hin, oder ob wir uns werden begnügen müssen, im Allgemeinen etwa Gesichtspunkte anzugeben, die dann eingehalten werden könnten, wenn wir in die 1. Klasse ein bestimmtes Schülermaterial hereinbe-kämen und durch alle Klassen führen könnten.
Nun hat unser Sprachunterricht ja überhaupt etwas Freieres. Wir betrachten das, was in den ersten zwei Stunden vor sich geht, als Grundstock der Erziehung. Der Sprachunterricht muss auch in Zukunft etwas freier gehandhabt werden.
Im Allgemeinen muss man sagen, dass das Kind in der 1. Klasse schon Sprachunterricht bekommt, und dass wir bis zum [Ende der] 3. Klasse den Sprachunterricht so treiben, dass das Kind am Sprechen sprechen lernt. Und dass man vermeiden sollte für irgendein Wort oder- eine Wendung, die das Kind [sich] anzueignen hat, auf die entsprechende deutsche Übersetzung des Wortes zu sehen, sondern dass man darauf sehen soll, dass das Kind unmittelbar an das Ding anknüpft das Wort oder die Wendung. Man soll also, nicht wahr, nicht das fremdsprachliche Wort auf das deutschsprachliche zurückführen, sondern auf die Sache und in der fremden Sprache bleiben, Das sollte man insbesondere bis zum vollendeten 3. Schuljahr durchführen. In dieser Zeit dürfte gar nicht bemerkbar werden, dass es eine Grammatik gibt.
Bei dem Behandeln größerer Stücke muss man so vorgehen, dass man gar keinen Anstoß daran nimmt, dass das Kind eine Strophe oder ein Gedicht, wenn es auch nur mangelhaft die Sache versteht, rein dem Laut nach sich aneignet. Im Extrem kann es selbst der Fall sein, dass das Kind sich aneignet vier, sechs, [acht] Zeilen, die es nur behält wie Klänge. Das würde sogar unter Umständen sehr viel zur Beherrschung der Sprache beitragen können, dass das Kind das, was es nur dem Klange nach [sich] angeeignet hat, erst aus dem Gedächtnis heraus verstehen lernt. In den ersten drei Jahren ist Poetisches ganz entschieden dem Prosaischen vorzuziehen. [Die Sache selbst lässt schon klar werden, dass im Grunde genommen] auf das einzelne Jahr [gar] nicht abzutrennen [ist, dass diese drei Jahre in gleicher Art] behandelt werden können.
Dann kommt das, was nun folgt, [die 4, Klasse]. Da würde es gut sein, wenn nicht länger vermieden würde, mit Grammatischem ZU beginnen, nicht durch Lernen von Regeln, sondern durch Anschaulichmachen an dem schon im Kinde bestehenden Schatz von Texten, Damit soll man anfangen, ganz induktiv grammatische Regeln zu bilden, dann aber, wenn sie gebildet sind, durchaus darauf bestehen, dass das Kind sie auch behält, dass es sie dann als Regeln hat. Also man darf nicht in das Extrem verfallen, dass das Kind überhaupt keine Regeln lernen solle, sondern wenn sie induktiv abgeleitet sind, dann auch das Einprägen der Regeln. Das Behalten der Regeln gehört zur Entwicklung des Ich zwischen dem neunten und zwölften Lebensjahr. Die Ich-Entwicklung kann gefördert werden dadurch, dass das Kind [grammatische] Regeln [logischer Art über den Bau der Sprache] bekommt.
Dann kann man übergehen von der Poesie zur Prosa, die bis [zum Ende des 3. Schuljahrs] auf ein Minimum beschränkt werden sollte. Vom 4. Schuljahr an kann man aber dazu übergehen, einen Stoff zu wählen, den man erst durchnimmt, wo das grammatische Lernen und das Durchnehmen des Stoffes parallel geht. Und dazu sollte man nur Prosa nehmen. Da würden wir ja nur die Poesie verpedantisieren dadurch, dass man grammatische Regeln davon abstrahiert. Aber einen Prosastoff kann man durchaus so behandeln. [Bei Prosaischem] kann man auch allmählich übergehen zu einer Art Übersetzung.
Nun ist es ja natürlich so, dass schon versucht worden ist bisher, solche Dinge ein wenig [im Unterricht] einzuhalten. Aber es ist doch immer wiederum in einer Klasse vorgekommen, dass man lexikografisch vorgegangen ist, dass man nicht den Zusammenhang gesucht hat zwischen dem Ding und dem fremden Wort, sondern zwischen dem deutschen Wort und dem fremden Wort. Das ist bequemer für den Lehrer, aber es führt zu dem, wie jetzt überhaupt Sprachen in [ihrem gegenseitigen] Verhältnis behandelt werden, sodass das Gefühl für die Sprache doch nicht entwickelt wird.
Nun würde dies [im 4. Schuljahr beginnen müssen]. Im 4. Schuljahr würden wir uns beschränken müssen, im Wesentlichen die Wortformenlehre zu behandeln.
Im 5. Schuljahr würden wir übergehen zu Syntaktischem. Im 6. Schuljahr würde man mit dein Syntaktischen fortfahren, die kompliziertere Syntax. Parallel laufend würde man natürlich immer Lektüre pflegen. Übersetzungen von der deutschen Sprache in die fremde aber sollten eigentlich nicht gepflegt werden. Dann sollten kurze, nicht lange Aufsätze gemacht werden und dergleichen. Solche Übersetzungen sollte man nur in der Form behandeln, dass man [kurz] irgendetwas sagt und verlangt, das Kind solle dasselbe in der fremden Sprache ausdrücken. Man lässt das Kind das deutsch Gesagte in der fremden Sprache sagen. So könnte eigentlich der Übersetzungsunterricht bis zum Ende des 6. Schuljahres behandelt werden. Jedenfalls sollte vermieden werden, längere Stücke aus dem Deutschen direkt in die fremde Sprache zu übersetzen.
