Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

The Kingdom of Childhood
GA 311

19 August 1924, Torquay

Lecture VII

We will now speak of some further details of method, though of course in this short time I can only pick out a few examples to give you.

When we consider the whole period between the change of teeth and puberty we can see that it divides itself again into three sections, and it is these three sections that we must bear in mind when we have to guide the children through these early years of school life.

First we have the age up to the point of time which I have described to you here, when the child begins to differentiate himself from his environment and makes a distinction between “subject”—his own self, and “object”—the things which surround him in the outside world; up to this point of time it is essential for us to teach in such a way that everything within the child or without him bears the character of a unity. I have shown you how that can be done artistically. Then, in the second period, we saw how the transition to descriptions of the outside world can be made through our teaching of plant and animal life. You can treat these things in quite an elementary way up till the twelfth year. The third section extends from the twelfth year up to puberty, and it is really only at this time that we can pass on to lifeless nature, for it is only now that the child really begins to understand the inanimate world.

We might indeed say that from the seventh year to about nine-and-a-half or nine-and-one-third the child takes in everything with his soul. There is nothing that the child would not take in with his soul. The trees, the stars, the clouds, the stones, everything is absorbed by the child's soul life. From about nine-and-a-third to about eleven-and-two-thirds the child already perceives the difference between the soul quality which he sees in himself and what is merely “living.” We can now speak of the whole earth as living. Thus we have the soul quality and the living quality. Then from eleven-and-two-thirds to about fourteen the child discriminates between what is of the soul, what is living, and what is dead, that is to say, what is based on the laws of cause and effect.

We should not speak to the child of Inanimate things at all before he approaches his twelfth year. Only then should we begin to speak about minerals, physical phenomena, chemical phenomena and so on. We must make it clear to ourselves that this is really how things are: in the child between the change of teeth and puberty it is not the intellect but the fantasy that is predominantly active; we must constantly be thinking of the child's fantasy, and therefore, as I have often said, we must especially develop fantasy in ourselves. If we do not do this, but pass over to all kinds of intellectual things when the child is still quite young, then he cannot go through his development rightly even in his physical body. And much that is pathological at the present day arises from the fact that in this materialistic age too much attention has been paid to the intellect in children between the change of teeth and puberty.

We should only very gradually introduce the lifeless world when the child is approaching his twelfth year, for this lifeless world must be grasped by the intellect. At this time we can introduce minerals, physical and chemical phenomena and so on. But even here we should connect it up with life as far as possible, not simply start, for instance, with a collection of minerals, but start from the earth, the soil, and first describe the mountain ranges, how they bring about the configuration of the earth; then we can speak of how the mountains are surrounded with soil at their foot, and the higher we go the more bare they become and the fewer plants there are. So we come to speak of the bareness of the mountains and point out that here there are minerals. Thus we start with the mountains and lead on to the minerals.

Then when we have given a clear description of the mountains we can show the children a mineral and say: this is what you would find if you were to take this path up the mountain. This is where it is found. When you have done this with a few different minerals you can pass on to speak of the minerals themselves. But you must do the other first, here again proceeding from the whole and not from the part. This is of very great importance.

For physical phenomena also it is just as important to start from life itself. You should not begin your teaching of Physics as set forth in the text books of today, but simply by lighting a match for instance and letting the children observe how it begins to burn; you must draw their attention to all the details, what the flame looks like, what it is like outside, what it is like further in, and how a black spot, a little black cap is left when you blow out the flame; and only when you have done this, begin to explain how the fire in the match came about. The fire came about through the generation of warmth, and so on. Thus you must connect everything with life itself.

Or take the example of a lever: do not begin by saying that a lever consists of a supported beam at the one end of which there is a force, and at the other end another force, as one so often finds in the Physics books. You should start from a pair of scales; let the child imagine that you are going to some shop where things are being weighed out, and from this pass on to equilibrium and balance, and to the conception of weight and gravity. Always develop your Physics from life itself, and your chemical phenomena also.

That is the essential thing, to begin with real life in considering the different phenomena of the physical and mineral world. If you do it the other way, beginning with an abstraction, then something very curious happens to the child; the lesson itself soon makes him tired. He does not get tired if you start from real life. He gets tired if you start from abstractions.

The golden rule for the whole of teaching is that the child should not tire. Now there is something very strange about the so-called experimental education of the present day. Experimental psychologists register when a child becomes tired in any kind of mental activity, and from this they decide how long to occupy a child with any one subject, in order to avoid fatigue.

This whole conception is wrong from beginning to end. The truth of the matter is as follows: you can read about it in my books, especially in the book Riddles of the Soul and in various lecture courses; all I shall do now is to remind you that man consists of three members—the nerve-senses man, that is, all that sustains man in the activity of his mind and spirit; the rhythmic man, which contains the whole rhythm of breathing, the circulation of the blood and so on; and the metabolic-limb man, in which is to be found everything that is metamorphosed by means of the different substances.

Now if you take the physical development of the child from birth to the change of teeth you will find it is specially the head-organisation, the nerve-senses organisation that is at work.1Dr. Steiner is here speaking of the process of organic development, not of the child's mental growth. There is no question of approaching the child's intellect during this first period of childhood when the head and nerves system is performing a function entirely different from later years. See Rudolf Steiner: The Education of the Child in the Light of Anthroposophy. The child develops from the head downwards in the early years of his life. You must examine this closely. Look first of all at a human embryo, an unborn child. The head is enormous and the rest of the body is still stunted. Then the child is born and his head is still outwardly the largest, strongest part, and out of the head proceeds the whole growth of the child.

This is no longer the case with the child between the seventh and fourteenth year. Rhythm of breathing, rhythm of the blood, the whole rhythmic system is what holds sway between the change of teeth and puberty. Only rhythm!

But what is the real nature of rhythm? Now if I think a great deal, particularly if I have to study, I get tired, I get tired in my head. If I have to walk far, which is an exertion for my limb organism, I also tire. The head, or the nerve-senses organism, and the metabolic-limb organism can get tired. But the rhythmic organism can never tire.

