Don't forget to visit The Waldorf Review for more up-to-date school reviews and news stories.
Showing posts with label highland hall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label highland hall. Show all posts

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Racist Waldorf School Teacher moves from Highland Hall to Lake Champlain

Racist Waldorf Teacher, Merrily Lovell, taught my kid that "the blood of people from Europe is more evolved than the blood of people from Africa and Asia" while working at Highland Hall.  Now, she is employed at Lake Champlain Waldorf School teaching biology and math.   From her bio at Lake Champlain:

http://www.lakechamplainwaldorfschool.org/our_school/meet_the_faculty/

Merrily Lovell

Biology and Math

"Ms. Lovell came to LCWHS in 2010 after many years of teaching Biology at Highland Hall Waldorf High School in Northridge, California. She completed a Waldorf High School Science teacher training in England in 1996. ... She is thrilled... to be teaching part time at the high school." 


Merrily is mentioned here and elsewhere on my blog:
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2009/11/pete-k-declares-war-on-racism-at_2522.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2009/11/pete-k-declares-war-on-racism-at_06.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2009/11/pete-k-declares-war-on-racism-at.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/10/highland-hall-board-members-clueless.html

and what she taught was posted to many newspapers and blogs:
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2011/11/controlhaltdelete-article-comments.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2012/01/dcs-improbable-science.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2012/01/local-schools-network-3.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2012/01/local-schools-network-2.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2012/01/local-schools-network.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2012/01/sf-k-files.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2012/01/ny-times-article-rebuttal.html

And many more places... And now Merrily is teaching biology at Lake Champlain!  But does she actually know anything about biology?  What do they teach as biology at Waldorf High School Science teacher training in England?  When my son, who was in her class, turned in a scientific paper on evolution, she chided him for not considering "intelligent design".  Is this what Waldorf biology teaches?  That God made all things and that some people have "evolved" higher than others, and that they are identifiable precisely through the color of their skin" (as Steiner would say).
 
Hasn't Merrily done ENOUGH for Waldorf education already?  Lake Champlain is already a poorly-run school according to the reviews.

Sunday, April 29, 2012

HIGHLAND HALL Waldorf school Reviews - by Parents - UPDATED

I've reviewed Highland Hall extensively, but here are more RECENT reviews from
other parents and teachers... notice, very little has changed in all these
years:

http://gocitykids.parentsconnect.com/attraction/highland-hall-waldorf-school-17100-superior-street-northridge-ca-91325-us

seems many Waldorf schools and charters start off with a beautiful dream but in reality, the success of the school is really depends on the ethical and emotional maturity of the Administration & teachers. Highly subjective whether or not you are blessed with one of the Great teachers or someone who hasn't worked out their issues and you're supposed to 'trust' and 'let go...' we had a very rude awakening... Public school seems so stable and healthy now after the dysfunction we encountered. Can NOT recommend.
ex-waldorfmom
added: 05/09/2012

Posted September 16, 2010
Waldorf education can be an amazing thing, but Highland Hall is a very poor
example of a Waldorf school. There are very real reasons this school is
under-enrolled, has no waiting lists, and often turns over 20% of its children a
year. There is no functioning leadership. Teacher quality is uneven. Most
crucially, Highland Hall lacks integrity, their mission statement a hollow
promise gutted by fear and money. Look elsewhere. —Submitted by a parent

Posted June 16, 2010
My 3 children did not feel they learned any basic curriculum. Knitting, art and
woodworking are great, but math, science, english, history are weak. Many of
their high school students don't get into college. We left because our children
were bored. —Submitted by a parent

Posted May 15, 2009
My daughter attended HH for a year and enjoyed what they had to offer at the
preschool age. However, she would come home and need to run and jump all over
the place. Some kids just need to run. I like the Waldorf philosophy but I also
feel times are changing and in order to keep a realistic perspective on our
world, the media is a huge part of it. And being a psych major, I have learned
that children feel safe when they can understand parts of their environment. Not
keeping them in a bubble right smack in the middle of a thriving city. Plus
parents have an imperialistic attitude at HH. The love and respect for nature
and life should be given to all, not just those who can afford it. —Submitted by
a parent

Posted April 21, 2009
My son was there for a year and didn't learn a thing. We changed schools the
following year to an more challenging academic setting. He had a lot of remedial
work that he had to do the following year just to catch up to his peers. The
teachers at Highland Hall are very nurturing and loving, however, the kids need
more mental stimulation. I don't agree with their philosophy (actually Rudolf
Steiner's) of delaying academics till the late elementary/jr. high years. My
feeling is that either you're a Waldorf person or you're not, there's no middle
ground. It turned out that my son had dyslexia, which had gone undetected as his
class was not performing at grade level in reading or writing. He did benefit
however, from having such a caring, wonderful teacher. The campus has an
expansive park-like feel to it and is beautiful. —Submitted by a parent

June 27, 2008
My child loved her kindergarten teachers but by 2nd grade became frustrated with
the repetition of form drawing and the weirdness of the eurythmy class. She is
now in a charter school that is equally relaxed (no grades, no tests, no
homework) but is more academically stimulating and inspiring. At Waldorf, every
child works at the same pace, which is usually dictated by the children who
struggle the most.
—Submitted by a parent

Posted July 25, 2007
If your child has any learning difficulties, this school is ideal for allowing
them to work without enormous pressure. If your child is academically gifted,
this school will not be a good fit. There is a strong anti-intellectualism from
First thru 12th grade.
—Submitted by Anna J., a parent

Posted June 25, 2007
Adjusting to a traditional school revealed that my child was performing in every
area below grade level. It took her a year to catch up, and we regret having not
pulled her out before First grade. Although the campus appears serene and
attractive, the lack of transparency in the curriculum is a serious problem.
—Submitted by Dorothy, a parent

Posted October 14, 2006
Excellent kindergarten with our particular teacher; however, we had the very
opposite experience in middle school; and we were so unimpressed by the time our
child reached 8th grade that our child begged us to allow her to switch to a
more traditional high school.
—Submitted by Judy, a parent

Posted October 13, 2006
Three children attended; the oldest had a great experience from k-8; our second
child had a series of terrible teachers. The youngest child had a great
kindergarten experience. The school has no ability to constructively address
parents concerns —Submitted by a parent

Posted October 13, 2006
In spite of the beautifuyl appearance, it feels like a cult. There are no
academics standards. —Submitted by a former STUDENT

Posted March 11, 2006
As the name states, this is a Waldorf school, which is a very definite thing.
For some, it is perfect, for some not such a good fit. That is the first thing a
prospective parent needs to research. One distinctive aspect of Waldorf schools
is there is not a 'principal'. In the event of a problem, this can be an issue.
We often felt we had no one to turn to for action on our concerns. Academically,
we found Highland Hall on a very different page than other private schools in
the area. Our children left with way above average vocabularies, and below level
skills in concrete areas such as spelling and basic math facts. —Submitted by a
parent

Posted February 28, 2005
The campus of Highland Hall Waldorf school is beautiful - there are big
playgrounds separate for the kindergarten, grades 1-3, and then 3-6. The
curriculum is very soul based, not academic - at least not academic enough for
my children. My 2nd grader got 'bored' there, and wanted to go to a 'real'
school - so we switched her to a public charter school. —Submitted by a parent

Anush ‎ - Jan 25, 2011
This place is a joke 4 years like bob says unless you start in 1st grade forget
it,you will always be an outsider,a bunch of spoiled rich kids who also infuse
the place with drugs ,you may be better of at another school ,save your money .

