In today’s busy public education environment, recess is typically shelved by Grade 4 for deeper dives into academics. Considering this, parents are often shocked to learn that Waldorf students not only continue to have three recess periods through Grade 8, they also take whole days off to experience non-academic learning. Or do they really take time off?
The connection between our minds and bodies is being more greatly understood as researchers take on the topic. What we eat, how we sleep, and how we play, move, and use sensory information all directly affect everyday learning. In other words, when our students are camping or ice skating, they are engaging their brains in purposeful ways that will enhance their academics.
This is due not only to the interrelation of movement and brain activity (such as arms crossing the midline helping brain hemispheres communicate), but also because intelligence and academics are multi-layered and dimensional subjects represented in different forms.
Howard Gardner, American developmental psychologist and Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, developed the theory of multiple intelligences and revolutionized the way educators think about learning. In his book Frames of Mind, Gardner outlines the types of intelligences, claiming that all people process information in several different, independent ways.
Gardner asserts that all eight of a person’s “intelligences” – verbal / linguistic, logical / mathematical, body / kinesthetic, visual / spatial, music / rhythmic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic – need to be stimulated and explored to best tap into a person’s academic talents and gifts.
When we take our students camping, we are helping them connect “real” experiences to learning and also are testing their growing abilities. Not only will the outdoor education experiences that occur during the trip help children learn courage, compassion, and cooperation, but they will also challenge and advance their different forms of intelligence. Children who participate in horseback riding, canoeing, climbing, and sports like archery and team building games are exercising their body/ kinesthetic, visual/ spatial, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic skill sets in ways that are not always as prevalent during class time.
So while the students may see ice skating or camping trips as fun days “off” from academics, Waldorf teachers understand that these immersive experiences offer a depth of experience and varied learning to students that directly benefit classroom time.
Want to learn more about how different types of movement support academics? Please visit: Movement for Childhood, which focuses on how movement programs, solidly based on the developmental needs of children, have school-wide benefit.
Boredom is an uncomfortable, undesired, frustrating state of mind. As parents, we’ve been conditioned to alleviate these feelings in our little ones. We ask, “What do they need to reach a better state of mind?” So it’s really no wonder that a bored and whiny child makes a parent spout lists of fun ideas or break out a craft project. However, relieving the discomfort of boredom is one of those parenting instincts we should fight.
University of Louisville Professor and boredom expert Dr. Andreas Elpidorou, in his article The Bright Side of Boredom, defines the value of boredom this way: “…boredom motivates the pursuit of a new goal when the current goal ceases to be satisfactory, attractive, or meaningful to the agent. Boredom helps to restore the perception that one’s activities are meaningful or significant. It acts as a regulatory state that keeps one in line with one’s projects. In the absence of boredom, one would remain trapped in unfulfilling situations, and miss out on many emotionally, cognitively, and socially rewarding experiences. Boredom is both a warning that we are not doing what we want to be doing and a “push” that motivates us to switch goals and projects. Neither apathy, nor dislike, nor frustration can fulfill boredom’s function.”
Not only is it key for motivating one toward goals and meaningful activity, it is also the precursor of creativity. A paper presented at the Annual Conference at the British Psychological Society outlined two studies that revealed that boredom in subjects brought forth daydreaming and innovative connections that lead to more creativity.
In the first study, 40 people were asked to copy numbers out of a telephone directory for 15 minutes, and were then asked to come up with different uses for a pair of polystyrene cups. Those subjected to copying telephone numbers were more creative than a control group who had only been asked to come up with uses for the cups.
In the second study, researchers looked specifically at the influence of daydreaming. This time the control group was only given the cups, another group again copied the numbers as before, and a third group read the numbers instead of writing them, which left more time for daydreaming. Researchers found that people who had no boring task demonstrated the least creativity; those writing names showed more creativity, but those who had just read the names were more creative of all. This suggested the importance of passive boredom, the kind that allows for daydreaming and leads to creativity.
But it’s not just this one study confirming boredom’s role in creative living. This study from the Journal of Associative Psychology found boredom promoted “associative thought” – deeper connections between potentially unrelated ideas. And neuroscience is jumping into the boredom study game, finding that “a neural circuit called the default network, which is turned on when we’re not preoccupied with something in our external environment” – in other words, when we’re bored. At first glance, these boring moments might seem like a great time for the brain to go quiet, to reduce metabolic activity and save some glucose for later. But that isn’t what happens. The bored brain is actually incredibly active, as it generates daydreams and engages in mental time travel. In particular, there seems to be an elaborate electrical conversation between the front and rear parts of the mind, as the medial prefrontal cortex fires in sync with areas like the posterior cingulate and precuneus.”