For just think; you breathe all day long. Your heart beats at night as well as in the day. It must never stop, from birth to death. The rhythm of it has to go on all the time, and cannot ever tire. It never gets tired at all.

Now in education and teaching you must address yourself to whichever system is predominant in man; thus between the change of teeth and puberty you must address yourself to rhythm in the child by using pictures. Everything that you describe or do must be done in such a way that the head has as little to do with it as possible, but the heart, the rhythm, everything that is artistic or rhythmic, must be engaged. What is the result? The result is that with teaching of this kind the child never gets tired, because you are engaging his rhythmic system and not his head.

People are so terribly clever, and in this materialistic age they have thought out a scheme whereby the children should always be allowed to romp about between lessons. Now it is certainly good to let them romp about, but it is good because of the soul qualities in it, because of the delight they have in it. For experiments have been made and it has been found that when the children are properly taught in lesson time they are less tired than when they play about outside. The movement of their limbs tires them more, whereas what you give them in their lessons in the right way should never tire them at all. And the more you develop the pictorial element with the children and the less you exert the intellect, by presenting everything in a living way, the more you will be making demands on the rhythmic system only, and the less will the child become tired. Therefore when the experimental psychologists come and make observations to see how much the child tires, what is it they really observe? They observe how badly you have taught. If you had taught well you would find no fatigue on the part of the children.

In our work with children of Elementary School age we must see to it that we engage the rhythmic system only. The rhythmic system never tires, and is not over-exerted when we employ it in the right way, and for this rhythmic system we need not an intellectual but rather a pictorial method of presentation, something that comes out of the fantasy. Therefore it is imperative that fantasy should hold sway in the school. This must still be so even in the last period of which we have spoken, from eleven-and-two-thirds to fourteen years; we must still make the lifeless things live through fantasy and always connect them with real life. It is possible to connect all the phenomena of Physics with real life, but we ourselves must have fantasy in order to do it. This is absolutely necessary.

Now this fantasy should above all be the guiding principle in what are called compositions, when the children have to write about something and work it out for themselves. Here what must be strictly avoided is to let the children write a composition about anything that you have not first talked over with them in great detail, so that the subject is familiar to them. You yourself, with the authority of the teacher and educator, should have first spoken about the subject with the children; then the child should produce his composition under the influence of what you yourself have said. Even when the children are approaching puberty you must still not depart from this principle. Even then the child should not just write whatever occurs to him; he should always feel that a certain mood has been aroused in him through having discussed the subject with his teacher, and all that he then himself writes in his essay must preserve this mood.

Here again it is “aliveness” that must be the guiding principle. “Aliveness” in the teacher must pass over to “aliveness” in the children.

As you will see from all this, the whole of your teaching and education must be taken from real life. This is something which you can often hear said nowadays. People say that lessons must be given in a living way and in accordance with reality. But first of all we must acquire a feeling for what is actually in accordance with reality. I will give you an example from my own experience of what sometimes happens in practice even when in theory people hold the most excellent educational principles.

I once went into a classroom—I will not say where it was—where an Arithmetic example was being given which was supposed to connect addition with real life. 14 2/3, 16 5/6 and 25 3/5 for example, were not simply to be added together, but were to be related to life. This was done in the following way: The children were told that one man was born on 25th March, 1895, another on 27th August, 1888, and a third on 3rd December, 1899. How old are these three men together? That was the question. And the sum was quite seriously carried through in the following way: from the given date in 1895 to 1924 [The date of this Lecture Course.] is 29 3/4; this is the age of the first man. The second one up to 1924 is about 26 1/2 years old, and the third, from 1899, as he was born on 3rd December, we may say 25. The children were then told that when they add up these ages they will find out how old they all are together.

But my dear friends, I should just like to ask how it is possible that they can make up a certain sum together with their ages? How do you set about it? Of course the numbers can quite well be made up into a sum, but where can you find such a sum in reality? The men are all living at the same time, so that they cannot possibly experience such a thing together in any way. A sum like this is not in the very least taken from life.

It was pointed out to me that this sum was actually taken from a book of examples. I then looked at this book and I found several other ingenious examples of the same kind. In many places I have found that this kind of thing has repercussions in ordinary life, and that is the important thing about it. For what we do at school affects ordinary life, and if the school teaching is wrong, that is if we bring such an unreality into an arithmetical example, then this way of thinking will be adopted by the young people and will be taken into ordinary life. I do not know if it is the same in England, but all over Central Europe when, let us say, several criminals are accused and condemned together, then you sometimes read in the papers: all five together have received sentences of imprisonment totalling 75 1/2 years. One has ten years, another twenty and so on, but it is all added up together. This you can find repeatedly in the newspapers. I should like to know what meaning a sum like that can have in reality. For each single prisoner who is sentenced, the 75 years together certainly have no meaning; they will all of them be free long before the 75 years are over, so that it has no reality at all.

You see, that is the important thing, to make straight for the reality in everything: you simply poison a child to whom you give a sum like this which is absolutely impossible in real life.

You must guide the child to think only about things that are to be found in life. Then through your teaching reality will be carried back into life again. In our time we suffer terribly from the unreality of men's thinking, and the teacher has need to consider this very carefully.

There is a theory in this age which, though postulated by men who are considered to be extraordinarily clever, is really only a product of education. It is the so-called Theory of Relativity. I hope you have already heard something of this theory which is connected with the name of Einstein; there is much in it that is correct. I do not want to combat what is right in it, but it has been distorted in the following way. Let us imagine that a cannon is fired off somewhere. It is said that if you are so many miles away, after a certain length of time you hear the report of the cannon. If you do not stand still but walk away from the sound, then you hear it later. The quicker you walk away the later you get the impression of the sound. If you do the opposite and walk towards the sound you will be hearing it sooner and sooner all the time.