Paolo ‎ - Oct 23, 2010
Went here for 3 years of my life. Unless you're in the Waldorf system from 1st
grade up you will not integrate well into their education system. A bogus
education belief based on creating your own books, if you're child isn't an
artist, or is coming in from public school. Forget it, spend your 14000
somewhere else

http://gocitykids.parentsconnect.com/attraction/highland-hall-waldorf-school-171\
00-superior-street-northridge-ca-91325-us#


Our 3 children attended over 12 years and despite the beauty of the campus - the
school has no transparent system for problem solving serious issues. Teachers
seem defensive and intolerant of parents asking questions. The teachers police
each other and there is no advocate for the parents or students who might have a
legitimate concern about a teacher's conduct. Students can be expelled, without
any warning, if the teacher does not like their parent, even if the student has
never done anything wrong. This is not written down anywhere, but it has
happened several times in the last few years. Each time a perfectly cooperative
child is expelled or not allowed to re-enroll because the teacher didn't like
the child's parents, it sends a frightening message to the entire community to
not question the teacher's authority or your child will be punished.

Parents are not allowed to question the teacher's decisions in the elementary
grades. Discipline is inconsistent - often the teachers seem excessively
punitive. This education appeals to students/families who prefer an
anti-intellectual curriculum, with a spiritual agenda inspired by Rudolph
Steiner. There is no geniune open forum to express concern about classroom
issues, bullying, etc., or to question the unusual methods used to teach. - A.
Scemema (student)

Westside Waldorf School Review - the next Highland Hall

Westside Waldorf school isn't a charter, it's private. Many Highland Hall
teachers (the worst) have made themselves at home at Westside.  Here's their list of teachers:
http://www.wswaldorf.org/Management.html



Listed from Highland Hall are:
1) Lisa Profumo (Scemema)... who hid the Wilkins molestation incidents from the entire school, ignored mandated reporting laws and put the school in severe legal jeopardy.  She's lying whenever her lips move.
2) Liis Edwards... Check out letters from Highland Hall on this blog for her signature.  She was involved in MANY cover-ups at Highland Hall.
3) Alex Houghton... a former friend and former Waldorf teacher - he once pretended outrage at what was going on at Highland Hall and promised to reform Waldorf through WISC... he's now silent as WISC continues to employ the very WORST teachers Waldorf has to offer.  He is influencing Waldorf boards across the country... sadly.




http://www.greatschools.org/california/pacific-palisades/12275-Westside-Waldorf/

Here's a real shocker... :)

April 11, 2008
It is truly unfortunate that this school continues to promote itself to parents
without sharing that the model is based on Anthroposophy. If you are interested
in any Waldorf School read about Rudolf Steiner. Here is a good website to start
with: openwaldorf. com
—Submitted by a parent

Ocean Charter School Reviews by Parents

In reading the reviews of the Ocean Charter School in Los Angeles, it becomes
apparent that they made promises they weren't about to keep. Read through the
reviews and see if you notice this trend. At first, parents were excited to
join the community and things went well at first. Then, around 2010, the
reviews start hinting at some issues with the school. The first review in 2010
was pulled, apparently, because it apparently was voicing concerns about the
lack of racial diversity in the school (remember this is in LOS ANGELES).
Reading forward in the reviews, it turns out, parents are discovering that their
kids aren't being educated, that the administrators aren't accepting input from
parents (only volunteer work), that parents are pulling their children out in
groves, and that half the teachers staged an exodus. Many of these symptoms are
TYPICAL of Waldorf schools. There's even a hint of Waldorf dividing a wedge
between working parents.

Here are a few of the critical comments. I'll let readers go to the reviews for
the apologia.

First the review apologizing for the lack of black kids (but hey, we have
English, Irish, Polish, even Asian kids... same thing, right?)

Posted January 29, 2010 - I am so sorry to hear that last review. It is true
that OCS doesn't have the number of African American children and Hispanic
children that is reflective of Los Angeles, but my daughter's class has children
whose parents are from Asia, England, Ireland, Poland...so there is diversity in
a sense. Plus, we have the most active diversity committee ever. They are
reaching out to the community. All who get into OCS get in through a lottery
system so it is not like the school itself controls who gets in. I have found
the school truly wonderful. I love that the school stresses the importance of
play and homework is not assigned until 2nd or 3rd grade, yet test scores are
among the highest of all comparative schools.

Posted February 1, 2010 - It's too bad they don't use a lottery and factor in
race (like the magnet schools) to get a hetergeneous community w/in the
classroom. You can have diversity committees all you want, but if children are
not mixing with different races on a daily basis inside the classroom walls,
then the school is not walking the talk.

Posted February 6, 2010 - I think that there is a large difference between the
lower grades and the upper ones at Ocean. While I really like the 'whole child'
approach in the younger grades, the upper grades suffer from the lack of rigor
in the academics. The upper grades are well behind other schools in mathematics
and writing, and they rarely do such basic things as book reports. Considering
this continues through the 8th grade, the students are seriously disadvantaged
when they move on to the high school level. While I will agree that parent
involvement is high, the parent body (and students as well) are very cliquish.
In addition, while they mean well, the parents are completely disorganized.
Events such as field trips or even day trips are always thrown haphazardly
together at the last minute, or cancelled due to lack of planning.

Posted March 18, 2010 - The school is not orriented, or particularly friendly or
accepting, of dual-parent working households, or single-parent working
households. Parents who cannot spend as much time on campus or at school events,
or donate as much time and money, are ostracized by this cliqueish 'community'
and that trickles down to the way students are treated and treat each other. The
school espouses to have liberal, child-friendly values, but in practice is
elitist and unwelcoming. My child will not return next year.

Posted June 4, 2010 - From initial observations, Ocean Charter School is a
wonderful place for learning, most especially in the younger grades. But upon a
closer review of the school organization, the administration, faculty and
community meetings, and the relationships among the students, one begins to
observe some major problems within this charter school organization. To begin
with, the administrtative team of Mrs. Stephanie and Mrs. Kristy (neither of
whom possess proper Admin. Credentials), have a gross reputation of incompetence
among the faculty . These two self-empowered individuals blatantly disguise
their ineptitude with smiles and other deceitful pleasantries. One egregious
example is the fact that new teachers are not provided with a school handbook
with accountable policies about the curriculum and for professional evaluations.
As a result, the Administration operates under a very non-transparent screen
that allows them to make decisions with no managerial oversight or
accountability. Look closely & you'll be sadly surprised.

Posted September 9, 2010 - I would really like to hear someone speak to the fact
that the parents of so many returning 6th graders have chosen to leave Ocean
Charter this year.

Posted September 16, 2010 - Ocean Charter had great potential. When it first
opened it relied heavily on parent involvement, not just for their own
children's experience but for the development of the school. Teachers and
parents working together to actually create a school--just what the charter
movement is about. The current board chair and administrators as leaders have
hidden everything with their goal of running a school with no interference from
anyone. With them at the helm, parents have no voice but are only asked for
money and sweat. The biggest problem is that they have no professional capacity
to run a school and the result is that every year, half the teachers leave. And
forget the middle school--no resources devoted to it and new teachers constantly
coming in.

PK: I just love this... someone copied the school brochure as if it was a
"review"...

Posted October 15, 2010 - Give me a break! That last post is verbatim what the
advertising materials of the school say. Certainly not a spontaneous parent
review.

PK: This review makes my point...

Posted February 24, 2011 - In reading the reviews from2005-2009 I really must
say how great we thought the school would become but alas 50 point drop in STAR
and more then half the 6th grade left rather then suffer another year of
ineptitude, and more left at the spring/fall semester shift. The middle school
is a sinking and stinking ship with an administration that covers their
inability to lead with "concerned" nods and "smiles"and fire most of the middle
school teachers year after year.

Posted June 7, 2011 - OCS is a lovely place and there is a really nice community
here. The plants and gardens are beautiful. Parental involvement is huge for
fundraising and community events. Waldorf curriculum is gentle and loving,
although the Waldorf rituals can feel secretive. What really disappoints me
though is the lack of academic substance in the upper grades. I was told that
Waldorf starts slow in the lower grades (which I love and think is done well at
OCS) then soars past conventional schools in the upper elementary school grades,
but this is not happening at OCS. The administration is unresponsive and
unapologetic about this. I know a number of parents who are very troubled by the
slacking academics and are pulling their children out, paying for private tutors
or doing semi-home schooling because they know their children are behind and are
missing out. It's a great school if you want a nurturing, progressive community
and a beautiful school, but if your child loves to learn and you want them to
have a good, solid academic education this is not the place. Transfers out of
OCS say that their children were significantly behind. I don t know how this
warrants an 8 rating.