[Dagegen wäre es gut, viel] Lektüre [zu pflegen, aber] nur Lektüre mit viel Humor. Mit freudigem innerem Dabeisein sollte man [an der Lektüre] alles Mögliche besprechen, was zusammenhängt mit Sitten, Lebensgewohnheiten und Seelenverfassung derjenigen Leute, die die fremde Sprache sprechen. Also die Landeskunde [und Volkskunde] sollte man in humorvoller Weise heranziehen in der 5. und 6. Klasse. Auch Eigentümlichkeiten der Ausdrucksweise müssen von der 5. Klasse an berücksichtigt werden. Dann, von der 5. Klasse an muss man den sprichwörtlichen oder redensartlichen Schatz der fremden Sprache mitbehandeln dadurch, dass man für irgendetwas im Leben, wofür man ein deutsches Sprichwort brauchen könnte, das entsprechende fremde, ja ganz anders gefasste Sprichwort lernt.
In der 7. Klasse muss es so eingerichtet werden, dass berücksichtigt wird, dass ein großer Teil der Kinder nach der 8. Klasse die Schule verlässt. In der 7. und 8. Klasse sollte man den Hauptwert legen auf Lektüre und auf Behandlung des Charakters der Sprache an Sätzen. Wiederum handelt es sich um eine Aneignung solcher Dinge, die im Treiben und Leben der Menschen vorkommen, die die Sprache sprechen. An Texten sollte man das üben und sollte darauf sehen, dass durch Nacherzählen die Ausdrucksfähigkeit [in der] fremden Sprache geübt wird. Übersetzen sollte man nur gelegentlich.
Dagegen sollte man nacherzählen lassen, was man liest; selbst Dramatisches. Nicht Lyrisches und nicht Episches, aber Dramatisches kann in eigenen Worten nacherzählt werden. In der 8. Klasse sollten aber nur die Rudimente der Poetik und Metrik der fremden Sprache behandelt werden. Und in diesen zwei letzten Klassen sollte folgen ein ganz kurzer Abriss der Literaturgeschichte der betreffenden Sprache.
Dann käme man also zur 9. Klasse. Da würde notwendig sein eine Art, aber wirklich mit Humor behandelte Wiederholung des Grammatischen, indem man fortwährend humorvolle Beispiele bietet. [Man kann so an den Beispielen im Laufe] des Jahres das ganze Grammatische durchgehen. Dann geht nebenher selbstverständlich gerade in dieser Klasse anregende Lektüre.
In der 10. Klasse folgt die Metrik der Sprache mit vorzugsweise poetischer Lektüre. In der 11. Klasse muss mit dramatischer Lektüre begonnen werden. Nebenher geht Prosalektüre und etwas Ästhetik der Sprache. Namentlich an der dramatischen Lektüre soll [die] Poetik entwickelt werden, und dieses wird fortgesetzt für die lyrische und epische Poesie in der 12. Klasse. Da müssen namentlich Dinge gelesen werden, die sich beziehen auf die Gegenwart und ihre Verhältnisse auf dem Gebiet der fremden Sprache. Dazu Kenntnis der modernen fremden Literatur.
Dies mag der lose Lehrplan sein, den wir in Zukunft einhalten wollen.
[Man sollte] nicht eine Sache lesen, ohne dass man die Kinder mit dem Inhalt des Ganzen bekannt macht. In der 5., 4. Klasse kann man mit den Elementen des Grammatischen beginnen. Möglichst dazu übergehen, die Kinder Konversation pflegen zu lassen.
In Bezug auf das Dramatische in der 7. und 8. Klasse wäre noch Folgendes zu sagen: Man sucht sich, [zum Beispiel aus einer Moilière'schen Komödie], irgendeine längere Passage aus, die man lesen will. Man muss bis dahin in humorvoller Weise die Kinder mit dem Inhalt bekannt machen, möglichst ausführlich und dramatisch, und dann den Abschnitt lesen.
Wir haben ja im Laufe der Jahre kleine Zusätze zu dem früher Gesagten gemacht, im Prinzip muss es schon so bleiben. Schriftliche Arbeiten erst von der Stufe an, wie es in den Kursen gesagt wurde.
Nun ist natürlich der altsprachliche Unterricht dadurch, dass er bei uns eine besondere Stellung einnimmt, auch dazu verurteilt, seinen besonderen Lehrplan zu haben. Wir wollen noch einmal rekapitulieren, wie wir den lateinischen Unterricht haben: Lehrs, Schubert, Tittmann, Gildemeister. Ich werde einen genauen Latein-Lehrplan ausarbeiten und werde Ihnen diesen Lehrplan [am Freitag] bringen. tSie werden wohl bekommen haben, was wir bisher eingeführt hatten und was] sich nach und nach so eingerichtet hat. Wir fangen mit der 6. Klasse an in diesem Jahre, da wir mit der 5. noch nicht angefangen haben.
ERICH SCHWEBSCH bittet um ein Sprachseminar, das Rudolf Steiner zusagt.
RUDOLF STEINER: Jetzt würde ich gerne etwas hören über die didaktischen Erfahrungen seit Ostern.
BETTINA MELLINGER fragt nach biblischer Geschichte in der 3. Klasse.