But now if you continue this thought you come to the possible conception, which is however an impossibility in reality, that you approach the sound more quickly than it travels itself, and then if you think this out to its conclusion you come to the point of saying to yourself: then there is also a possibility of hearing the sound before the cannon is fired off!

That is what it can lead to, if theories arise out of a kind of thinking which is not in accordance with reality. A man who can think in accordance with reality must sometimes have very painful experiences. For in Einstein's books you even find, for instance, how you could take a watch and send it out into the universe at the speed of light, and then let it come back again; we are then told what happens to this watch if it goes out at the speed of light and comes back again. I should like to get an actual sight of this watch which, having whizzed away at this speed, then comes back again; I should like to know what it looks like then! The essential thing is that we never lose sight of reality in our thinking.

Herein lies the root of all evil in much of the education of today, and you find, for instance, in the “exemplary” Kindergartens that different kinds of work are thought out for the child to do. In reality we should make the children do nothing, even in play, that is not an imitation of life itself. All Froebel occupations and the like, which have been thought out for the children, are really bad. We must make it a rule only to let the children do what is an imitation of life, even in play. This is extremely important.

For this reason, as I have already told you, we should not think out what are called “ingenious” toys, but as far as possible with dolls or other toys we should leave as much as we can to the child's own fantasy. This is of great significance, and I would earnestly beg you to make it a rule not to let anything come into your teaching and education that is not in some way connected with life.

The same rule applies when you ask the children to describe something themselves. You should always call their attention to it if they stray from reality. The intellect never penetrates as deeply into reality as fantasy does. Fantasy can go astray, it is true, but it is rooted in reality, whereas the intellect remains always on the surface. That is why it is so infinitely important for the teacher himself to be in touch with reality as he stands in his class.

In order that this may be so we have our Teachers' Meetings in the Waldorf School which are the heart and soul of the whole teaching. In these meetings, each teacher speaks of what he himself has learnt in his class and from all the children in it, so that each one learns from the other. No school is really alive where this is not the most important thing, this regular meeting of the teachers.

And indeed there is an enormous amount one can learn there. In the Waldorf School we have mixed classes, girls and boys together. Now quite apart from what the boys and girls say to each other, or what they consciously exchange with each other, there is a marked difference to be seen in the classes according to whether there are more girls than boys or more boys than girls or an equal number of each. For years I have been watching this, and it has always proved to be the case that there is something different in a class where there are more girls than boys.

In the latter case you will very soon find that you yourself as the teacher become less tired, because the girls grasp things more easily than boys and with greater eagerness too. You will find many other differences also. Above all, you will very soon discover that the boys themselves gain in quickness of comprehension when they are in a minority, whereas the girls lose by it if they are in the minority. And so there are numerous differences which do not arise through the way they talk together or treat each other but which remain in the sphere of the imponderable and are themselves imponderable things.

All these things must be very carefully watched, and everything that concerns either the whole class or individual children is spoken of in our meetings, so that every teacher really has the opportunity to gain an insight into characteristic individualities among the pupils.

There is one thing that is of course difficult in the Waldorf School method. We have to think much more carefully than is usually the case in class teaching, how one can really bring the children on. For we are striving to teach by “reading” from the particular age of a child what should be given him at this age. All I have said to you is directed towards this goal.

Now suppose a teacher has a child of between nine and ten years in the class that is right for his age, but with quite an easy mind he lets this child stay down and not go up with the rest of the class; the consequence will be that in the following year this child will be receiving teaching which is meant for an age of life different from his own. Therefore under all circumstances we avoid letting the children stay down in the same class even if they have not reached the required standard. This is not so convenient as letting the children stay in the class where they are and repeat the work, but we avoid this at all costs. The only corrective we have is to put the very weak ones into a special class for the more backward children.2Dr. Steiner then added that these children were at that time being taught by Dr. Karl Schubert who had a very special task in this domain and was particularly gifted for it.

Children who are in any way below standard come into this class from all the other classes.

Otherwise, as I have said, we do not let the children stay down but we try to bring them along with us under all circumstances, so that in this way each child really receives what is right for his particular age.

We must also consider those children who have to leave school at puberty, at the end of the Elementary School period, and who cannot therefore participate in the upper classes. We must make it our aim that by this time, through the whole tenor of our teaching, they will have come to a perception of the world which is in accordance with life itself. This can be done in a two-fold way. On the one hand we can develop all our lessons on Science and History in such a manner that the children, at the end of their schooling, have some knowledge of the being of man and some idea of the place of man in the world. Everything must lead up to a knowledge of man, reaching a measure of wholeness when the children come to the seventh and eighth classes, that is when they have reached their thirteenth and fourteenth year. Then all that they have already learnt will enable them to understand what laws, forces and substances are at work in man himself, and how man is connected with all physical matter in the world, with all that is of soul in the world, with all spirit in the world. So that the child, of course in his own way, knows what a human being is within the whole cosmos. This then is what we strive to achieve on the one hand.

On the other hand we try to give the children an understanding of life. It is actually the case today that most people, especially those who grow up in the town, have no idea how a substance, paper for instance, is made. There are a great many people who do not know how the paper on which they write or the material they are wearing is manufactured, nor, if they wear leather shoes, how the leather is prepared.

Think how many people there are who drink beer and have no idea how the beer is made. This is really a monstrous state of affairs. Now we cannot of course achieve everything in this direction, but we try to make it our aim as far as possible to give the children some knowledge of the work done in the most varied trades, and to see to it that they themselves also learn how to do certain kinds of work which are done in real life.

It is, however, extraordinarily difficult, in view of what is demanded of children today by the authorities, to succeed with an education that is really in accordance with life itself. One has to go through some very painful experiences. Once for instance, owing to family circumstances, a child had to leave when he had just completed the second class and begun a new year in the third. He had to continue his education in another school. We were then most bitterly reproached because he had not got so far in Arithmetic as was expected of him there, nor in Reading or Writing. Moreover they wrote and told us that the Eurythmy and Painting and all the other things he could do were of no use to him at all.