PK: Even the positive reviews reveal problems:

Posted September 2, 2011 - I have 3 children at OCS and they love this school.
Just like any place it has it's issues that are mostly addressed quickly and
with passion. If you want a place that will barely watch your kids, much less
educate them, put them in just any old public school. If you are looking for a
place that has an extremely active, intelligent curriculum and incredible parent
involvement then OCS is perfect for you. OCS has had their fair share of
administrative problems in the past. There always seems to be one or two very
intense and often irrational parents that have nothing better to do than
complain about the little things that bug them about various administrators or
teachers. The majority of the parents, though, truly admire the efforts of the
school administration. I just think that an alternative school such as OCS tends
to attract very passionate and opinionated parents who think the school is
something that it is not. Again it's not for everybody. You know what's best for
your family. We have been through quite a lot of ups and downs with this school
yet we feel very fortunate to have discovered it.

PK: Love these next two...

Posted November 16, 2011 - lovely school...if you are rich. don't go if you're
not!!!!! the principal told a homeless mom 'have a nice vacation". pretty sure
homelessness is not a vacation!

Posted November 19, 2011 - What is the last poster talking about? Homelessness
is like a permanent vacation. Seriously, though, do you think the principal
would tell other families, "Have a nice vacation." And, then, point to the
homeless mom and say, "Oh, you poor dear. Good luck to you finding a home over
the holiday." Give me a break.


It's clear that Ocean Charter School is going the route of independent Waldorf
schools. Once again, problematic former Highland Hall teachers are listed on
the faculty, and of course our friend Joan Jaeckel serves on the board.

http://www.oceancharterschool.org/faculty.html


Public charter schools have to make their meeting minutes public. Let's have a
peek at Ocean Charter School's, shall we?

Looks like there was, indeed, a mass exodus:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxvY3Nib2FyZ\
GRvY3N8Z3g6Mjk3NTM1M2M3YmRiNThhYg


*Finance
Enrollment is below the current OCS 2011-2012 budget by 40 students which is
approximately $5,000 per student loss of ADA, however, our higher ADA percentage
to date of approximately 96% versus budgeted 95% could help alleviate part of
the loss if attendance continues at that rate.

Any chance of a normal public school teacher working at this charter school?

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxvY3Nib2FyZ\
GRvY3N8Z3g6NGYxZGQ4Yzg1NTJhYzc3Zg


*MOTION: "OCS will require that all of its class teachers be Waldorf-certified."
Motion passed.


The loss of students is taking its toll:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxvY3Nib2FyZ\
GRvY3N8Z3g6YTkyMzhiNDQzZDI5OGUy


*Finance
Despite the additional students enrolled for the 2011-
2012 school year, the cash we will be funded through January 2012 is based on
our 2010-2011 Average Daily Attendance (ADA), thus furthering our need to rely
on cash surplus until funding levels are adjusted to actual enrollment.

A revised loss of $45,000 is forecasted through 2011-2012 fiscal year-end,
primarily based on lower student ADA and increased Special Education costs.


Diversity? No rush. Let's take a little time to think about this:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxvY3Nib2FyZ\
GRvY3N8Z3g6MjFmYmJlNzkzZTQ4YjU5Mw


*Discussion on Title I for Enrollment Lottery
Title I refers to families who are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch, based on
income levels. Besides honoring our mission and vision to "…educate children in
a multi-cultural, urban environment…", "…informed by the Waldorf educational
approach…",
implementing a Title I preference could be critical for our Walgrove RFP and
Charter Renewal. [Board member] strongly believes that a Title I preference is
necessary to show how we will serve the community in our RFP, and having our
charter renewed for
another five years, as it would reflect our commitment to improve our current
lack of diversity. OCS would need to provide services such as Free and Reduced
breakfast and lunch as well as before and after school care. Providing before
and after care services for
Title I students would be an additional OCS expense, however, we can be
reimbursed for the meals. [Board member] clarified that 20% of OCS students
already qualify for Free and Reduced Lunch. OCS would not be eligible for Title
I funding until at least 40% of our students qualify.

[Board member] shared that during her Diversity outreach efforts, she found many
minority families interested in the OCS educational philosophy but discouraged
by their lottery odds.

Board members discussed the costs of services to support Title I students, the
potential impact on Annual Family Giving, and overall volunteerism. Many
expressed a concern about implementing the preference this year, when we have
increased class size by eight
students, and questioned why it needed to be done so quickly. Board members
asked how the Title I preference would fall in the order of existing
preferences, and would like to hear a plan made with the faculty to support
these new students and their families.


Remember, they need 40% of students in Title I to qualify for state money.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxvY3Nib2FyZ\
GRvY3N8Z3g6NDRhNjUwNDUwOWM3YjFjYQ


*MOTION: that the Board adopt the following resolution:
The OCS Board of Trustees resolves that the following shall be given preference
for admission to OCS:
1. Children of school faculty and staff (not to exceed 10% of openings)
2. Children of board members (not to exceed 10% of remaining openings)
3. Siblings of enrolled students (no cap)
4. Title I eligible students (not to exceed 42% of remaining openings)
5. Residents of LAUSD (no cap)
Preferences shall be given in the above order. The preference for Title I
eligible students shall remain in place until the percentage of Title I eligible
students meets or exceeds 42% of total OCS enrollment.


There's more here:
http://sites.google.com/site/ocsboarddocs/approved-minutes-2011-2012

UNDERVACCINATED?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immunization29-2009mar29,0,3148179.story


A rising number of California parents are choosing to send their children to kindergarten without routine vaccinations, putting hundreds of elementary schools in the state at risk for outbreaks of childhood diseases eradicated in the U.S. years ago.
...

A Times analysis found other concentrations on the Westside, the Palos Verdes Peninsula and the central Orange County coast, and in the southern San Fernando Valley.

At Ocean Charter School in Del Rey, near Marina del Rey, 40% of kindergartners entering school last fall and 58% entering the previous year were exempted from vaccines, the highest rates in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Administrators at the school said the numbers did not surprise them. The nontraditional curriculum, they said, draws well-educated parents who tend to be skeptical of mainstream beliefs.

"They question traditional knowledge and feel empowered to make their own decisions for their families, not deferring to traditional wisdom," said Assistant Director Kristy Mack-Fett.

UP FOR GRABS?
http://www.argonautnewspaper.com/articles/2011/07/28/news_-_features/mar_vista/m1.txt

Mar Vista -  May 3, 2012

Ocean Charter turns to its neighbors to help rally support in bid on proposed charter school site at Walgrove 
On July 23, Ocean Charter parents fanned out in the surrounding neighborhoods of Mar Vista to make their case for acquiring the space on a campus where they colocate with the elementary school. “As you may or may not know, LAUSD has put our north campus site up for grabs for any charter school that’s interested. They will be issuing a request for proposal in the next week or so to interested schools and will be voting on who gets the site just days after those proposals are turned in,” Gary Adler, a parent of two Ocean Charter children, wrote in an email. “A small task force of motivated parents has been formed to unify us in our proposal and our community outreach.

Karen Wolfe, a Venice resident who transferred her son from Ocean Charter this year, thinks it may be a case of too little too late to garner a great deal of community support for the school.

“It would be an impressive feat if they were able to get the neighbors to support (them in the land lease bid),” asserted Wolfe, whose daughter will be attending fourth grade in September at the Walgrove campus. “There have been authentic, meaningful opportunities for them to have done this years ago, and it would be a real shift from the ‘us vs. them’ mentality that has been pervasive there for years.”




 PK: Looks like my blog post for Ocean Charter School appeared JUST IN TIME!