RUDOLF STEINER: Ich habe gesehen, dass einzelne Freunde benutzen das Hebel-Buch. Meiner Empfindung nach kann als Leitfaden für die Behandlung der biblischen Geschichte nur die im Aufbau aus-gezeichnete Schuster'sche Bibel benutzt werden. Es ist besser, wenn man [die Geschichten] nicht textmäßig, behandelt, sondern in freier Weise heranträgt. Man sollte die Sachen nur in freier Weise an die Kinder heranbringen. Das Buch ist nur eine Gedächtnishilfe [und zum Nachlesen]. Da ist die ältere Schuster'sche Bibel, obwohl sie in der neuen Ausgabe verballhornt ist, doch immer noch das Beste. Ich glaube, so interessant es auch ist, das Buch von Hebel zu lesen, wenn man lesen will, [was man schon kennt], zum ersten Unterricht in der Bibel ist es nicht geeignet, ganz abgesehen davon, dass der Druck der hiesigen Ausgabe ein [scheußlicher] ist. Also ich würde meinen, wir behalten die alte Schuster'sche Bibel bei. Der Aufbau ist ausgezeichnet. Es ist ja [sonst] etwas pedantisch und katholisierend, aber in die Gefahr, zu katholisch zu werden, werden Sie ja. nicht geraten.
HERBERT HAHN fragt nach dem Unterschied der Behandlung der biblischen Geschichte im Religionsunterricht und im Hauptunterricht der 3. Klasse.
RUDOLF STEINER: Sie werden [methodisch] viel lernen, [wenn] Sie bedenken, welches Prinzip dem zugrunde liegt, dass wir an diesen zwei verschiedenen Stellen die biblische Geschichte zu behandeln haben. Nicht wahr, wenn wir biblische Geschichte [im Hauptunterricht] im eigentlichen Lehrplan drinnen behandeln, so behandeln wir sie als etwas ganz Allgemein-Menschliches. Wir machen einfach die Kinder bekannt mit dem Inhalt der Bibel, geben dem keine besondere religiöse Färbung, behandeln es als Profanunterricht, lassen nur gelten, dass der Inhalt der Bibel eben durchaus klassische Literatur ist, wie andere klassische Literatur auch.
Behandeln wir die Bibel im freien Religionsunterricht, so stellen wir uns damit auf den religiösen Standpunkt, stellen wir sie für uns in den Dienst des freien religiösen Elementes. Wenn wir diesen Unterschied taktvoll treffen, [wenn] wir nicht seichte Aufklärerei treiben im Hauptunterricht, dann werden wir gerade an der Herausarbeitung dieses feinen Unterschiedes außerordentlich viel für unsere eigene Pädagogik lernen können. Es ist ein Unterschied im «wie», aber ein außerordentlich wichtiger Unterschied im «wie».
Das, was [vorher] erzählt worden ist, wird nachher gelesen zur Befestigung. Ich möchte durchaus nicht glauben, dass diese schusterische Bibel ein schlechter Lesestoff ist. Die Bilder sind ganz humoristisch sogar, nicht schlecht; etwas süßlich, aber nicht eigentlich sentimental. Es genügt als Lesestoff [für die 3. Klasse und kann auch zur Einübung der Fraktur-Druckschrift verwendet werden].
LILI KOLISKO fragt wegen Schwierigkeiten im Stenografieunterricht mit neu eingetretenen Schülern.
RUDOLF STEINER: Dann bliebe uns nur übrig, den Stenografieunterricht nicht obligatorisch sein zu lassen. Wir behandeln ihn [doch] als etwas, was die Kinder lernen sollen.
Nehmen Sie an, es tritt ein Schüler in der i L Klasse ein. Er hat in allen vorigen Klassen einen Naturgeschichtslehrer gehabt, der katholisch war. Nun kommt er und sagt, ich will Naturgeschichte bloß auf Katholisch lernen. Dann können wir den [auch] nicht befreien.
Wir lehren das beste System, [das Gabelsberger'sche], und wir machen es obligatorisch, weil es im heutigen Zeitpunkt doch nötig ist für die Erziehung. Ich glaube nicht, dass es ein Vorurteil ist. Es ist das einzige System, das eine innere Notwendigkeit hat. Die anderen Systeme sind ausgedacht. Das wäre zu überlegen, dass man den Unterricht hereinverlegt in untere Klassen.
GERTRUD BERNHARDT: [Haben nicht die Kinder der 1. Klasse durch den Sprachunterricht zu viele Stunden?]
RUDOLF STEINER:[Wenn man sieht, dass die Kinder ermüdet sind], ist es schon besser, dass Sie für die ersten zwei Klassen diesen Unterricht ausfallen lassen, statt [irgendwelche] anderen Künste zu machen. Sonst wäre ich dafür, dass wir die Kleinen überhaupt nur zwei Stunden am Tag unterrichten.
EUGEN KOLISKO fragt wegen der Heileurythmie-Übungen.
RUDOLF STEINER: [Das kann nur eine Frage einer möglichst klugen Ausnützung der Zeit sein.] Das Kind bekommt die heileurythmischen Übungen eine bestimmte Zeit hindurch, und dies sollte täglich sein, Dafür muss das Kind aus der Klasse herausgeholt werden. Wenn das Kind eine Heileurythmie-Übung bekommt, so ist es eben krank. Da es eine Therapie ist, muss man das Kind aus jeder Stunde herausnehmen können [außer aus dem konfessionellen Religionsunterricht]. Versäumt es im Unterricht etwas, so ist es sein Karma. Es können nicht Schwierigkeiten entstehen, wenn man der Heil-eurythmie Wichtigkeit beimisst. Es sollte keiner sein, der nicht die Heileurythmie so hoch stellt, dass er das Kind nicht gehen lässt.
Jemand fragt nach der Kavalierperspektive im geometrischen Zeichnen der 12. Klasse und sagt: Ich habe in der Kavalierperspektive alles machen lassen.