If therefore, we educate the children not only out of the knowledge of man, but in accordance with the demands of life, they will also have to know how to read and write properly at the age at which this is expected of them today. And so we shall be obliged to include in the curriculum many things which are simply demanded by the customs of the time. Nevertheless we try to bring the children into touch with life as far as possible.

I should have dearly liked to have a shoemaker as a teacher in the Waldorf School, if this had been possible. It could not be done because such a thing does not fit into a curriculum based on present-day requirements, but in order that the children might really learn to make shoes, and to know, not theoretically but through their own work, what this entails, I should have dearly liked from the very beginning to have a shoemaker on the staff of the school. But it simply could not be done because it would not have been in accordance with the authorities, although it is just the very thing that would have been in accordance with real life. Nevertheless we do try to make the children into practical workers.

When you come to the Waldorf School you will see that the children are quite good at binding books and making boxes; you will see too how they are led into a really artistic approach to handwork; the girls will not be taught to produce the kind of thing you see nowadays when you look at the clothes that women wear, for instance. It does not occur to people that the pattern for a collar should be different from that of a belt or the hem of a dress. People do not consider that here for example (see drawing a.) the pattern must have a special character because it is worn at the neck. The pattern for a belt (see drawing b.) must lead both upwards and downwards, and so on.

Diagram 1

Or again, we never let our children make a cushion with an enclosed pattern, but the pattern itself should show where to lay your head. You can also see that there is a difference between right and left, and so forth. Thus here too life itself is woven and worked into everything that the children make, and they learn a great deal from it. This then is another method by which the children may learn to stand rightly in life.

We endeavour to carry this out in every detail, for example in the giving of reports. I could never in my life imagine what it means to mark the capacities of the children with a 2, or 3, or 21-. I do not know if that is done in England too, giving the children numbers or letters in their reports which are supposed to show what a child can do. In Central Europe it is customary to give a 3, or a 4. At the Waldorf School we do not give reports like this, but every teacher knows every child and describes him in the report; he describes in his own words what the child's capacities are and what progress he has made.

And then every year each child receives in his report a motto or verse for his own life, which can be a word of guidance for him in the year to come. The report is like this: first there is the child's name and then his verse, and then the teacher without any stereotyped letters or numbers, simply characterises what the child is like, and what progress he has made in the different subjects. The report is thus a description. The children always love their reports, and their parents also get a true picture of what the child is like at school.

We lay great stress upon keeping in touch with all the parents so that from the school we may see into the home through the child. Only in this way can we come to understand each child, and to know how to treat every peculiarity. It is not the same thing when we notice the same peculiarity in two children, for it has quite a different significance in the two cases.

Suppose for instance that two children each show a certain excitability. It is not merely a question of knowing that the child is excitable and giving him something to help him to become quiet, but it is a question of finding out that in the one case the child has an excitable father whom he has imitated, and in the other case the child is excitable because he has a weak heart. In every case we must be able to discover what lies at the root of these peculiarities.

This is the real purpose of the Teachers' Meetings, to study man himself, so that a real knowledge of man is continually flowing through the school. The whole school is the concern of the teachers in their meetings, and all else that is needed will follow of itself. The essential thing is that in the Teachers' Meetings there is study, steady, continual study.

These are the indications I wanted to give you for the practical organisation of your school.

There are of course many things that could still be said if we could continue this course for several weeks. But that we cannot do, and therefore I want to ask you tomorrow, when we come together, to put in the form of questions anything which you may have upon your minds, so that we may use the time for you to put your questions which I will then answer for you.

Siebenter Vortrag

Wir wollen noch aus dem Methodischen einiges herausgreifen. Es können ja natürlich während dieser kurzen Zeit wirklich nur herausgegriffene Beispiele gegeben werden.

Wenn wir die Zeit, die der Mensch zwischen seinem Zahnwechsel und der Geschlechtsreife zubringt, überblicken, so gliedert sie sich uns wiederum in drei Teile, und diese drei Teile sind zu berücksichtigen, wenn es sich darum handelt, das Kind durch die Elementarschule durchzuführen.

Da haben wir zunächst das Lebensalter bis zu dem Lebenspunkt hin, den ich charakterisiert habe, in welchem sich das Kind von seiner Umgebung zu unterscheiden beginnt, wo es den Unterschied macht zwischen Subjekt, das es selbst ist, und den Dingen der Außenwelt, die ihm Objekt sind. Bis zu diesem Zeitpunkte müssen wir durchaus das Kind so erziehen, daß alles, was im Kinde ist, und alles, was außerhalb des Kindes ist, einen einheitlichen Charakter trägt. Ich habe Ihnen ja charakterisiert, wie man das artistisch machen kann. Dann haben wir ja beim Hinweis auf das Pflanzen- und Tierreich schon gesehen, wie man zu der Beschreibung der Außenwelt übergeht. Und man kommt dann, wenn man diese Dinge ganz elementar gestaltet, bis gegen das 12. Lebensjahr heran. Von diesem 12. Lebensjahr bis zu der Geschlechtsreife ist dann der dritte Abschnitt, in dem wir eigentlich erst zu der leblosen Natur übergehen können, wo das Kind im Grunde genommen erst anfängt, wirklich das Leblose zu fassen.

So können wir sagen: Vom 7. Jahre bis etwa 9 1/2 oder 9 1/3 Jahren nimmt das Kind alles seelisch. Es ist nichts da, was das Kind nicht seelisch aufnehmen würde. Die Bäume, die Sterne, die Wolken, die Steine, alles wird seelisch aufgenommen. Von 9 1/3 etwa bis etwa 11 2/3 Jahren nimmt das Kind allerdings schon den Unterschied zwischen Seelischem, das es in sich selber erblickt, und bloß Lebendigem wahr. Und wir können von Lebendigem, von der ganzen Erde als Lebewesen sprechen. Also Seelisches und Lebendiges. Dann von 11 2/3 bis etwa zum 14. Jahr unterscheidet das Kind Seelisches, Lebendiges und Totes, also alles dasjenige, was nach Ursachen und Wirkungen zusammenhängt.