Ocean Charter Ignores problems - Removes critical comments from blog - Can't get along with neighbors

http://theopendaily.com/schools/ocean-charter-school-seeks-community-input-on-proposed-school-project

Karen 
There is so much unsaid on this blog; it's like a typical Ocean Charter meeting. First, it's run by an Ocean Charter parent, James Brennan. That disclosure seems important. Also, OCS parents are taking acception to neighbors "taking it upon themselves to post negative comments about OCS. This is a public process and that's not a comfortable setting for OCS.
Lance, your comments are obviously sincere but you don't mention that you, like dozens of OCS parents, withdrew your children from OCS after 5th grade. The community is looking for an alternative MIDDLE school. OCS should at least demonstrate an ability to do a respectable job of being a middle school. But it fails by numerous measures and before millions of dollars in resources are given away by the district, it's important to evaluate their track record and not just whether their kids are polite to neighbors.
The school leadership has ignored serious, documented problems with the middle school year after year and it does a disservice to the public discourse to fail to acknowledge that at a time when OCS is asking for substantial public resources. I wish OCS had dealt with those matters in meetings with OCS parents, but now it's relevant to this broader community discussion. 1)OCS misrepresents the situation by claiming in their neighborhood flier "steadily rising test scores in the range of 855 to 896 for years 2009 and 2010." The test scores DROPPED from 896 to 855. Even if test scores are not the only indicator of academic achievement, I have yet to find ANY westside school that has failed on that scale. 2)OCS lost nearly half their teachers last year. That would be scandalous at most schools. 3)OCS claims to do a good job with special education. TRUTH: Many families of students with special needs have been counseled out, even those that are cheerleading this RFP. 4)OCS has couched severe budget cuts as just another school facing budget cuts. But an entire 7th grade class was eliminated for next year because so many students withdrew, including mine midyear. That lost revenue surely has an impact on OCS's overall budget.
Ocean Charter could be using this public process as a reason to clean house. Instead they're spinning information to make it look like they're the best candidate, and showing no indication that they'll fix things. But no amount of spin can take away the actual track record of a school that's been open for 7 years.
Finally, OCS--and lots of charter parents--would do well to recognize that while we were reforming outside the system, plenty of teachers, administrators and parents were reforming from within our public schools. Rather than begging the neighborhood to come and visit OCS, OCS parents should be visiting other neighborhood schools. You might be very surprised!

Sandi
Ocean Charters proposed plan would create an even worse traffic nightmare for the residents by adding an additional 500 students (k-8). I know they saying that they only have 350 students but the proposal by lausd is for 500 seats so once that site is finished they will most certainly fill it and if they do not then lausd can fill it with another charter school (according to prop 39 and it's amendments). Walgrove will also still be subject to co-locating with another charter as lausd is required by law to offer any available space to all charters who apply, which could mean 3 schools being housed on that campus. After the free standing classrooms come down next year per a state mandated law there will still be 3 classrooms available. A charter only needs 80 kids to apply and be offered space.
OC supporters are going around the neighborhood now trying to get a petition signed and telling people that their poor students will not have a place to go in a year if they do not win this proposal. Seriously? That is ridiculous! Everyone knows it will take at least 3 years to build and if they do not have a back up plan for where they are going after next year then how do they expect parents to have any faith in their abilities to run a school?
I, and many of my neighbors, are adamantly opposed to any charter school being built on that campus at all. It is demeaning for the students of Walgrove having to look over at a brand new campus while their own campus still needs work. I do not agree with our taxes being spent on building a new school while our neighborhood schools still need so much work. Lets upgrade what we've got first and make our current schools better.
It's much easier for lausd to sit back and collect the rent from the charters rather than make the effort needed to make necessary changes. That's why there are now more charters in lausd than other school system in the country. It's not time to give up our schools to charters, it's time for change.
Read about the high turnover rates at charter schools in the newest LA Times article here: They are not without problems either.
http://www.latimes.com/news/lo...

Troy
Gary,
I understand that we are both public schools and I hope for the best for your school, but I do take issue with the fact that OCS is sending out press releases that tout the great relationship between Walgrove and Ocean Charter.  I find this disingenuous.  I believe that the majority of children, parents, staff and teachers would characterize our relationship as poor.  In fact, I know several OCS parents that would do the same.  To give examples such as a reading program that has not existed in years, a garden where OSC has half and Walgrove has half, a breakfast that happened once in 5 years, etc is stretching the truth at best.  To say that Ocean Charter parents can't help double parking because you have to enter through one gate is false.  There is plenty of parking on the street that you enter (appleton way) and Walgrove parents do not double park on Morningside and we enter through a gate on that street.  To say that there will be LESS traffic by adding 200+ students is a bit of an odd argument.
I would be happy to meet with you so that you can explain how OCS is going to do it better next time, but it is not me that you have to convince.  You have to convince the rest of Walgrove's children, teachers, parents, staff and neighbors. I would love for OCS to be better neighbors, but first you have to own the fact that OSC has not been a good partner in the past.
If not me, please listen to the Walgrove first grade teacher that emailed me.  Read it and take it to heart.
Cheers,
Troy

Troy 
here is an email that I received from one of the teachers at Walgrove...
Thanks Troy for keeping us informed! The OCS claims of collaboration through their existence at Walgrove is pure B.S. and could easily be debunked by all the Walgrove staff. I personally have been disrespected by their students many times and never acknowledged by any of their staff! To the point where I felt unsafe during my pregnancy because I almost go knocked down several times by their students that always run through common shared areas! We get also get mocked by their students when we try to speak to them. Their whole claim of "buddy reading across grade levels" was done with Zeena's class maybe for 2yrs, not with anyone else. You could go up to every Walgrove teacher and find out for yourself within seconds. The whole garden thing... they have their area and we have ours. We don't do anything together with that. We are forced to share the space and that's it, same with the auditorium. We have bent over backwards when they've needed it during our scheduled time but they're always rude when we need it. Ugh.... Ok I'll stop because you know all of this and I know I'm preaching to the choir. I just really wanted to personally thank you for all your efforts and support of our school. I do appreciate everything you do!!!!

Troy 
As a parent of two children that attend Walgrove Elementary I have to say that our relationship with Ocean Charter is strained at best. There is little collaboration between the schools and a lot of animosity. Both Walgrove students and teachers find them rude. Ocean charter also has a terrible relationship with the neighbors because of traffic problems that they cause. When confronted with complaints they made excuses and did not change their behavior. Now they want to build a new building and are suddenly concerned with us? I have nothing against their school, but I am hoping that they will no longer be our neighbors.




 


Interview with a Vampire

Here is a recent email exchange with the monster - Wendy Wilkins.  Apparently, I spoiled her plans to infiltrate Somerset Waldorf school by exposing her on Somerset's blog.  Oh well...

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "wendelinnwilkins@rocketmail.com" <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: "petekaraiskos" <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: Re: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:30:58 -0000

Dear Pete
I have read your entire site with interest.
I can see that you have a major axe to grind with Highland Hall school.
I can sympathise with many of your concerns surrounding Waldorf schools in general.
Your posts, however, regarding me are libelous. There is no truth to your allegations. They have caused harm. I am asking you politely to stop.
Wendy

>--- In waldorf-critics@yahoogroups.com, "petekaraiskos" <pkcompany@...> wrote:

> Wendy Wilkins is a familiar name to people reading my blog:

> http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/02/letters-from-highland-hall-wilkins.html

> http://sites.google.com/site/wendywilkinssteinerteacher/
> Wendelinn Wilkins

> Teaching credentials:

> Grade 3, Highland Hall, Northridge, CA 2000/2001
> All academic subjects plus recorder, painting, clay modeling, and drama
> She's moved to Wiviliscombe, Somerset, U.K.
> - where they're having controversy over the new charter Steiner school:
> http://www.thisissomerset.co.uk/search/search.html?searchPhrase=steiner&searchType=
> Looks like Somerset school will be drawing from the best of the best...
> I REALLY wasn't kidding when I said Highland Hall teachers are going to end up in the UK charter system.  Here we go!
>
> PK
> ENOUGH ALREADY!!!
> http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/03/highland-hall-breaking-mandated.html
>
 ***
Pete comments: Apparently, Ms. Wilkins doesn't understand the difference between something I wrote and something HIGHLAND HALL WROTE, which I posted.  She apparently thinks I can be sued for libel for Highland Hall's words.  Here's the document I referenced: http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/02/letters-from-highland-hall-wilkins.html


***
From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:09:13 +0000
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: This is Somerset?