RUDOLF STEINER: Die realistische ist die Kavalierperspektive. [Wir sehen in kleinen Stücken alles in Kavalierperspektive.] Alle Möglichkeiten sollten für die Kavalierperspektive genommen werden. Architektonik ist dasjenige, was für Kavalierperspektive bestimmt ist. [Die Architrave im ersten Goetheanum waren gemacht in der Kavalierperspektive, wie wenn man sich die Wände eines Zimmers betrachtet, rings umhergehend.]
Ich möchte nur, dass [das Kind] gleichzeitig und abwechselnd darin geübt wird, alle die Konstruktionen, [zum Beispiel Kegelschnitte], auch aus freier Hand [zu skizzieren]. Das eigentliche Zeichnen, die gute Ausführung, kann dann mit Zirkel und Lineal gemacht werden.
Frage wegen der Zeugnisse.
RUDOLF STEINER: Über Zeugnisse ist nicht gar so viel zu sagen. Wie wir das erste Schuljahr hatten in der Waldorfschule, war es so, dass die Zeugnisse [wirklich] reizend waren. Es war neu, einmal nicht mit Noten, sondern mit eigener Ausführung [die Schüler zu bewerten]. Von vielen Seiten wurde das als ungeheuer wohltätig empfunden. Die Sätze sind mit ungeheurer Liebe formuliert. Wenn Sie diese Zeugnisse heute vornehmen, sie sind aus Liebe formuliert.
Als ich aus Anlass der einen Beschwerde die Zeugnisse anschaute, fand ich, dass nach und nach die Sache so gekommen ist, dass für eine große Zahl der Lehrer die Zeugnisse [ebenso] eine solche Last geworden sind wie draußen in den Schulen, dass man froh ist, wenn man das hinschreibt. Es ist so, dass man sieht, dass keine Liebe mehr darauf verwendet ist. In der trockensten Prosa sind die Dinge formuliert worden. Da ist es schon besser, wir führen 4, 3, 2, 1 ein. Wir müssen mehr Sorgfalt darauf verwenden, in die Formulierung mehr Phantasie hineinlegen. Mehr Fleiß und Liebe sind anzuwenden, sonst artet es aus, sodass jemand zum Beispiel schreibt: «Kann zwar noch nichts, wird aber schließlich besser gellen», «benimmt sich ziemlich mangelhaft», [und so weiter]. Ios hat keinen Sinn mehr. Ich habe ja nichts dagegen; wenn es als eine zu große Last empfunden wird, so müssen wir in den sauren Apfel beißen und schulmäßige Zeugnisse ausstellen. Das wäre aber schade. Wenn offenbar in den letzten acht Tagen [irgend]etwas hingeschrieben wird, das dürfte sich nicht einstellen. Es lassen sich nicht Regeln angeben, sonst müsste für jeden Schüler eine besondere Regel da sein.
Das V.'sche Zeugnis hat mich betrübt. Ich habe ausdrücklich [gesagt], als ich mich entschlossen habe, diesen A. V. aufzunehmen — es war während des Aufenthaltes in Ilkley, weil ich es für die Waldorfschule für notwendig hielt, dass sie nicht vermufft —, wir können so etwas nicht durchführen, wenn wir muffig werden, wir müssen weltmännisch werden. Man kann nicht die Waldorfschule führen und darauf angewiesen sein, dass Unterstützung kommt, wenn man weltfremd wird. Es wäre viel bequemer gewesen [zu sagen]: Einen solchen Schüler wie A. V. können wir nicht aufnehmen. Es handelte sich darum, eine weltmännische Frage zu lösen, und dadurch bekamen wir diesen Jungen. Nun habe ich kein Hehl daraus gemacht, dass wir uns eine Plage auferlegen. Das alles habe ich gesagt. Wir müssen einmal eine Frage so lösen. Wir bekamen den Jungen in die 9. Klasse hinein, der [weit über sein Alter hinaus] begabt ist. Was stellt er für Fragen! Der aber andererseits [gar] nichts kann. Er war in allen Gegenständen ein Tunichtgut. Nun bekam er ein Zeugnis — mit Ausnahme dessen, [dass] der Satz [so] formuliert war, ist außer Acht gelassen worden alles, was jemals gesagt worden ist. Es war — ich finde es zum Die-Wände-Hinaufkriechen — ohne Berücksichtigung des besonderen Falles [geschrieben]; mehr als schematisch [und ganz ohne Berücksichtigung seiner Psychologie]. Ich bin von der Waldorfschul-Lehrerschaft ganz grässlich blamiert worden. Dies Zeugnis hat für diesen Jungen keine Bedeutung. [Die Mutter] verliert den Kopf. Dieses Zeugnis war schon ein Prachtstück von Nonchalance, soweit man es sich denken kann. In diesem Fall haben Sie sich nicht so begabt erwiesen wie sonst. [Es war] im Stil eines ganz gewöhnlichen Mittelschullehrers [geschrieben].
Man schreibt [doch] das Zeugnis für diejenigen, welche über das Kind etwas erfahren sollen. [Dem Kinde kann man auf viel direktere Art im Laufe des Jahres das mitteilen, was man ihm zu sagen hat.] Das Zeugnis lesen die anderen! Eine Vorstellung davon, dass der junge doch das wichtigste Jahr seines Lebens verlebt hat, dass er am Ende des Jahres anders dastand als vorher, was die positiven Dinge sind, das geht nicht daraus hervor. Um ein solches Zeugnis zu bekommen, hätten wir ihn nicht auf die Waldorfschule bringen müssen. Gewiss kann man sich aufs Schulmeisterross setzen. Wir sollen doch weltmannisch sein.