Wir sollen dem Kinde gar nicht sprechen von Leblosem, bevor es gegen das 12. Lebensjahr hingeht. Dann erst sollen wir anfangen, von Mineralien, von physikalischen Erscheinungen, von chemischen Erscheinungen und so weiter zu sprechen. Man muß sich nur klarmachen, daß die Dinge wirklich so sind, daß beim Kinde zwischen dem Zahnwechsel und der Geschlechtsreife durchaus noch vorwiegend nicht der Intellekt, sondern die Phantasie tätig ist und daß man überall auf die Phantasie zählen muß. Daher muß man selber in sich, wie ich schon öfter sagte, die Phantasie besonders entwickeln. Wenn man das nicht tut, wenn man früh zu allerlei Verstandesmäßigem übergeht, dann kann das Kind auch körperlich-physisch seine Entwickelung nicht in ordentlichem Sinne durchmachen. Und manches, was an Pathologischem in unserer Gegenwart ist, rührt eben davon her, daß man in der materialistischen Zeit bei den Kindern zwischen dem Zahnwechsel und der Geschlechtsreife zu stark auf den Intellekt gesehen hat.

Wir dürfen erst leise anfangen mit dem Toten - denn das Tote muß eben mit dem Intellekt begriffen werden -, wenn das 12. Jahr heranrückt. Da können wir mit Mineralien, mit physikalischen, mit chemischen Erscheinungen und so weiter an das Kind herankommen. Aber auch da sollen wir womöglich überall an das Leben anknüpfen; nicht einfach, sagen wir, von der Mineraliensammlung ausgehen, sondern von dem Erdboden, vom Gebirge ausgehen, so daß wir das Gebirge zunächst beschreiben, wie es die Erde konfiguriert; dann davon sprechen, wie das Gebirge unten mit Erde umzogen ist. Je höher wir kommen, desto kahler wird das Gebirge, desto weniger finden sich dort Pflanzen. Nun fangen wir an, von dem Kahlen des Gebirges zu sprechen und dann darauf aufmerksam zu machen, daß da Mineralisches ist. Wir gehen also vom Gebirge aus und kommen an das Mineralische heran.

Dann, wenn wir das Gebirge so recht anschaulich beschrieben haben, dann nehmen wir irgendein Mineral und zeigen es und sagen: Das also würde man finden, wenn man diesen Weg hinaufginge auf dieses Gebirge. Dort findet man das. Hat man das für ein paar Mineralien gemacht, dann kann man übergehen, die Mineralien selbst zu behandeln. Aber das erste muß sein, daß man auch hier wiederum von dem Ganzen ausgeht und nicht von dem Teil. Das ist von einer außerordentlichen Wichtigkeit.

Und ebenso ist es wichtig auch für physikalische Erscheinungen, vom Leben auszugehen. Nicht einfach Physik, so wie man sie heute in den Lehrbüchern findet, zu lehren anfangen, sondern etwa davon ausgehen, daß man einfach ein Zündholz anzündet und nun zunächst das Kind anschauen läßt, wie da das Zündholz anfängt zu brennen. Man soll das Kind auf alle Einzelheiten aufmerksam machen, wie die Flamme aussieht, wie die Flamme mehr nach außen aussieht, wie sie im Innern aussieht; wenn man die Flamme auslöscht, daß da ein schwarzer Fleck zurückbleibt, eine schwarze Kuppe; dann erst davon anfangen, wie das Feuer an dem Zündholz zustande gekommen ist. Das Feuer an dem Zündholz ist dadurch zustande gekommen, daß Wärme entwickelt worden ist und so weiter. Überall die Dinge an das Leben anknüpfen!

Also zum Beispiel nicht vom Hebel ausgehen und sagen: Ein Hebel besteht darin, daß man einen Balken hat, der unterstützt ist, am einen Arm eine Kraft hat und am andern Arm eine Kraft, so wie man es in den Physikbüchern sehr häufig ausgeführt findet. Man soll das nicht so machen, sondern von der Waage ausgehen. Man soll das Kind in Gedanken zu irgendeinem Geschäft hinführen, wo mit der Waage abgewogen wird, und von da aus erst zum Gleichgewicht übergehen, ebenso zu dem Begriff des Gewichtes, der Schwere übergehen. Also überall aus dem Leben heraus das Physikalische entwickeln. Und so auch bei chemischen Erscheinungen.

Das ist das Wesentliche, daß man vom Leben ausgehend, die einzelnen physikalischen, mineralischen Erscheinungen betrachtet. Geht man anders vor, geht man von der Abstraktion aus, dann geschieht ja etwas sehr eigentümliches mit dem Kinde, dann wird das Kind leicht müde durch den Unterricht. Das Kind wird dann nicht müde, wenn man vom Leben ausgeht; es wird müde, wenn man von der Abstraktion ausgeht.

Nun ist es überhaupt die goldene Regel für den Unterricht, daß das Kind absolut nicht müde werde. Es ist etwas sehr eigentümliches mit der sogenannten experimentellen Pädagogik von heute. In der experimentellen Pädagogik stellt man fest, wann ein Kind durch irgendeine geistige Tätigkeit müde wird. Daraus schließt man dann, wie lange man ein Kind beschäftigen soll mit irgendeinem Gegenstande, damit es eben nicht müde werde.

Diese ganze Anschauung ist falsch, durch und durch falsch! Denn sehen Sie, die Sache ist so - Sie können das in meinen Büchern nachlesen, namentlich in Zyklen, aber auch in meinem Buch «Von Seelenrätseln» -: Der Mensch besteht ja aus den drei Gliedern, aus dem Nerven-Sinnes-Menschen - ich will das nur in Ihr Gedächtnis zurückrufen -, das ist alles dasjenige, was den Menschen geistig in seiner Tätigkeit stützt, dem rhythmischen Menschen, worinnen aller Atmungsrhythmus, alle Blutzirkulation und so weiter enthalten ist, und dem Stoffwechsel-Gliedmaßen-Menschen, worinnen alles enthalten ist, was durch die Stoffe umgewandelt wird.