I'd like to ask YOU to STOP too...  How about it?
Find a different profession - AWAY FROM CHILDREN!
I NEVER STOP!  Bring your lawsuit!
Pete

***
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Wendelinn Wilkins <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:49:27 +0000


I have no interest in lawsuits. I have retired from a long and happy career as a teacher. Your allegations about me, specifically, are false. They have caused harm. Continuing to post false allegations about me are libelous. Please stop doing so. I have done nothing to you, so do not wish to be used as a pawn in your crusade against Waldorf schools.

***
From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:16:02 +0000
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?

YOU should know about using "pawns" - how many sleepovers did you arrange for Jeffrey? 
Do YOU know what he discussed with my son and daughter in after school care? 
Do YOU know the pictures he shared with them? 
Children were MOLESTED.  I have the police reports!
YOU brought this to Highland Hall.  YOU DIRECTLY AFFECTED MY KID'S LIVES! 
Where do you get the balls to threaten ME?  Like I said, bring your lawsuit!  I'll be bringing mine!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfkscHt96R0&feature=player_embedded#
Pete
 ***
 ---------- Original Message ----------
From: Wendelinn Wilkins <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:45:37 +0000


I do not know who your son and daughter are.
How many sleepovers have you arranged for your children?
My son has never been in after school care.
What police reports?
I am not threatening you in any manner.
Please stop publishing libelous material about me and now about my son.
Are you saying I molested children? I have brought no such thing to Highland Hall.
I do not know the relevance of the video you have posted.
I do not have balls - wrong gender.

***
From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:05:43 +0000
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?

I'm not surprised you can't keep straight the children your son has harmed.  You'll find out soon enough who my son and daughter are.  You were my son's teacher!
Your son was not "enrolled" in after school care.  He CERTAINLY was there.  I have LOTS of witnesses and written accounts.
Devonshire Division
Police Report # 0117-20741
# 0117-30062
I have NEVER published libelous material about you and your son.  Only the truth - which I can support with evidence and testimony.  Try me.
You didn't know you were involved in a court case with Santa Barbara when you were hired at Highland Hall?  Gee, Highland Hall admitted knowing... but said nothing. 
Thanks in part to your son's behavior, my daughter went on to slice her arms and legs.  Get it now?  Need a judge to explain it to you?  You were COMPLICIT in the molestation of children by your son.  You KNEW about his problems before bringing him to Highland Hall and letting him run around unsupervised.  MONSTERS LIKE YOU are who the guy in the video is talking about... The guy in the video is about half as mad as I am.  Get it now?
Don't think for a moment I'm going anywhere.

***

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Wendelinn Wilkins <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:45:17 +0000


I know this about my youngest son. He was an autistic child and vulnerable. He was abducted when he was 12. Santa Barbara School fired me - illegally - when I attended a court case in Vancouver when my son was found. I sued the Santa Barbara School for the illegal firing - and won. Highland Hall was fully aware.
I believe you also know that the misinformation you are spreading is wildly distorted and untrue. I believe you are using your self righteous stance to fuel your antagonism towards Waldorf Schools in general. This is easier than being accountable for the troubles of your child; I know. Nevertheless your accusations continue to be libelous, malicious, untrue and harmful. Please stop publishing material about me and my son to fuel your argument against Waldorf Schools and teachers.
Like you, I sent my children to Waldorf schools. I was initially enamoured of the gentle atmosphere and illusion of a safe environment. I added a Waldorf credential to my teaching credential and taught in Waldorf schools. There is much to love and much to criticize. Waldorf education is not for every child, for every parent and not for every teacher.
I am very sorry for your distress as a parent of a troubled child. Fruit doesn't fall very far from the vine.

***
 Pete comments: This was NOT what happened.  PARENTS, not Highland Hall, contacted the Santa Barbara school directly and were told the details of the lawsuit.  Parents were told by Santa Barbara Waldorf school that Wilkins set up "sleepovers" for her son with her own students.   Here's a letter from an angry parent describing Highland Hall's role in this matter - and the extent of the GAMES that Wilkin's son played with the children at Highland Hall. http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/10/letter-from-angry-parent-1.html



Highland Hall, despite being "fully aware" (according to Wilkins) refused to discuss the case with angry parents.  The FACTS speak for themselves.  Highland Hall had TWO incidents of molestation by this boy (hence the two police reports).  They did NOTHING after the first incident because the child wasn't enrolled at the school.  After the SECOND incident, the information about the first incident came out.  Highland Hall claimed (in front of parents) that they had a SIGNED CONTRACT from Wendy Wilkins - acknowledging that she would not bring her son back on campus unsupervised.  AGAIN, after being pressed by parents, Highland Hall ADMITTED the "signed" contract was only signed by Highland Hall and NOT by Wilkins.  HIGHLAND HALL PUT CHILDREN IN HARM'S WAY WITH NO REGARD TO THEIR SAFETY!


*** 
From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:58:01 +0000
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?

The more you demonstrate to me that you don't get it, the more it falls on ME to ensure that you do.
"Fruit doesn't fall very far from the vine."
Interesting point... Think about it.
Stop wasting my time and your breath... I'll be seeing YOU in court!
Pete
***
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Wendelinn Wilkins <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:59:23 +0000


Are you
You waste your own time and breath in pursuit of finding someone to blame. I have done none of the things you publish widely about me so @cease andd desist."

***

From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:07:11 +0000
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?

Um... how can I make this more clear to you?
FUCK OFF YOU LYING MONSTER!
***

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Wendelinn Wilkins <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:00:35 +0000


Are you self refering?
Please remove libelous references about me or my son as a juvenile from your blogs and websites. I have written nothing publicly about you nor defamed you in any way. You have written tomes that have injured us both for years. You continue to victimize victims. Leave us out of your vendetta.
***
From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:18:44 +0000
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?

I'm VERY HAPPY to know I have injured you both for years... Look forward to MANY MORE YEARS of this.  I'm only JUST getting started.
Please continue to describe how I've made your lives miserable.  This is delicious news for me!  I can't wait to hear more - and please, use plenty of adjectives.  I hope your next letter describes in detail how my comments have put you in such despair that you've got a loaded gun in your mouth and are pulling the trigger exactly as you press the Send key. 
I'm really sorry if the truth hurts... Now, FUCK OFF!
***
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Wendelinn Wilkins <wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com>
To: <pkcompany@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:29:25 +0000

You can't make up your mind - "Can't wait to hear more" or "fo." Charming and non abusive. The truth does not hurt. Libel does
***
From: pkcompany@netzero.net
Date: Wed, Apr 25, 2012 12:34 PM
To: wendelinnwilkins@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: This is Somerset?
I think I'll stick with FUCK OFF.
***
AND SHE DID!

Update!  She DIDN'T FUCK OFF... She FLAGGED my comments AND THEY WERE REMOVED.  This may clear the path for this monster to "go to work" on the children at Somerset!  Below is the email I received:

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Report Abuse <reportabuse@thisiscomments.co.uk>
To: pkcompany@netzero.net
Subject: content removed from This is Somerset
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 09:35:56 +0100

Thank you for registering with This is Somerset. Unfortunately we have had to remove your comment on an article headlined Steiner's theories cause this parent concern following a complaint that it was defamatory.
This is the comment that was removed:
No big surprise, Highland Hall teachers are INDEED moving to Somerset school. <a href="http://tinyurl.com/6pwfxq2" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/6pwfxq2</a>
This teacher caused scandals at TWO schools, Santa Barbara and Highland Hall Waldorf schools.
I documented how Highland Hall sheepishly confessed to the abuses that occurred here: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/84wtbmw" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/84wtbmw</a> and ignored mandated reporting laws when problems arose with this teacher here: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/8399vdy" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/8399vdy</a> �Somerset is becoming the depository for bad teachers from the US.

