Steiner School

Press, 5 December 1986, Page 20

Steiner School

Sir, —Wednesday’s article, “Some parents unhappy with Steiner School,” impressed me as being a little unfair. Before we send our children to this school, we parents are all well aware of the delayed age that a child will be taught to read, and the reasons for it. As we become a part of the school community, we also learn that in Steiner schools all over the world there are instances where, occasionally, a particular teacher can not make it through the full eight years of being a class teacher. The reaction of most of us to this is to wonder that so many can, considering how few of us could be sure how our lives would unfold eight years in advance. We also notice that the teachers do not feel that they are being treated unfairly, that they really want to work in this school; they even choose their low salaries in order to help the school. I hope the people who read articles like that of Wednesday will realise that for every dissatisfied parent there are very large numbers like myself, who, while not saying that the school is perfect, have found it to be of tremendous value to their children. — Yours, etc., L. MacDONALD. December 3, 1986.

Sir,—The report about two dissatisfied Steiner School parents (December 3) is puzzling, if not actually disturbing. On the one hand, a parent is worried because the class teacher has not had continuous service, and also worried because the incoming teacher has had eight years of Continuous service with his class.

As for reading at nine years, we know that there are many secondary (State) school pupils struggling, with remedial reading having to be provided. Possibly these parents did not attend the recent Steiner School fair. The amount of work and co-operation which went into that very successful effort by teachers and parents of what is, after all, a small school, was staggering. It spoke for itself. —Yours, etc.,

D. L. MAIN. December 3, 1986.

Sir,—l found it saddening that certain Steiner School parents should go to the newspaper with their discontents rather than discussing them with the school concerned (December 3). After two unhappy years at another school we sent the youngest of our six children to the Rudolf Steiner School. Within two months he had achieved more small successes, and consequently more personal satisfactions, than in the previous two years. The areas which appealed to me most within the school were its co-operative spirit, the gentleness of its approach, and the way children of very different backgrounds and abilities were woven together. Of course, everything was not of such appeal, but I always felt able to discuss my concerns with staff. As the world continues with its rapid changes, more and more is expected of “education” and our own ideas must be constantly reevaluated. The Steiner path, while maybe not appealing to all, has much of value to offer in these troubled times.—Yours, etc. JILL WILCOX. December 4, 1986.

Sir,—For the two disgruntled parents who have achieved some bad publicity for the Steiner School (December 3), there are hundreds of parents and friends of the school who would have wonderful things to say about it. Sadly, however, good news is seldom newsworthy. Some of the criticisms published in Wednesday’s article show an obvious lack of understanding of Steiner education. We have four children who have so far spent seven very happy and productive years at the school, and I have nothing but praise and admiration for the teachers. They are not only excellent and inspiring teachers, but they have worked to establish the school from very small beginnings 11 years ago, against daunting odds. Our recent successful Christmas fair showed what a great spirit our school community has. — Yours, etc., PADDY GILGENBERG. December 4, 1986.