Wenn man die Entwickelung des Kindes von der Geburt bis zum Zahnwechsel nimmt, so ist es insbesondere die Kopforganisation, die Nerven-Sinnes-Organisation, die da wirkt. Das Kind entwickelt sich vom Kopf aus in der ersten Zeit seines Lebens. Das müssen Sie nur genau durchschauen. Sehen Sie sich zuerst einmal einen menschlichen Embryo an, also das noch ungeborene Kind. Da ist der Kopf mächtig. Das andere alles ist noch verkümmert. Dann wird das Kind geboren. Sein Kopf ist noch immer äußerlich das Mächtigste, und vom Kopfe geht überhaupt das ganze Wachstum und alles aus.

Das ist nicht mehr der Fall beim Kinde zwischen dem 7. und 14. Lebensjahre. Der Atmungs-Rhythmus, der Blut-Rhythmus, der ganze Rhythmus herrscht zwischen dem Zahnwechsel und der Geschlechtsreife des Kindes. Nur der Rhythmus!

Wie ist es aber mit dem Rhythmus? Denken Sie doch nur einmal, wenn ich viel nachdenke, namentlich wenn ich viel studieren muß, werde ich müde, kopfmüde. Wenn ich viel gehen muß, also den Gliedmaßenorganismus anstrenge, werde ich auch müde. Der Kopforganismus, der Nerven-Sinnes-Organismus, und der Stoffwechsel-Gliedmaßen-Organismus können müde werden, aber der rhythmische Organismus kann gar nicht müde werden.

Denken Sie doch, während des ganzen Tages müssen Sie atmen. Ihr Herz schlägt während der Nacht auch, es darf gar nie aufhören zwischen der Geburt und dem Tode. Es muß fortwährend im Rhythmus gehen. Der darf nicht müde werden, der wird überhaupt nicht müde.

Nun müssen Sie sich in der Erziehung und im Unterricht an dasjenige System wenden, welches den Menschen beherrscht. Also zwischen dem Zahnwechsel und der Geschlechtsreife müssen Sie sich mit Bildern an den Rhythmus wenden. Sie müssen alles, was Sie beschreiben, was Sie betreiben, so gestalten, daß der Kopf möglichst wenig dabei beteiligt ist, daß das Herz, der ganze Rhythmus, alles, was künstlerisch, rhythmisch ist, daran beteiligt ist. Was ist die Folge? Daß durch einen solchen Unterricht das Kind überhaupt nicht müde wird, weil man auf das rhythmische System und nicht auf den Kopf abstellt.

Die Leute sind ja so furchtbar gescheit, und sie haben in der materialistischen Zeit ausgedacht, daß man die Kinder zwischen den Stunden immer herumtollen lassen muß. Nun ist das ja gut, wenn man sie herumtollen läßt, aber freilich durch das Seelische, durch die Freude, die sie daran haben. Man hat dann auch Experimente gemacht und hat gefunden, daß wenn die Kinder ordentlich unterrichtet werden, sie während des Unterrichts weniger müde werden, als wenn sie draußen herumtollen. Das Bewegen der Glieder ermüdet mehr; während das, was Sie in richtiger Weise in dem Unterricht heranbringen, überhaupt nicht ermüden darf. Und je mehr Sie das Bildhafte vor den Kindern entfalten, je weniger Sie den Intellekt anstrengen, je mehr Sie lebendig schildern, desto mehr nehmen Sie bloß das rhythmische System in Anspruch, desto weniger ermüdet das Kind. Wenn also die Experimental-Psychologen kommen und untersuchen, wie stark das Kind ermüdet wird, was haben sie denn da eigentlich untersucht? Wie schlecht Sie unterrichtet haben! Wenn Sie gut unterrichtet hätten, würden sie gar keine Ermüdung konstatieren können.

Man muß dazu kommen, für das Kind in der Volksschule nur das rhythmische System zu beanspruchen. Und für dieses rhythmische System, das nie ermüdet, das gar nicht angestrengt wird, wenn man es in der entsprechenden Weise beschäftigt, braucht man nicht das Intellektuelle, sondern das Bildhafte, das, was aus der Phantasie kommt. Daher müssen Sie in der Schule unbedingt die Phantasie walten lassen. Auch noch in den letzten Jahren, von 11 2/3 bis zum 14. Jahre, auch da noch das Tote durch die Phantasie lebendig machen, an das Leben anknüpfen! Man kann durchaus die Möglichkeit gewinnen, alle physikalischen Erscheinungen an das Leben anzuknüpfen. Dazu muß man eben Phantasie haben; das ist dasjenige, was notwendig ist.

Weiter wird es sich darum handeln, daß man diese Phantasie vor allen Dingen in dem walten läßt, was man den Aufsatz nennt, wenn das Kind einen Aufsatz schreiben soll, selber etwas ausarbeiten soll. Da handelt es sich darum, daß man nichts von dem Kinde aufsatzmäßig verarbeiten läßt, was man nicht zunächst wirklich genau durchgesprochen hat, so daß das Kind mit der Sache bekannt ist. Und man soll über die Sache von sich aus als Lehrer- und Erzieherautorität gesprochen haben. Dann soll das Kind unter dem Einfluß dessen, was man selbst gesprochen hat, seinen Aufsatz liefern. Davon soll man auch nicht abgehen in den letzten Jahren vor der Geschlechtsreife. Auch da soll man nicht das Kind blind darauflos schreiben lassen, sondern in ihm das Gefühl erwecken, es sollte nichts in dem Aufsatz stehen, was ihn nicht in der Stimmung erhält, die dadurch in ihm hervorgerufen worden ist, daß? der Gegenstand des Aufsatzes mit dem Lehrer oder Erzieher besprochen worden ist. Auch da muß Lebendigkeit walten. Die Lebendigkeit des Lehrers muß auf die Lebendigkeit des Kindes übergehen.