Pete Karaiskos
Former Waldorf parent
Southern California

We would ask you please not to resubmit this content or discuss its removal on the site. We would also remind you that you are legally responsible for the content you submit.
If you are unsure of any of our house rules or terms and conditions you can find a link to them in full at the foot of the home page.


I'm not THAT worried.  To be honest, I'm happier knowing EXACTLY where Wendy Wilkins is... that way, when the time arrives for her to face me in court, I'll be able to find her EASILY!



 

Monday, January 2, 2012

Local Schools Network

Steiner schools “repudiate” their founder’s racist beliefs to get state funding — but will it be enough?


http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2011/07/steiner-schools-repudiate-their-founders-racist-beliefs-to-get-state-funding-but-will-it-be-enough/

Some of my comments:

  1. If I could jump in here with an ACTUAL FACT:
    Highland Hall Waldorf School in Northridge, CA. explicitly TAUGHT my child that “The European race is more evolved than the African and Asian races”. http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2011/02/racism-conference-emails.html They don’t deny teaching this lesson to my son’s class… they stand behind the lesson. After self-investigating, they claimed the lesson WAS NOT RACIST! http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2011/04/hasib-disguises-racism-at-highland-hall.html
    The fact that Anthroposophists/Waldorf teachers don’t believe it’s racist to promote that the white race is “more evolved” than other races does not alter or excuse the FACT that they TEACH RACISM TO CHILDREN AT WALDORF SCHOOLS. http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2009-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2010-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=4
    Here’s AWSNA’s statement on racism and my comments regarding their misquoting of Steiner to make it appear he’s saying something he isn’t: http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2011/05/awsna-comments-on-racism.html
    Waldorf representatives should make some effort to determine EXACTLY what constitutes racism, then accept the FACT that they are racists if they follow the tenets of Anthroposophy. It’s that easy!
    Popular comment! Like? Thumb up 7
  2. Sune wrote: “Just in parenthetis, as far as I remember: the temporal context for the statement implicating that we as humans reincarnate through the races indicates that it refers not to what Blumenbach referred to as five main races of humankind, but to the stages in the development of our solar system, referred to in theosophy but not in anthroposophy, as “root races” and the “sub races of Atlantis” of theosophy, that constituted the ever more human forms that developed during Tertiary and Quaternary.”
    That’s an interesting one Sune. Where did you get it from? Oh that’s right, you INVENTED it. YOU have tried to disconnect Steiner from the “root races” of Theosophy a term Steiner used in the same way in Anthroposophy. Steiner made NO mention of Tertiary and Quaternary periods of time (despite they were defined during his time) – YOU made this “connection”. Just like AWSNA, you fiddle with Steiner to put words in his mouth that HE DIDN”T SAY! That’s just plain dishonest!
    Popular comment! Like? Thumb up 6
  3. Sune theBee wrote: “After an arbitration some years ago, the authors of the articles are only allowed to use reliable published sources.”
    I was part of that arbitration process – so I can report that what you are saying is, AGAIN, untrue. NO ANTHROPOSOPHICAL SOURCES was the ruling… not “reliable published sources”. The whole point was to include ONLY reliable sources – and that excluded Anthroposophical sources (obviously). Unfortunately, nobody is left on Wikipedia who is willing to point out that MANY of the sources for the article you site ARE INDEED Anthroposophical sources (McDermott for example) pretending to be mainstream.
    My question to you, Sune, is… are you going to post ANYTHING truthful here? If not, rest assured I’ll be back to point out the deceitfulness in what you are posting. ;)
    Popular comment! Like? Thumb up 6
  4.   Jan Luiten says:
    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/racism-still-issue-english-schools-023148892.html
    http://operationblackvote.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/independent-report-schools-still-failing-to-tackle-racism/
    http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=6984
    Do you think it only concerns Waldorf Schools here?
    Pete Karaistos, I am not a representative of the Waldorf movement, but you know my suggestion for a sound definition of racism: the definition of Albert Memmi.
    Like this comment? Thumb up 1
  5. Hi Jan,
    I’m not sure I understand your point. Because you find racism in English schools, you feel it’s OK to promote to schools that teach racism as science? Based on the racist ideas of their founder? Why?
    Rather than champion against racism, you choose to take the “everybody’s doing it” approach. Why?
    As justification, you produce a definition that “defines” racism in a way you think doesn’t apply to Steiner. I’ve read Memmi’s definition of racism… It sounds to me like he was defining “racial discrimination” – not “racism”. You don’t have to be an “accuser” to be a racist, nor does there have to be a “victim”. Many of Steiner’s views are still racist by Memmi’s definition BTW. What a Waldorf teacher taught to my child is racist by ANY definition – especially when put into the context of promoting Anthroposophy, which is indeed the intention of Waldorf.
    Like this comment? Thumb up 3
  6.   Jan Luiten says:
    The quotation of the SWSF Francis Gilbert presents above, is in accordance with the conclusions of a very extensive (720 pages) report of a Dutch anthroposophical commission published in 2000. Titel: antroposofie en het vraagstuk van de rassen.
    Although I was critical about the report myself, I do think it is a very interesting report.
    It confronts anthroposophical content with contemporary scientific and scholarly thinking (biological, historical, cultural, social). It gives clarification about certain concepts e.g. race, discrimination and racism. It is regrettable that not many critics have read the full version of this report. I even think that the main critics of the anthroposophy of the moment : Peter Staudenmaier and Helmut Zander have not read this full version, but instead read the summary in German. This is understandable because the report is not translated neither in English nor in German. I would say that the fact it hasn’t been translated is an omission. I think it is worth the investment.
    I have a question for Francis Gilbert. After I send my latest comment on this blog I received the message “your comment is awaiting moderation”, this was not the case with my first comments. Is this normal?
    Like this comment? Thumb up 0
  7.   Jan Luiten says:
    Pete Karaistos, what they said to your child is, of course, not very wise. To me there is not such a thing as an European race, neither African race, nor Asian race etc. I myself avoid the as much as possible the use of the word “race”, because I think there is no ground in reality for it. Although we may say there is ONE human race with many differencies within. These differencies are not so big that we can speak of distinct races. But in the daily way of speaking the use of this concept is very unclear, like the use of the concept racism. People easily use this concept (race) when they want to name large groups. I think this not correct and confusing
    Like this comment? Thumb up 0
  8. Jan, The Dutch Anthroposophical Commission was composed ENTIRELY of Anthroposophists. That Anthroposophists don’t find very much racism in Steiner’s work is not exactly startling. I was impressed that they identified 16 passages that would have landed Steiner in jail had he uttered them in Germany today. It is my understanding that the “full version” of the Dutch commission’s report is available for purchase – something like $85, last I heard. What source do you have for the comment that Peter Staudenmaier and Helmut Zander haven’t had access to the full version?
    Like this comment? Thumb up 1
  9. “Pete Karaistos, what they said to your child is, of course, not very wise. To me there is not such a thing as an European race, neither African race, nor Asian race etc. ”
    Of course there isn’t… which makes the point the teacher was making SO much more evident. She didn’t use the word “race” at all. I’ll paraphrase what she said: “The blood of the people in Europe is more EVOLVED than the blood of people in Africa and Asia.” If this statement wasn’t in COMPLETE ACCORDANCE with Steiner’s racist teachings, there wouldn’t be a problem would there? It’s the fact that Steiner’s racism came out in physiology class that is EXTREMELY problematic for Waldorf schools. Again, this isn’t one wacky teacher saying something stupid… The school SUPPORTED the lesson. It doesn’t get more racist than this. Steiner’s racism IS taught to teachers in Waldorf teacher training – and it DOES come out in the classroom. That’s the BOTTOM LINE
    Like this comment? Thumb up 2
  10. Pete Karaistos, “What source do you have for the comment that Peter Staudenmaier and Helmut Zander haven’t had access to the full version?” None, they might have read the full version when they can read Dutch.
    I don’t think Steiner was a racist. I think that Steiner could have used another concept than race to describe what he wanted to. He would most likely had done this when he lived in our time. Certainly, also without the word “race” it is possible to have racism. But you cannot say Steiner had the intention to legitimate the causing of disadvantage by a supposed superior group to another supposed inferior group (cf. Memmi).
    The things said to your child should not be taught in a Waldorf school nor in
    any other school. I think there is more arousal , more consciousness , now for that issue in Waldorf schools. I think Waldorf schools in Britain have now the opportunity to present themselves as schools which are alert and perceptive for any form of racism and should also pay attention to prejudices and stereotypes being the first stages towards discrimination and racism.
    Something else Pete, just for my curiosity: did you ever experience that one of the comments you send on this blog was “awaiting moderation”?
    Like this comment? Thumb up 0
  11. Jan wrote: “But you cannot say Steiner had the intention to legitimate the causing of disadvantage by a supposed superior group to another supposed inferior group (cf. Memmi).”
    When he claimed black people didn’t belong in Europe for example? I don’t know if you consider it a disadvantage when someone declares an entire continent “off-limits” to you… but I think some people bight feel disadvantaged by such a statement.
    “The things said to your child should not be taught in a Waldorf school nor in
    any other school. I think there is more arousal , more consciousness , now for that issue in Waldorf schools.”
    Really? My son was in high school… he’s only 22 now. I think you give Waldorf WAY too much credit for their “consciousness” when it comes to the nonsense they’re teaching children. Remember – they ALL AGREED with the lesson plan!
    “I think Waldorf schools in Britain have now the opportunity to present themselves as schools which are alert and perceptive for any form of racism and should also pay attention to prejudices and stereotypes being the first stages towards discrimination and racism.”
    How is that possible? They still teach RACIST ways of dealing with children to their teachers in Waldorf teacher training.
    “Something else Pete, just for my curiosity: did you ever experience that one of the comments you send on this blog was “awaiting moderation”?”
    I have experienced this several times on several blogs (not sure about this one). I know it happens to me on Zooey’s blog often. I find it happens most often if I link to a website or a picture. I think it’s more of an automatic system lag than some human intervention. Have all your comments been coming through OK?
    Like this comment? Thumb up 1
  12.   Andreas Lichte says:
    “Waldorf Schools: Rudolf Steiner’s books are “an incitement to racial hatred”, says BPjM
    (…) Ruhrbarone publish a short English summary of the BPjM’s decision on Rudolf Steiner. By Andreas Lichte.
    The “Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien” (BPjM) (”Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons”) examined 2 books by Rudolf Steiner for “racist content” and decided that the content of the books is racist (…)”
    read more: http://www.ruhrbarone.de/waldorf-schools-rudolf-steiner’s-books-are-“an-incitement-to-racial-hatred”-says-bpjm/
    Popular comment! Like? Thumb up 4