So is boredom always good? Well, as it turns out, no. German researchers have identified four different types of boredom, and while three of them lead to creativity and focused goal pursuit, one of them does not. They call this bad boredom “reactant boredom,” and it is defined as boredom induced by an activity which requires attention in order to have meaning. You guessed it: this is classroom boredom, and it’s bad because “it prompts sufferers to leave the boredom-inducing situation and avoid responsibility and those responsible (teachers).”
Waldorf schools use multi-disciplinary teaching to avoid classroom boredom among our students. It’s hard to be apathetic and bored at your desk when you have to sing, draw, or catch a ball during a lecture.
Ultimately, however, boredom at home is a net gain for children. While it’s hard to watch children suffer and be uncomfortable, this trip out of their comfort zone and into the land of boredom leads to inspired, creative, and meaningful play. And that’s the work of the child.
In Part 1 of this series, Waldorf vs. Public School – Early Academics, we explored child development and testing in its relation to academics in Waldorf and Public schools. Now we’ll compare the academic philosophies of each education system, beginning with an in-depth discussion of Waldorf early academic pedagogy.
What is the objective of Waldorf Early Academics?
Waldorf educators believe test standards cannot be rigidly adhered to in a child’s early years. We all have heard stories of geniuses and other successful adults that “underperformed” in early grades. For example, a student’s inability to read fluently until the end of second or third grade could be due to a learning challenge, or it could be that the child has not reached the developmental milestones necessary for them to read and it’s important not to label or stress children in these early years if a love of learning is to be established.
Waldorf educators understand that most children taught academics in early years will learn academics, but at what cost? A growing body of current research indicates that early academics actually hurt the long term test scores of students. Also, Harvard research found that by eighth grade, Waldorf students outperform their early-academic-focused peers.
But why? Waldorf educators believe it is because our early academic curriculum takes a child’s development into account and focuses on more than one kind of intelligence, which is key to educating the whole child for long term academic success.
While reading and math is taught in Waldorf early academics, Waldorf teachers have, and take, time to focus on all the varying forms of intelligence as defined by Howard Gardner, American developmental psychologist and professor of Cognition and Education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. In his book, Frames of Mind, he discusses the different ways in which humans cultivate intelligence, which include: Verbal / Linguistic, Logical/ Mathematical, Body/ Kinesthetic, Visual/ Spatial, Music/ Rhythmic, Interpersonal & Intrapersonal and Naturalistic.
Waldorf students in Grade K-3, unhindered by test-centered curriculum and schedules, have the time to do what public schools used to accomplish. Students learn art and music for visual and musical learning, which studies show aids future learning of abstract mathematical concepts. They are given time to use their bodies during each of the three recess periods and during gym class, eurythmy, and main lesson movement to develop body/kinesthetic and spatial learning. Collaborative classwork and free play allows students to develop inter- and intrapersonal intelligence. Special subjects like gardening allow science curriculum to occur in a meaningful, naturalistic environment.
By giving young children time to learn and develop layers of important skills that go beyond the three Rs and testing concepts, Waldorf educators are fostering deeper learning that pays off in the long term.
The Philosophy Behind the Pedagogy
- The importance of standardized testing
- The idea the learning is linear and cumulative
Public school adheres to the ideas that testing is essential. As the old adage goes: “everything measured improves.” They also believe that learning happens on a linear incline and students ascend in measured time. If this is true, then making students walk up the learning incline earlier, even as early as Kindergarten, means that students will climb higher learn more in the 13 years before graduation.
A metaphor for Waldorf pedagogy would be better represented by a campfire. The imagination is the fire starter, sparked by genuine interest in academic topics (typically told through story). Then other skills, like those explored by Howard Gardner, layer on as small kindling and build up the flame of cognition. Only then, with a stable and hearty love of learning established, can students take on and fuel their intellect with the logs of heavy academic rigor that come in grades 4-12.
As one can see in this metaphor, measurement becomes difficult. Measurement of the kindling does not directly influence the growth of flame. And so, although Waldorf educators believe testing has its place in older grades as a benchmark for certain learning, they also feel it has no place as a measure of early intelligence.
In our article A Comparison of Waldorf and Public School, we broke down key elements that differentiate the two pedagogies by looking at the way each approaches early academics, curriculum, classroom environment, teaching methods, social learning, individuality, and relation to society as a whole. In the following series, we will look at each of these elements in more detail and explore the differences more deeply. We begin the series with a closer look at Early Academics – Part One and Part Two.