Der ganze Unterricht und die ganze Erziehung müssen, wie Sie ja aus alledem ersehen, aus dem Leben geholt werden. Das spricht man auch heute oftmals aus. Man sagt, es muß} so unterrichtet werden, daß die Sache lebendig ist, wirklichkeitsgemäß ist. Aber man muß sich erst wirklich ein Gefühl dafür aneignen für das, was wirklichkeitsgemäß ist. Wie man da, auch wenn man guten theoretischen Erziehungsgrundsätzen huldigt, manchmal in der Praxis verfährt, das möchte ich Ihnen an einem Beispiel erörtern, das ich selber erlebt habe.

Ich kam einmal in eine Schulklasse, ich will jetzt nicht sagen wo, da wurde ein Rechenexempel aufgegeben. Es wurde aufgegeben aus dem Grunde, um an das Leben eine Addition anzuknüpfen. Man sollte nicht einfach 14 2/3 und 16 5/6 und 25 3/5 addieren, sondern man sollte etwas aus dem Leben haben. Nun, das Rechenexempel lautete ungefähr so: Ein Mensch ist geboren am 25. März 1895, ein zweiter am 27. August 1898, ein dritter am 3. Dezember 1899. Wie alt sind diese drei Menschen zusammen? So wurde gefragt. Und es wurde nun ernsthaft auf folgende Weise gerechnet: von 1895 bis zum Jahre 1924 sind 29 3/4. So alt ist der eine. Der andere ist bis 1924 ungefähr 26 1/2 Jahre, und der dritte, da er am 3. Dezember erst geboren ist, können wir sagen, ist 25 Jahre. Nun wurde gesagt, wenn man das zusammenrechnet, so kommt heraus, wie alt sie zusammen sind.

Nun möchte ich aber fragen, wie die das machen sollen, daß sie überhaupt zusammen in irgendeiner Summe alt werden können? Wie stellt man das an? Nicht wahr, die Zahlen ergeben ganz gut eine Summe; aber wie stellt man das an, daß diese Summe irgendwo in der Wirklichkeit ist? Die leben ja alle zu gleicher Zeit. Also, sie können unmöglich das zusammen irgendwie erleben! Das ist gar nicht aus dem Leben, wenn man solch eine Rechnung aufstellt.

Man konnte mir zeigen, daß dies eine aus einem Schulbuch entnommene Rechnung war. Ich sah mir dann dieses Schulbuch an. Da standen mehrere solche geistreiche Dinge.

Ich habe in manchen Gegenden gefunden, daß das nun wiederum ins Leben zurückwirkt, und das ist das Wichtigste.

Also dasjenige, was wir in der Schule treiben, geht wiederum in das Leben zurück! Wenn wir in der Schule falsch lehren, wenn wir so unterrichten, daß wir irgend etwas, was gar keine Wirklichkeit ist, in eine Rechnung hineinbringen, dann wird diese Denkweise aufgenommen von den jungen Menschen und ins Leben hineingetragen. Ich weiß nicht, ob es in England auch so ist, aber in Mitteleuropa ist es überall so, daß wenn, sagen wir, mehrere Verbrecher zusammen angeklagt und verurteilt werden, man in den Zeitungen manchmal angegeben findet: alle fünf zusammen haben Gefängnisstrafen bekommen von 75 1/2 Jahren. Der eine hat 10, der andere 20 Jahre bekommen und so weiter, aber man rechnet das zusammen. Das können Sie in den Zeitungen immer wieder finden. Nun möchte ich wissen, was solch eine Summe in Wirklichkeit für eine Bedeutung hat. Für den einzelnen, der verurteilt ist, haben die 75 Jahre zusammen gewiß keine Bedeutung; aber alle zusammen werden auch früher fertig. Also es hat keine Realität.

Sehen Sie, das ist das Wichtige, daß man überall auf die Realität losgeht. Sie vergiften geradezu ein Kind, dem Sie eine solche Addition aufgeben, die ganz und gar nicht möglich ist in der Wirklichkeit.

Sie müssen das Kind anleiten, nur solche Dinge zu denken, die auch im Leben vorhanden sind. Dann wird auch wieder vom Unterricht aus die Wirklichkeit in das Leben hineingetragen. Wir leiden in unserer Zeit geradezu furchtbar unter dem unwirklichkeitsgemäßsen Denken der Menschen. Der Lehrer hat nötig, das sich wirklich zu überlegen.

Es gibt in unserer Zeit eine Theorie, die, obwohl die Menschen, welche diese Theorie aufgestellt haben, als außerordentlich geistreich gelten, rein aus der Erziehung hervorgegangen ist; es ist die sogenannte Relativitätstheorie. Ich hoffe, Sie werden auch schon etwas von dieser Theorie gehört haben, die sich an den Namen Einstein knüpft. An ihr ist vieles richtig. Ich will das Richtige gar nicht anfechten, aber sie wird in der folgenden Weise ausgedehnt. Sagen wir also, irgendwo wird eine Kanone losgelassen. Jetzt sagt man: Nach soundso viel Zeit hört man den Knall der Kanone, wenn man soundso viele Meilen entfernt ist. Wenn man nun nicht stillsteht, so sagt man, sondern mit dem Schall mitgeht, in der gleichen Richtung geht, so hört man den Ton später. Man bekommt den Knalleindruck später, und je schneller man sich entfernt, desto später kommt der Schalleindruck. Macht man es umgekehrt, geht man dem Schall entgegen, so kommt er immer früher und früher.

Nun, wenn man den Gedanken fortsetzt, so kommt man zu der Denkmöglichkeit, die aber keine Wirklichkeitsmöglichkeit ist, daß man schneller dem Schall entgegenkommt, als er selber geht. Und wenn man das zu Ende denkt, dann kommt man dazu, sich zu sagen: Es gibt auch eine Möglichkeit, den Schall früher zu hören, bevor die Kanone losgelassen ist!