Sunday, January 1, 2012

Wikipedia Archives

Here are archives from Wikipedia discussion pages... there's some great behind-the-scenes reading here:

http://www.territorioscuola.com/wikipedia/en.wikipedia.php?title=Talk:Waldorf_education/Archive_1


Criticism

I am also removing the PLANS site link. This will be controversial in some quarters, so I am giving a full explanation of this here.
Diana writes: I am replying to some of Hgilbert's explanation for removing the PLANS link. (You have later noted that nobody ever replied to any of this.) I hope I am putting this in the right place as I haven't tried to make edits here before. I'm one of the people mentioned, without my name given, in this list of reasons PLANS supposedly should not be cited in the Waldorf article.
Hgilbert writes: "Grave concerns have become apparent about the honesty, transparency and standard of the site. In particular:
1) The 'historian' that is most frequently referenced has no academic qualifications in history."
Obviously the 'historian' whose credibility Hgilbert is attempting to call into question with the use of quotes round the word is Peter Staudenmaier. Peter Staudenmaier is a PhD candidate in history and has indeed published academic papers, in academic journals, as well as a book (not self-published) on the subjects in question here, all fully citable. (I will provide a list of his published works a bit later, in case this point is actually in dispute.) The numerous references here that merely lead to Sune [...]’s multiple web sites ("The Bee," "Waldorf Answers," and "Americans for Waldorf Education" are all the work of [...]) would also have to go, if a site that has used Peter Staudenmaier's work has to go, since to my knowledge Sune has no “academic qualifications” in history, and citing propaganda or product-promotion web sites is not usually acceptable in academic papers, unless perhaps they are being cited as *examples* of such.
Firstly: Is it not true that at the time of writing of writing these papers and book, and for a long period when P.S. was being cited as a historian on the PLANS site, and to this day, he had no academic qualifications as a historian? That he is now a candidate for such qualifications is to be praised.
You are missing the point. This is a person who does indeed have published articles, in scholarly journals, as well as a book on the subject, and numerous articles in other media. His publications meet the standards for citing here. There is no doubt about this. I offered a list but I really don't have time, I'd rather get an updated CV from him but also don't really want to bother him, as I don't think he's too interested in Wikipedia. Anyone interested can google him and find, in about 30 seconds, that he is a published author on various topics related to anthroposophy. He is not, however, "PLANS' historian." I don't see where he's cited as a historian on the PLANS site anyway. This is completely irrelevant. You could pick any one individual with an article on the PLANS site, and say, this person doesn't have a graduate degree, so we can't ever refer to the PLANS site? I don't think so. The fact that you have your facts all wrong in the first place is simply a reflection of the fact that you are barking up the wrong tree trying to discredit this one individual anyway. You don't have a graduate degree either, do you? Hm. Where does such an argument lead us next? Your academic degrees? Mine? Where do we even get off writing encyclopedia entries?
Actually, I do have a graduate degree. That's not the point, however; Wikipedia has criteria for sources to be used.
Where is your graduate degree from, what university? In what subject? Where was your undergraduate degree from?DianaW 03:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not going into anthroposophists' activities in Nazi Germany. If you are the "enforcer" here of Wikipedian policies, it says clearly this page is not for discussing the issues in the article, but for discussing the *article*. The question was your bizarre assertion that because a certain individual who has articles on the PLANS web site doesn't have a PhD, the site could not be mentioned in the article! If this argument made any sense, why would you stop with Peter? Lots of us don't have PhDs. You could win that one much more easily than picking on Peter, but that is not the point, is it? The point is your sour grapes. (Hope I am indenting and signing things correctly now. There's more below.)DianaW 14:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Secondly: Peter was kind enough to send me the basis for claims he made on the PLANS site that a number of Nazis were friendly towards and supportive of anthroposophy/Waldorf education. One of those he mentioned was Rudolf Hess. The documents he sent spoke of Hess's staff, not Hess himself. I have since discovered that Hess was actually the person who signed the document forbidding anthroposophy in the Third Reich!!! If this was anthroposophy's friend in the Reich, what did its enemies do??? (Late edit; my apologies, I am wrong. Hess did lift a ban on anthroposophy in the Third Reich.)Hgilbert 15:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Peter also said that a Nazi named Bauemler "said good things about anthroposophy". Bauemler was in fact mentioned in the documents he sent -- with numerous criticisms of the education and a single point of interest - a way that, despite fundamental ideological differences, its pedagogical results in overcoming intellectualism could be useful to the Nazi goals. The documents show no friend of the schools, but someone interested in making use of them for his own ends. Nothing he sent supports his contention that Bauemler said anything good about anthroposophy.
2) Several of the prime complainants on the site have been either misleading or at least not fully disclosing about key information. One has repeatedly accused the Waldorf school of not teaching her child reading in the three years the latter attended the school, and said that the child had a slow recovery from this poor academic start. She recently revealed (in response to direct questioning) a) that these three years were spent in the kindergarten (Waldorf kindergartens tell parents they will not teach reading), and b) that her child was reading well by the second half of first grade, i.e. within a few months of leaving the Waldorf school."
The above is about me. (It would help, of course, to use people's names, if you are going to write on other web sites trying to make it sound like they - I - am some disreputable character. The casual reader cannot possibly check what you are saying about me here, since you don't even name me.)
What you write above about me is completely false. I have never once, anywhere, “accused the Waldorf school of not teaching [my] child reading.” My child attended 3 years of preschool and kindergarten at Waldorf, and I of course had no expectation he would learn to read in kindergarten. Hgilbert has not understood any of the many posts I have written on the critics list and elsewhere on the problems in reading instruction in Waldorf, if he thinks I have ever made a claim such as he attributes to me here.
It is flatly false to frame this as if I “revealed” this information (the years my child attended the Waldorf school) only under “direct questioning.” This implies I somehow wish the dates or ages my child attended the school to be a secret. My child’s story in Waldorf has been told on the critics list in detail many times – and I sign my full name and explain who I am, what my association with Waldorf is, and why I write what I write. Many, many posts from me explain the timeline and details of my family’s experiences in Waldorf explicitly. I wrote my first posts on the critics list in late 1999. I don’t tell the whole story of my family’s Waldorf experiences, with dates and timelines, in every post, of course – so if you asked me, I told you. My criticism of the reading instruction in Waldorf is based on much more than my own child’s experience. It is based on numerous other children’s experiences, my own observations in the school (I worked in the Waldorf kindergarten for parts of 3 different school years), Steiner’s suggestions for teaching reading, and other published material on reading in Waldorf schools.
It is clear to those who have observed in Waldorf classrooms that reading is discouraged among young children (this is not a point in dispute; I have listened to Waldorf teachers many times trade tips on *how* to discourage reading in young children), and I do believe this is harmful to these children’s later academic efforts.
I have never withheld information about the dates and times of my son’s Waldorf years. I have certainly never suggested that I wanted the Waldorf school to teach him to read in kindergarten. I did not and I do not now call for Waldorf schools to teach kindergarteners to read. I do not believe reading should be taught explicitly in kindergarten, though I also don’t believe children who wish to read should be discouraged or shamed. Of course, if someone “directly questions” me, I will provide information on the dates we were in Waldorf and my son’s age at the time; but to imply that I am *otherwise* dishonest or withholding about this, and that getting the facts from me requires “direct questioning,” is not playing fair, Hgilbert.
It has also become apparent through direct questioning that the main complainants on the site almost all or all had their children in the schools for extremely short periods. A number of them do not and/or did not even have custody of the children in question. Some do not mention the views of their spouses, who have more contact with the children, regarding the education; others mention that their spouse holds a diametrically opposed view, supporting the education and feeling it works well for the child."
The above claims are also demonstrably false. Again, it is easy to make this sort of insinuation without naming names. "Lots of the contributors . . ." etc. It is false. I doubt that you could name more than one individual who posts in a regular or visible way there who either does not have custody or his or her children, or who has a dispute with a spouse or ex-spouse about Waldorf education. This is an argument by ad hominem - implying that the criticisms come from people who have had custody of their children removed! Frankly, knowing a number of them personally, the regular contributors there are an unusually happily and long-married group! - not that anyone's personal situation is relevant. It is simply incorrect that among Waldorf critics there is a high proportion of divorced parents or parents with disputes about Waldorf. This allegation cannot possibly be backed up by Hgilbert.
The claims about the "extremely short periods" is also false. Among the regular contributors there, my own child's stay in Waldorf was one of the shorter ones: 3 years. (Ages 3-6 are formative years.) Many of the other regular contributors had children in Waldorf for 5 or 6 years.
I am sorry if I misrepresented the group; a X. certainly does not have custody of his Waldorf child,
Oh look! Now the name has been removed! It sure didn't say "X" a few hours ago!DianaW 03:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, in response to your objection to names appearing here, the name has been removed. You cannot object to it appearing and object to it not appearing. This is a double bind, a tactic the PLANS discussions often use. Please avoid it here.Hgilbert 06:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
My name does, however, still appear on the Waldorf discussion list and Hgilbert's comments are still there for everyone to see - so I know that I am the Mr. X who Mr. Gilbert is referring to. Since I have been drawn into these discussions by Mr. Gilbert, I will state for the record here as I did there that I have not lost custody of my children and, in fact, enjoy more custody timeshare than my ex-wife who is a Waldorf teacher. That my name was mentioned here is quite disturbing to me and my family, but not surprising at all as I have become quite accustomed to the types of tactics some people have tried to use against me to discredit me and others who voice a critical view of Waldorf education. --Pete K 23:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Indeed I can object to it appearing and then object to it not appearing. Try to understand the issue rather than continuing to point fingers at others for your own very poor behavior - behavior very much contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia, and the hypocritical "good faith" reminders you keep sending to me. It is not whether someone's name is used or not used either in the article or in the discussions here. I'm all in favor of everyone using their real name. It is mud slinging that is objectionable - the posting of false (and irrelevant even if they were true) personal accusations - the attempt to discredit people based on personal situations or characteristics, rather than the substance of what they have said. Bringing in people's family situations is stooping quite low. You named names directly in response to my calling you on your false (and in itself disreputable) accusation that many critics do not have custody of their children. In other words, you stooped lower and lower. *At that point* removing the name is merely covering your tracks. You've had your cake and eaten it too.DianaW 15:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