Die Zeugnisse müssen mit mehr Liebe verfasst werden. Sie sind nicht mit Liebe verfasst. Auf die Schülerindividualität muss man mit mehr Liebe hinsehen. Selbst -Äußerlich [ist dieses Zeugnis] schlampig. So etwas schaut schlecht aus. Ein Zeugnis sollte übersichtlich und sauber aussehen. Es wird Kinder geben, wo man veranlasst ist, über die innere Entwicklung zu schreiben. Wenn unsere Einrichtungen so versagen, wäre es besser, wir machen nichts Riskantes. Ich fürchte, es wird noch schlimmer werden, weil doch die Sorgfalt für eine solche Individualität nicht da ist.
BETTINA MELILINGER fragt, ob das Kind L. 13. aus der 3. Klasse in die Hilfsklasse soll.
RUDOLF STEINER: Die Mutter ist schrecklich, [war schon als junges Mädchen pathologisch]. Das Kind ist nicht geeignet für die Hilfsklasse, wo wir [nur] Kinder mit einem intellektuellen oder Gemütsdefekt hinbringen sollten. Die L. B. ist bloß schlimm. Man würde sie bloß bestrafen. In die Hilfsklasse passt sie nicht hinein. Nicht alle in die Hilfsklasse hineinstecken.
A. D. — unsere Therapie wird ihm helfen. Er kann ab und zu in die Hilfsklasse kommen.
[Jemand fragt: Ist der K. S. in der 4. Klasse wohl als normal anzusehen]?
RUDOLF STEINER: [Was ist normal? Eine Grenze ist ja gar nicht zu ziehen.] Der K. S. ist nicht abnorm. [Unter solchen Umständen kann man ein Kind in die frühere Klasse geben.]
ROBERT KILLIAN fragt wegen R. A. in der 5. Klasse, der gestohlen hat.
RUDOLF STEINE : Vier Jahre lang hat er nicht gestohlen. Jetzt fängt er an zu stehlen. Wir haben die Aufgabe, ihn zu einem ordentlichen Menschen zu machen. Es muss doch etwas sein, dass der Kontakt zwischen Lehrerschaft und Kindern nicht vorhanden ist. Wenn die Kinder völliges Vertrauen haben, ist es eigentlich gar nicht möglich, dass solche moralischen Defekte vorkommen. Den sollten Sie gerade in der Klasse behalten. Er ist kein Kleptomane. Er hat keine Mitwisser gehabt. Auf die Psychologie der Kinder muss man eingehen. Es kann ein Bravourstück vorkommen. [Es könnte so eine geheime, verschmitzte Nichtsnutzigkeit gewesen sein.] Ich habe ihm gehörig meine Meinung gesagt.
Es wird doch eingehalten werden, dass man Frau Heyer keine Kostkinder gibt? Dies muss streng eingehalten werden, dass von der Waldorfschule aus kein Kostkind vermittelt wird.
Eine Frage wegen des Schülers A. K., ob er zum landwirtschaftlichen Kursus gehen solle.
RUDOLF STEINER: Das geht nicht, er hat doch gar nichts voraus. Es ist doch einfach ein Unfug. [Über einen anderen Schüler.] Da er Hospitant ist, brauchen wir ihm keinen Urlaub zu geben.
Fräulein Michels kann kommen [zum landwirtschaftlichen Kursus]. Jemand muss sich mit den Kindern in anderer Weise beschäftigen.
Es wird nach dem anstehenden Lauteurythmie- Kurs gefragt.
RUDOLF STEINER: Zum Toneurythmie-Kurs [im Februar] hätten die Eurythmielehrerinnen und Herr Baumann gehört.
[Jetzt] bei diesem Kurs handelt es sich außer dem Sprachkursus um etwas anderes, 1912 habe ich die Lauteurythrnie aufgebaut. Dann sind eine Anzahl von Schülerinnen gekommen, Kisseleff, Baumann, Wolfram; dann hat sich so eine Weiterführung gebildet, als eine An-zahl von Eurythmistinnen da war. Das Erste hat sich traditionell vonseiten Lory Smits' fortgepflanzt. Dann ist etwas Unhomogenes hereingekommen. Dieser Kurs soll benützt werden, noch einmal von Anfang an zu beginnen. Wie weit man kommt, das wird sich erst herausstellen. Nun kann das von besonderer Wichtigkeit sein. Es kann schon sein, weil es sich um etwas handelt, was hier in der Schule gepflegt werden muss, dass dies zum Schließen des Eurythmieunterrichts führen könnte.
Für den Heilpädagogischen Kurs müsste es genügen, wenn Dr. Schubert [und Dr. Kolisko] dabei sind, [und sonst, wer gerade kann.] Wegen Geografieunterricht eine Stunde wiederholen.
Sixty-seventh Conference
On the afternoon of June 1, the fourth regular general meeting of the Freie Waldorfschule association took place. Rudolf Steiner spoke about communication between teachers and parents in the spirit of Waldorf education. “It is not a rule or some educational principle that requires Waldorf teachers to find a way to connect with parents, but rather the deepest need of the heart, just as Waldorf education in its innermost essence is an education of the heart.” The question arose as to whether the classes were too large. Steiner's answer: “To establish small classes for pedagogical reasons is to assume a pedagogical weakness.” (GA 298, 5. 182, 185)
The next day was a conference. The day after that, Steiner left Stuttgart. He prepared for the major conference in Koberwitz on the establishment of biodynamic agriculture (Agricultural Course, GA 327). After a closing event in Weimar, Rudolf Steiner traveled back to Dornach via Stuttgart. He arrived back in Stuttgart on June 19 and held a conference.
Topics: Fundamentals of foreign language teaching and grammar. Narrative material for the 3rd grade in relation to religious education. Shorthand lessons and their problems. On the position of eurythmy therapy. The burden of writing report cards. The student A. V. — his report card and his treatment. The relationship between religious education and Sunday services and the Christian community. Poetry, reflections on language.
Comments: There were so many new teachers that it had become necessary to once again present the methodology and didactics of foreign language teaching in great detail.