Waldorf Education: Child Development & Testing
When Waldorf educators consider their approach to learning in grades K through 3, they take special note of the completed transition children experience by Grade 3 — moving from Piaget’s Preoperational to Concrete Operational cognition. Piaget believed most children made this transition around age seven, whereas Waldorf’s founder, Rudolf Steiner, determined children transitioned closer to age 9.
Although some may transition a bit sooner, by some point in third grade, each child will awake from an egocentric worldview. They will begin to see that they have a place within a greater, expansive world. What this shift in thinking requires, in Waldorf education, is a shift in teaching method and rigor. It is then, and only then, that Waldorf educators think of young students as emerging from “early academics.” For the students who are more academically capable in the early years, the focus is on presentation, taking their time to do their best work, developing social skills, and physical abilities.
Many will say that “the rubber hits the road” as Waldorf students round out their third year of schooling. Homework may begin halfway through this year as children hone their capacity to focus and to take personal responsibility for their actions. While movement still plays a key role, children begin to be able to sit for longer periods and grapple with ever more complex and nuanced topics.
It’s important to note that Waldorf student assessments are not based on testing during early academic learning. Waldorf educators believe a child’s physical, social, and cognitive development at this age is too fluid and varied to be measured by testing early reading and math skills. Waldorf teachers assess the children daily based on participation, lesson work, social interactions, and physical abilities.
By the end of fourth grade, most Waldorf schools will allow students to take a standardized test, such as the IOWA test, although most do not share the scores with students to avoid the children having a specific impression of their strengths and weaknesses and comparing themselves to others in their class.
Public School: Child Development & Testing
While Piaget has been influential in public school curriculum in the past, regard for child development has been sidelined in favor of a more linear approach to learning, where educators and administrators reverse engineer what must be learned by a particular grade and then segment and downshift those lessons back to Kindergarten in order to “fill the pail” by a particular test date.
The Department of Education says it has, “designed [core standards] to ensure students are prepared for today’s entry-level careers, freshman-level college courses, and workforce training programs.” They encourage parents to sort through the facts of Common Core standards vs. the myths. They counter skeptics’ claims, such as those who say that teachers were not consulted on test creation or that tests are not based on relevant international research.
Common Core advocates say, “Standards in ELA/literacy and mathematics provide a staircase to college and career readiness, building on the best of previous state standards and based on the best evidence and research; unlike typical standards prior, these standards help teachers understand exactly what is expected of each of our students at each grade level.”
But concerned skeptics like Dr. Megan Koschnick feel that many of the early childhood Common Core Standards are developmentally inappropriate for young students not yet reaching Piaget’s concrete operational stage. Her peers at the American Principles Project are concerned that no developmental or neuropsychologists were involved in the committees for creating the Common Core. According to Koschnick, there is also little, if any, scientific research supporting the aptitude recommendations at early grade levels.
As Koschnick said in this video, when standards are not developmentally appropriate, “Teachers are going to see typically developing children as delayed, parents may be informed that their children are behind and kids are going to get measured against inappropriate standards and might be held back or tracked into remedial classes that they don’t really need.”
Test vs. Non Test Culture — Who has the “Right” Research?
There is simply no research documenting the benefits of teaching the Common Core. It is too soon to measure the results of all this measurement. Research about testing in America and its result is mostly based on Iowa Testing started in 1935 and The No Child Left Behind Act started in 2002.
However, ten years on, the results of No Child Left Behind have begun to surface. The National Center for Fair and Open Testing claims that “NCLB failed to significantly increase average academic performance and significantly narrow achievement gaps as measured by the National Assessment of Education Progress. NCLB severely damaged educational quality and equity by narrowing the curriculum in many schools and focusing attention on the limited skills standardized tests measure.”
Many skeptics of Common Core, Waldorf educators included, feel it is the testing culture that is causing the problem, not the specifics of any given test. For a comprehensive history and review of varying tests, check out this Frontline article: Testing Our Schools, A Guide for Parents.
Click to Continue to Waldorf Compared to Public School — Early Academics Part 2 as we compare the academic philosophies of each education system, beginning with an in-depth discussion of Waldorf early academic pedagogy.
Early Childhood classrooms in Waldorf schools look different. Some parents are initially surprised by the lack of primary colors and maps and charts that normally festoon the walls of “traditional” preschool rooms. Won’t the kids find this … boring?
