Forum Index
»
Schools and Education General Discussion
Green Acres, Waldorf, Oneness
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Does anyone have any information on these schools? They all seem to be a lot of fun for the kids, but what about academics? Does anyone know of any bad experiences at these schools, such as kids falling behind for grade level? |
Anonymous
| I'm curious on this as well. I love the philosophy of these schools - very warm, nurturing and creative. I know a few Waldorf kids (from another state) and I have to say they are the nicest kids I've ever met and very imaginative and creative. They spend their time knitting and making up stories and exploring nature. They're just great kids. |
Anonymous
|
I think Green Acres is more traditional than a Waldorf school in an academic sense, while still avoiding the high-stakes academic testing pressure. Check out the Washington Post magazine story on Green Acres from about a month ago. It was written by a Post reporter who had to pull his kids out and put them in public school for financial reasons. It was a thought-provoking story, and it seemed like academics are important at Green Acres.
I don't know anything about Oneness, but isn't it a Montessori school? As far as Waldorf education in general, and the Acorn Hill preschool and kindergarten in particular, I have heard that kids generally perform at grade level or above. I hear only good things about Washington Waldorf. I'm not sure about the Waldorf view that reading should not be a part of the early curriculum, but I love that TV and other media, as well as commercial images on t-shirts, etc. are discouraged. Many Waldorf kids do read early at home. I too would be interested in posters who have direct experience of these schools. |
Anonymous
| I have done tons of online research about these alternative styles of education. There have been studies that show that Montessori and Waldorf style education have some advantages. Waldorf has been shown to make a difference long term. The Progressive approach has had mixed reviews. But I wonder about how well the studies were conducted, and are the samples equal. Do these kids tend to come from privileged backgrounds anyway, and would have done well regardless of the academic environment? Are they children of creative parents? Before I commit my child to a different approach, and spend the money, I would like to know more. Does anyone know of education specialists that have a handle on these topics? |
Anonymous
| does anyone know how colleges view these types of schools? |
Anonymous
|
Some say that colleges have an interest in Waldorf kids, maybe from a curiosity standpoint. In Germany, the Waldorf kids have been shown to have impressive outcomes on achievement tests.
The Progressive schools argue that the mixed results in the past reflect poorly supervised progressive education by educators that did not understand the approach. Alternatively educated kids seem to stand out, for many reasons, when they apply to college. |
Anonymous
|
And yet another related question: where do these kids go to school for high school? (and possibly middle school)?
Speaking of colleges. |
Anonymous
| Washington Waldorf School is K-12, I think. Don't know about the others. |
clarabow
Member Offline
Member Offline
| Are there temperment/personality types that do particularly well or poorly under the various alternative approaches? It's nice to hear from someone who has researched this stuff! |
Anonymous
|
The main thing that I have heard is that a small number of poorly motivated kids can fail in these environments.
Someone once said that if a kid likes a school, he/she will do well there, but I wonder about the realistic side of that. We can't always keep them entertained, so what happens when it's time for the real world, i.e. doing the academic tasks that just have to get done? |
Anonymous
|
I've also reaserched extensively, as we are looking for alternatives to the standard academic setting for our daughter, who will go to kinder next year.
Each school's site has a listing of where the kids go after 8th grade/high school. Most go on to other prestigious privates in the area, with a few heading on to public schools. For the prek-12 schools, there are a LOT of kids heading to small liberal arts schools, quite a few Ivies and good state schools (UVA, etc). I certainly know a bunch of kids who wouldn't do well in progressive schools and are more suited for a traditional setting, such as the British School or Beauvoir/St Albans, etc. My child, on the other hand, would do much better in a more laidback, child-paced school, such as one of the above. Some need discipline, some need space to do their own thing. It's such an individual thing. I think another huge factor are the types of families at the school and the community it creates. Waldorf/Lowell/Oneness families are much different from St Albans/Sidwell families. I'm not saying either is better! Just that the environment is markedly different and was certainly a factor in the schools we chose to apply to. |
Anonymous
|
The Progressive approach is confusing to me. They do things that the experts say to avoid, such as teaching reading by sight rather than phonics; and "fuzzy" math, which has the kids "understanding " what they are doing rather than memorizing and repeating. There is a whole web site called nychold.com that involves this issue. I get the impression that the experts are now saying that young children are not understanding as much as we might think. By asking young children to "feel" the math can confuse and frustrate them. So it has been suggested that young kids should just learn by memory, then understand later when their brains are more developed. It seems that this is why Asian schools do a better job at teaching math.
I want my child to enjoy school, but I want her to be taught as efficiently as possible...so she is not wasting time. So there is more time for fun and family. I like the Progressive and Waldorf approach, but I am looking at it as an adult and saying "wow, that looks like fun". But this is exactly what the researchers caution us on. What seems great to us, may be more confusing for a child. My take on it so far is that certain subject areas may need the old fashioned phonics and memorization techniques (namely elementary math and reading). Other subjects, lend themselves to more creative approaches??? Am I wrong? |
Anonymous
|
To pp: Are you wrong? Well, that's subjective. I think you're wrong. All of the kids/parents that go to the more progressive schools think you're wrong and prove that you can be wrong by excelling past the vast majority of kids. There's a big difference b/w pure progressive theory and its actual use in schools in the area (of which I'm familiar). The kids that go to Wash Waldorf and Lowell do not have learning problems. Now, that could be because the parents tend to to be more educated and wealthy, so the kids have these opportunities anyway and would do well regardless of school. But, no one's saying that these types of schooling is ok for all kids. Some kids NEED memorization. Some don't. There's no need to put an entire cohort down because of general "Japanese test better than we do". They also have a ridiculously high teen suicide rate connected to said schooling pressures.
Every child is an individual. If your child is one that needs memorization, then send him/her to another school. I think it's wonderful that we have these options - and that we can pick what works for our kids. |
Anonymous
|
Sorry, I am not implying that any kids at any school have learning problems.
I need to clarify that I like to Progressive and Waldorf approaches, the kids seem to have higher self esteem, confidence and life skills. I just fear that in the end, there could be "holes" in my child's education. On a practical note, does anyone know of kids coming out of these systems with academic problems/deficiencies? |
Anonymous
I'm a lot more concerned about gaps in my child's education under the current testing-driven public schools regimen. Approaches like Waldorf capture the child's imagination and teach him to value learning and seek it in all circumstances. When you ignite that curiosity, I think you end up with fewer gaps and a lot more real learning. But if anyone has known children with academic deficiencies coming out of these programs, please let us know. |