However, one also senses Steiner's resignation in the face of the teachers' inability. If the problems with shorthand could not be overcome, then the lessons should simply “no longer be compulsory.” If report cards became a burden and could no longer be written with love, then grades were simply better. He felt “disavowed in a certain way” by the teachers because they had judged the very special student he had brought to school, the highly gifted A. V., only according to pedantic standards. "No consideration was given to the individual case. He is difficult to deal with, but there is not the necessary will to individualize. I have to say it radically, otherwise it will not be understood clearly enough."
Steiner's generosity and open-mindedness could be seen in the way he was unable to view the Christian Community and free religious education as opposites and therefore recommended only a friendly coexistence.
Chair: Rudolf Steinen At the beginning, the ninth lecture from the “Methodological-Didactic Course” will be read aloud, and the curriculum instructions given so far will be compiled by Mr. Boy.
RUDOLF STEINER: The language teachers have been interested in what has been given so far. It should not be forgotten that we have had certain difficulties in language teaching up to now. Although we have generally found that students of various ages have come to us, and we have always had to accept new students into the higher grades, we could generally assume that when a nine-year-old child came, he or she had already learned something up to a certain level. This was not the case for language teaching. We simply had children entering the 5th grade who had never learned a word of French or English, so that, basically, given the way we were provided with student materials, we could not establish a strict curriculum. The question is also whether we can continue to set it for the individual year, or whether we will have to content ourselves with generally indicating aspects that could then be adhered to if we were to receive a certain amount of student material in the 1st grade and could carry it through all grades.
Now, our language teaching is a little freer. We consider what takes place in the first two hours to be the foundation of education. Language teaching must also be handled more freely in the future.
In general, it must be said that children already receive language instruction in the first grade, and that we continue to teach language until the end of the third grade in such a way that children learn to speak by speaking. And that one should avoid looking at the corresponding English translation of the word for any word or phrase that the child has to learn, but rather ensure that the child immediately associates the word or phrase with the thing itself. So, one should not, should one, relate the foreign word to the German word, but rather to the thing itself and remain in the foreign language. This should be done in particular until the end of the third school year. During this time, it should not even be noticeable that there is such a thing as grammar.
When dealing with longer pieces, one must proceed in such a way that one does not take offense at the fact that the child learns a verse or a poem purely by ear, even if he or she only has a poor understanding of the subject matter. In extreme cases, the child may even learn four, six, [eight] lines, which he or she only retains as sounds. Under certain circumstances, this could even contribute greatly to the child's mastery of the language, as they learn to understand from memory what they have only learned by sound. In the first three years, poetry is definitely preferable to prose. [The matter itself makes it clear that, basically,] the individual years cannot be separated [and that these three years can be treated in the same way].
Then comes what follows [the 4th grade]. It would be good if we no longer avoided starting with grammar, not by learning rules, but by illustrating them with the treasure trove of texts already existing in the child. We should begin by forming grammatical rules inductively, but then, once they have been formed, insist that the child retains them, that they then become rules. So one must not fall into the extreme of thinking that the child should not learn any rules at all, but rather, once they have been derived inductively, the rules should also be memorized. Retaining the rules is part of the development of the ego between the ages of nine and twelve. Ego development can be promoted by giving the child [grammatical] rules [of a logical nature about the structure of language].
Then you can move from poetry to prose, which should be kept to a minimum until [the end of the third school year]. From the fourth school year onwards, however, you can move on to choosing material that you first work through, where grammatical learning and working through the material go hand in hand. And for this, you should only use prose. We would only be pedanticizing poetry by abstracting grammatical rules from it. But prose material can certainly be treated in this way. [With prose], one can also gradually move on to a kind of translation.
Of course, attempts have already been made to adhere to such things [in teaching] to a certain extent. But it has always been the case in class that a lexicographical approach has been taken, that the connection has not been sought between the thing and the foreign word, but between the German word and the foreign word. This is more convenient for the teacher, but it leads to languages being treated in [their mutual] relationship in such a way that a feeling for the language is not developed after all.
Now this would have to begin [in the 4th school year]. In the 4th school year, we would have to limit ourselves to essentially teaching word forms.
In the 5th school year, we would move on to syntax. In the 6th school year, we would continue with syntax, the more complicated syntax. At the same time, we would of course always continue with reading. Translations from German into the foreign language should not really be cultivated. Then short, not long essays should be written and the like. Such translations should only be dealt with in such a way that one says something [briefly] and asks the child to express the same thing in the foreign language. The child is allowed to say what has been said in German in the foreign language. Translation lessons could actually be taught in this way until the end of the 6th school year. In any case, translating longer passages from German directly into the foreign language should be avoided.
[On the other hand, it would be good to do a lot of] reading [but] only reading material with a lot of humor. With joyful inner participation, one should discuss everything possible [in the reading material] that is related to the customs, habits, and state of mind of the people who speak the foreign language. Thus, regional studies [and folklore] should be taught in a humorous way in the 5th and 6th grades. Peculiarities of expression must also be taken into account from the 5th grade onwards. Then, from the 5th grade onwards, the proverbial or idiomatic treasure of the foreign language must also be taught by learning the corresponding foreign proverb, which is expressed in a completely different way, for something in life for which a German proverb could be used.
In the 7th grade, it must be arranged in such a way that it takes into account that a large proportion of children leave school after the 8th grade. In the 7th and 8th grades, the main emphasis should be placed on reading and on dealing with the character of the language in sentences. Again, it is a matter of acquiring such things that occur in the activities and lives of the people who speak the language. This should be practiced using texts, and care should be taken to ensure that the ability to express oneself in the foreign language is practiced through retelling. Translation should only be done occasionally.