You have no idea what you are talking about. None. The above is completely false, and you are on shaky ground talking about individuals' children here, and their marital situations! You could at least get your facts straight. It is completely untrue that X. does not have custody of his Waldorf child. This is really shocking. Can this possibly be okay with Wikipedia policies?
I really think you should be more
and I had been (falsely?) informed that others had not had custody of their children in Waldorf as well. I apologize if this is not the case (note that I would never include such hearsay in an article; this talk page is a good place to clear up such misunderstandings).
Oh, please be serious. You are trying to "clear up misunderstandings" with this sort of thing? You are doing nothing of the sort, you should be ashamed. You are trying to slander and defame. You implied the critics are a bunch of people who have lost custody of their children! You stoop to *naming names* of individuals you think have lost custody of their children and it turns out not to even be true. There is NOT ONE PERSON there that I know of who has ever had custody of their children removed. There is ONE case of a person who disagrees with his ex-wife about Waldorf. You were never "misinformed" about this - you have chosen to believe nasty rumors behind the scenes. These are the tactics of a cult trying to discredit its critics. You have lowered yourself. Wikipedia should dismiss you. This is appalling.
Perhaps you could mention the length of time that Dan Dugan's child(ren) and those of other principle contributors - Peter Staudenmaier, Peter Farrell, Steve Walden, etc. - have attended the school. Have the former two's children never went to a Waldorf school, for example? I have understood that Steve Walden's did. Has Dan Dugan had custody of his children throughout? How long were his children in Waldorf?
First of all, the critics list is an open list, for anyone interested in the topic. It is not only for people who have, or have had, children in Waldorf schools. There are a variety of other topics there - biodynamics, Camphill, anthroposophical medicine in addition to Waldorf. So naturally there are interested people who don't have a child in a Waldorf school but have encountered or become interested in anthroposophy in other ways. Walden's children were in Waldorf for (I don't recall exactly) but it is *many* years. Peter Farrell is interested in anthroposophy because he is a scientist, he is interested in the pseudoscience that comes out of anthroposophy. Peter S. we have already discussed; his interest is historical. He is probably (I can't speak for him but last I heard) writing a dissertation on Steiner.
This is a case of trying to discredit *individuals* by reference to personal details, family history, marital status, "exactly how many years were you at the school" etc., and there cannot be any doubt this is completely unacceptable and inappropriate as a means to *improve the article on Waldorf education*. I am shocked. This sort of thing wholly discredits Wikipedia.
Diana edits one more time to add: In fact although taking part in improving this article is obviously a lost cause, as you folks have it in a vise grip, under apparently round-the-clock surveillance, I am considering reporting this for defamation, as apparently Wikipedia does take accusations of defamation seriously. Discussions of whether contributors have custody of their children is not a legitimate academic inquiry. When I first read this this morning, I missed the part (because the text did not wrap properly) where you not only don't back off this claim, go on naming individuals whom you believe (erroneously) do not have custody of their children, but go on asking me even more specific questions about specific individuals, Does this person or that person have custody of his children. Are you serious!DianaW 16:53, 19 August 2006 (UTC)