According to recent research on the topic of classroom design, they won’t consider it at all, which is exactly the point. The teacher and the lessons – or, in Early Childhood, the play and cognitive, creative, and motor development – is what deserves the children’s focus, not the posters, mobiles, or charts.
And it turns out children do give busy decor a fair amount of their focus. This New York Times article, Rethinking the Colorful Kindergarten Classroom, reports on a recent early childhood study which found that “children spent far more time off-task in the decorated classroom than in the plain one,” as measured by time spent gazing at the walls and scores on a picture test about stories the teacher had been telling.
There is also concern that the material on the walls is simply part of a larger commercial agenda to sell teachers and schools pre-made banners, mobiles, and posters, when walls might be better served as display space of student work or functional space for teachers and students.
A comprehensive 2012 research study published in The International Journal of Building Science and its Applications conducted an extensive analysis and assessment of 751 students across 34 classrooms in seven different schools in order to isolate the characteristics of classrooms that “maximize pupils’ achievement.”
According to this study, a well-designed classroom:
- Receives natural light
- Is designed with a quiet visual environment
- Uses warm colors on the walls and floor
- Has a large area of free space for building and diverse learning/play
- Has high-quality and purpose-designed furniture, fixtures and equipment
- Allows ease of movement
- Allows flexibility in learning varied activities
- Contains ergonomic tables and chairs
- Is modular, meaning the teacher can easily change the space configuration
While stepping into a Waldorf Early Childhood classroom evokes feelings of warmth, simplicity and comfort, careful analysis reveals that almost all of the above features have been accomplished in its design. Open areas are filled with natural light and materials that emphasize function over primary-colored form. This helps young children feel comfortable and focus on what matters — their creative play with peers, and time listening to and working with their teacher.
If you Google, “Summer break with children,” you get two types of search results — a variety of activity lists or articles about the evils of summer’s off. Turns out they call it “summer fade,” which is a one month backslide in learning coupled with an increase in Body Mass Index (BMI) for kids.
Many parents counter these issues with a rigorous schedule of summer camps, sport practice and tutoring. While watching television all day with a box of pop tarts is obviously not good, there are some other options beyond a highly structured and scheduled summer.
When planning, or not planning your child’s summer, consider the scientifically proven benefits of boredom, free play and time in nature. These research studies about children and learning support the idea of a summer slowdown.
In a recent BBC news article, Children should be allowed to get bored, Dr Teresa Belton said, “Cultural expectations that children should be constantly active could hamper the development of their imagination.”
Now couple that reality with studies connecting time in nature with increased learning and emotional capabilities. The positive results of being outdoors for children are vast as seen in this PDF of a decade of Scientific Studies on this topic. Some highlights include:
- “When children engage in authentic play in nature-based outdoor spaces, they develop skills in a variety of domains simultaneously.” – Miller, D.L., Tichota, K,.White, J. (2009).
- “Sullivan has revealed that the symptoms of children with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) are relieved after contact with nature. The greener the setting, the more the relief.” – Taylor, A., Kuo, F. & Sullivan, W. (2001).
- “Children who regularly have positive personal experiences with the natural world show more advanced motor fitness, including coordination, balance and agility.” – Fjortoft, Ingunn (2001).
In addition to the learning benefits to boredom and time in nature, there is also the issue of free play. This article from Parenting Science explores over a decade of studies about the benefits of unstructured play time. The author is careful to note that free play does not mean physcial education classes or sports. Free play is just that. Unstructured play time, which is proven to help math skills, language development, and creative problem solving.
- “Play and exploration trigger the secretion of BDNF, a substance essential for the growth of brain cells.”
- “Psychologist Edward Fisher analyzed 46 published studies of the cognitive benefits of play (Fisher 1999). He found that “sociodramatic play”—what happens when kids pretend together—’results in improved performances in both cognitive-linguistic and social affective domains.'”
And finally, before you schedule a summer of busy stimulation, consider this article and advice from Simplicity Parenting writer Kim John Payne. He says:
“[When Google is hiring they say] ‘we’re less concerned about grades and transcripts and more interested in how you think.'”
If we rewind to a childhood that makes an adult like that, what do we see? Is it racing around from one prep course to another? From soccer to piano to Mandarin? A childhood on the clock and filling up the gaps with zoning on the iPad and obsessing about making more friends on Facebook?
I don’t think so.
When we really look at what happens for a kid when they slow down, tune in to themselves, take space and get busy in serious play, we can see that what they are learning is how to be create a kind of inner structure that will serve them (and us) well in the world ahead. … Play provides a deep and wide-reaching domain for kids to experiment with the real work of the real world.”