On the other hand, students should be asked to retell what they read, even dramatic works. Not lyrical or epic works, but dramatic works can be retold in their own words. In the 8th grade, however, only the rudiments of the poetics and metrics of the foreign language should be covered. And in these last two grades, a very brief outline of the literary history of the language in question should follow.
Then we come to the 9th grade. Here it would be necessary to repeat the grammar, but in a humorous way, by constantly offering humorous examples. [One can thus go through the entire grammar using examples throughout] the year. Then, of course, stimulating reading would take place alongside this in this grade.
In the 10th grade, the meter of the language follows, preferably with poetic reading. In the 11th grade, dramatic reading must be introduced. This is accompanied by prose reading and some aesthetics of language. Poetics should be developed through dramatic reading in particular, and this is continued for lyric and epic poetry in the 12th grade. In particular, works relating to the present and its circumstances in the field of foreign languages must be read. This includes knowledge of modern foreign literature.
This may be the loose curriculum that we intend to follow in the future.
[One should] not read something without familiarizing the children with the content of the whole. In the 5th and 4th grades, one can begin with the elements of grammar. If possible, move on to having the children engage in conversation.
With regard to drama in the 7th and 8th grades, the following should be noted: Choose a longer passage [from a Molière comedy, for example] that you want to read. Beforehand, you must familiarize the children with the content in a humorous way, as thoroughly and dramatically as possible, and then read the passage.
Over the years, we have made small additions to what was said earlier, but in principle it must remain the same. Written work only from the level as stated in the courses.
Now, of course, because classical language teaching occupies a special position at our school, it is also destined to have its own special curriculum. Let us recapitulate once again how we teach Latin: Lehrs, Schubert, Tittmann, Gildemeister. I will work out a detailed Latin curriculum and bring it to you [on Friday]. You will probably have received what we have introduced so far and what] has gradually been established. We are starting with the 6th grade this year, as we have not yet started with the 5th grade.
ERICH SCHWEBSCH requests a language seminar, which Rudolf Steiner agrees to.
RUDOLF STEINER: Now I would like to hear something about the didactic experiences since Easter.
BETTINA MELLINGER asks about biblical history in the 3rd grade.
RUDOLF STEINER: I have seen that some friends are using the Hebel book. In my opinion, only Schuster's Bible, which is excellently structured, can be used as a guide for teaching biblical history. It is better not to treat [the stories] textually, but to approach them in a free manner. One should only present the material to children in a free manner. The book is only a memory aid [and for reading]. The older Schuster Bible, although it has been distorted in the new edition, is still the best. I believe that, as interesting as it is to read Hebel's book if you want to read [what you already know], it is not suitable for the first lesson in the Bible, quite apart from the fact that the print of the local edition is [awful]. So I would say we should keep the old Schuster Bible. The structure is excellent. It is [otherwise] somewhat pedantic and Catholicizing, but you will not run the risk of becoming too Catholic.
HERBERT HAHN asks about the difference in the treatment of biblical history in religious education and in the main lessons of the 3rd grade.
RUDOLF STEINER: You will learn a lot [methodologically] [if] you consider the principle underlying the fact that we have to deal with biblical history in these two different places. Isn't it true that when we deal with biblical history [in the main lesson] in the actual curriculum, we treat it as something very general and human? We simply familiarize the children with the content of the Bible, do not give it any particular religious coloring, treat it as secular instruction, and accept that the content of the Bible is simply classical literature, like other classical literature.
If we cover the Bible in free religious education, we are taking a religious standpoint and placing it at the service of the free religious element. If we make this distinction tactfully, [if] we do not engage in shallow enlightenment in the main lesson, then we will be able to learn an extraordinary amount for our own pedagogy precisely by working out this subtle distinction. It is a difference in “how,” but an extremely important difference in “how.”
What has been told [before] is read afterwards for reinforcement. I do not want to believe that this cobbled-together Bible is bad reading material. The pictures are quite humorous, not bad; a little sweet, but not really sentimental. It is sufficient as reading material [for the 3rd grade and can also be used for practicing Fraktur printing].
LILI KOLISKO asks about difficulties in teaching shorthand to new students.
RUDOLF STEINER: Then we would have no choice but to make shorthand lessons optional. We treat it [after all] as something that children should learn.
Suppose a student enters the first grade. In all previous grades, he had a natural history teacher who was Catholic. Now he comes and says, I only want to learn natural history in Catholic. Then we cannot exempt him [either].
We teach the best system [Gabelsberger's], and we make it compulsory because it is necessary for education at the present time. I don't think it's a prejudice. It is the only system that has an inner necessity. The other systems are contrived. It would be worth considering moving the lessons to lower grades.
GERTRUD BERNHARDT: [Don't the children in the 1st grade have too many hours of language lessons?]
RUDOLF STEINER:[If you see that the children are tired], it is better to cancel these lessons for the first two grades instead of doing [any] other arts. Otherwise, I would be in favor of teaching the little ones only two hours a day.
EUGEN KOLISKO asks about the curative eurythmy exercises.
RUDOLF STEINER: [This can only be a question of making the best possible use of time.] The child receives the eurythmy therapy exercises for a certain period of time, and this should be daily. To do this, the child must be taken out of class. If the child receives eurythmy therapy exercises, then it is ill. Since it is a therapy, it must be possible to take the child out of every lesson [except for denominational religious instruction]. If the child misses something in class, that is its karma. There can be no difficulties if therapeutic eurythmy is given importance. No one should be so opposed to therapeutic eurythmy that they do not let the child go.
Someone asks about cavalier perspective in 12th grade geometric drawing and says: I had everything done in cavalier perspective.
RUDOLF STEINER: The realistic perspective is the cavalier perspective. [We see everything in small pieces in cavalier perspective.] All possibilities should be taken for cavalier perspective. Architecture is what is intended for cavalier perspective. [The architraves in the first Goetheanum were made in cavalier perspective, as if one were looking at the walls of a room, walking around it.]
I just want [the child] to be trained simultaneously and alternately in [sketching] all the constructions, [for example, conic sections], freehand. The actual drawing, the good execution, can then be done with a compass and ruler.
Question about report cards.
RUDOLF STEINER: There is not much to say about report cards. When we had our first school year at the Waldorf School, the report cards were [really] charming. It was new to evaluate the students not with grades, but with our own execution. Many people found this to be tremendously beneficial. The sentences are formulated with tremendous love. When you write these report cards today, they are formulated with love.
When I looked at the report cards in response to a complaint, I found that, little by little, the situation had developed to such an extent that for a large number of teachers, the report cards had become as much of a burden as they are in other schools, and that they were glad when they had finished writing them. It is clear that no love has been put into them. The comments have been formulated in the driest prose. It would be better to introduce 4, 3, 2, 1. We need to take more care and put more imagination into the wording. More diligence and love are needed, otherwise it will degenerate to the point where someone writes, for example: “Can't do anything yet, but will eventually get better,” “behaves rather poorly,” [and so on]. Ios no longer makes sense. I have nothing against it; if it is perceived as too great a burden, we must bite the bullet and issue school-style report cards. But that would be a shame. If something has obviously been written down in the last eight days, that should not be the case. Rules cannot be specified, otherwise there would have to be a special rule for each student.
V.'s report card saddened me. When I decided to accept A. V. — it was during my stay in Ilkley, because I thought it was necessary for the Waldorf School not to become stuffy — I explicitly [said] that we cannot do something like this if we become stuffy; we must become sophisticated. You cannot run a Waldorf school and rely on support coming if you become unworldly. It would have been much easier [to say]: We cannot accept a student like A. V. It was a matter of solving a social question, and that is how we got this boy. Now, I made no secret of the fact that we were taking on a burden. I said all that. We have to solve a question like this once and for all. We got the boy into the 9th grade, who is [far beyond his age] gifted. What questions he asks! But on the other hand, he can't do anything. He was a good-for-nothing in all subjects. Now he got a report card — with the exception of the fact that the sentence was phrased that way, everything that had ever been said was ignored. It was—I find it infuriating—written without taking the special case into account; more than schematic [and completely without consideration of his psychology]. I have been terribly embarrassed by the Waldorf school teachers. This report card has no meaning for this boy. [The mother] is losing her mind. This report card was a masterpiece of nonchalance, as far as one can imagine. In this case, you have not proven yourself to be as talented as usual. [It was] written in the style of a very ordinary middle school teacher.
One writes the report card for those who need to know something about the child. [You can tell the child what you have to say to them in a much more direct way during the course of the year.] The report card is read by others! It does not convey the idea that the young person has just lived through the most important year of their life, that they were in a different place at the end of the year than they were before, or what the positive things are. We didn't have to send him to Waldorf school to get a report card like this. Of course, you can put yourself on your schoolmaster's high horse. We are supposed to be sophisticated, after all.
Report cards need to be written with more love. They are not written with love. We need to look at the individuality of each student with more love. Even externally, [this report card] is sloppy. Something like this looks bad. A report card should look clear and clean. There will be children where one is prompted to write about their inner development. If our institutions fail so badly, it would be better not to do anything risky. I fear it will get even worse, because the care for such individuality is not there.
BETTINA MELILINGER asks whether the child L. 13. from the 3rd grade should be placed in the remedial class.
RUDOLF STEINER: The mother is terrible, [was already pathological as a young girl]. The child is not suitable for the remedial class, where we [only] children with intellectual or emotional defects should be sent. L. B. is just terrible. She would only be punished. She does not fit into the remedial class. Not everyone should be put into the remedial class.
A. D. — our therapy will help him. He can come to the remedial class from time to time.
[Someone asks: Can K. S. in the 4th grade be considered normal]?
RUDOLF STEINER: [What is normal? There is no clear line to be drawn.] K. S. is not abnormal. [Under such circumstances, a child can be placed in the previous class.]
ROBERT KILLIAN asks about R. A. in the 5th grade, who has stolen something.
RUDOLF STEINER: He hasn't stolen anything for four years. Now he's starting to steal. It is our job to make him a decent person. There must be something wrong if there is no contact between the teachers and the children. If the children have complete trust, it is actually impossible for such moral defects to occur. You should keep him in the class. He is not a kleptomaniac. He had no accomplices. You have to respond to the psychology of children. It could be a bravura performance. [It could have been a secret, mischievous act of uselessness.] I told him exactly what I thought.
Will it be ensured that no boarding children are placed with Mrs. Heyer? It must be strictly adhered to that no boarding children are placed by the Waldorf School.
A question about the student A. K., whether he should attend the agricultural course.
RUDOLF STEINER: That won't work, he has no advantage. It's simply nonsense. [About another student.] Since he is a guest student, we don't need to give him time off.
Miss Michels can come [to the agricultural course]. Someone has to look after the children in a different way.
A question is asked about the upcoming eurythmy course.
RUDOLF STEINER: The eurythmy teachers and Mr. Baumann would have attended the eurythmy course [in February].
[Now] this course is something different from the language course. In 1912, I established eurythmy. Then a number of students came, Kisseleff, Baumann, Wolfram; then a continuation of sorts was formed when a number of eurythmists were there. The first part was traditionally continued by Lory Smits. Then something inhomogeneous came in. This course should be used to start again from the beginning. How far we will get remains to be seen. Now this may be of particular importance. It may well be that, because this is something that needs to be cultivated here at the school, it could lead to the closure of the eurythmy class.
For the curative education course, it should be sufficient if Dr. Schubert [and Dr. Kolisko] are present, [and otherwise, whoever is available.] Repeat one hour due to geography class.