Das ist dasjenige, wozu solche Theorien führen, die vom nichtwirklichkeitsgemäßen Denken kommen. Wer richtig in der Wirklichkeit denken kann, der kann manchmal ungeheure Schmerzen ausstehen. In den Büchern von Einstein finden Sie sogar angeführt, wie man eine Uhr nimmt, sie mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit in den Weltenraum hinausgehen läßt, und dann kommt sie wiederum zurück; es wird erklärt, wenn sie mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit hinausgeht und wiederum zurückkommt, wie es dann mit dieser Uhr zugeht. Aber nun möchte ich einmal wirklichkeitsgemäß diese Uhr anschauen, wie die aussieht, wenn sie mit dieser Geschwindigkeit hinaussaust und wieder zurückkommt. Es handelt sich darum, daß man niemals in seinem Denken von der Wirklichkeit abkommt.

Darin besteht das Urübel unseres Unterrichtes, daß sich so vieles von der Wirklichkeit entfernt. Darauf beruht auch sehr vieles, was heute in den mustergültigen Kindergärten gemacht wird. Da hat man Arbeiten ausgedacht, die das Kind machen soll. In Wirklichkeit soll man das Kind nichts anderes, auch im Spiele, machen lassen, als was Nachahmung des Lebens ist. Also alle Fröbelarbeiten und so weiter, die ausgedacht sind, sind eigentlich vom Übel. Es handelt sich durchaus darum, daß man das Kind nur dasjenige machen läßt, auch im Spiel, was Nachahmung des Lebens ist. Das ist von ungeheurer Wichtigkeit.

Und deshalb soll man auch nicht, wie ich Ihnen schon gesagt habe, Spielwaren ausdenken, die kunstvoll, wie man sagt, gestaltet sind, sondern man soll womöglich bei Puppen oder bei irgend etwas dem Kinde noch möglichst viel für die Phantasie übriglassen. Das ist von einer großen Bedeutung.

Das ist dasjenige, was ich auch hier besonders erwähnen will, daß Sie tatsächlich darauf sehen, daß nichts in den Unterricht und die Erziehung hineinkommt, was nicht in irgendeiner Weise an das Leben anknüpft. Das muß auch immer berücksichtigt werden, wenn das Kind dazu angehalten wird, selber irgend etwas zu beschreiben. Man soll dem Kinde jederzeit bemerklich machen, wann es von der Wirklichkeit abirrt. Der Verstand geht niemals so tief in die Wirklichkeit hinein wie die Phantasie. Die Phantasie kann irren, aber sie geht in die Wirklichkeit hinein; der Verstand bleibt eigentlich immer an der Oberfläche haften. Und daher ist es für den Lehrer so unendlich notwendig, selbst wirklichkeitsgemäß in der Klasse drinnen zu stehen. Damit der Lehrer selbst wirklichkeitsgemäß in der Klasse drinnenstehen kann, haben wir in der Waldorfschul-Pädagogik die Lehrerkonferenz als Seele des ganzen Unterrichtes. In dieser Lehrerkonferenz, wo die Lehrer vereinigt sind, bringt jeder dasjenige, was er selbst an seiner Klasse, an der Summe seiner Kinder gelernt hat, so daß jeder vom andern lernen kann. Und keine Schule lebt, in der nicht in dieser Weise die Konferenz, die Versammlung der Lehrer von Zeit zu Zeit das Allerwichtigste ist.

Man kann da tatsächlich ungeheuer viel lernen. Wir haben in der Waldorfschule gemischte Klassen, Mädchen und Knaben nebeneinander. Nun, ganz abgesehen von dem, was sich die Knaben und Mädchen sagen oder was sie mit ihrem Bewußtsein miteinander austauschen, kann man einen deutlichen Unterschied bemerken zwischen Klassen, in denen mehr Mädchen als Knaben sind, und Klassen, in denen mehr Knaben als Mädchen sind oder in denen Knaben und Mädchen gleich verteilt sind. Jahrelang bin ich dem nachgegangen, und immer hat es sich gezeigt: Es ist etwas ganz anderes, eine Klasse, wo mehr Mädchen als Knaben sind.

In einer Klasse, wo mehr Mädchen als Knaben sind, findet man sehr bald, daß man selber als Lehrer verhältnismäßig weniger müde wird, weil die Mädchen leichter auffassen, aber auch mit einem größeren Eifer auffassen als die Knaben. Aber man findet auch zahlreiche andere Unterschiede. Vor allen Dingen findet man sehr bald heraus, daß die Knaben selber in der Leichtigkeit ihrer Auffassung gewinnen, wenn sie in der Minderzahl sind, während die Mädchen verlieren, wenn sie selbst in der Minderzahl sind Und so sind zahlreiche Unterschiede da, die nicht durch das Mitteilen, nicht durch das gegenseitige Behandeln bestehen, sondern die im Imponderablen bleiben, Imponderabilien sind.

Auf alle diese Dinge muß man ungeheuer aufmerksam sein. Alle die Dinge, sowohl diejenigen, die sich auf ganze Klassen beziehen, wie diejenigen, die sich auf die einzelnen Schüler beziehen, werden bei uns in der Konferenz durchaus behandelt, so daß eigentlich jeder Lehrer die Möglichkeit hat, auf charakteristische Schülerindividualitäten besonders hinzusehen.

Fines ist natürlich bei der Waldorfschul-Methode schwierig: Man muß viel mehr als sonst beim Klassenunterricht nachdenken, wie man die Schüler wirklich vorwärtsbringt. Denn man will ja so unterrichten - und alles, was ich Ihnen auseinandergesetzt habe, ist darauf berechnet, so zu unterrichten -, daß man vom Lebensalter des Kindes abliest, was in diesem Lebensalter an es herangebracht werden soll.

Nun denken Sie, wenn man leichten Herzens ein Kind, das gerade zwischen dem 9. und 10. Jahre ist, also in der Klasse ist, die dem Alter entspricht, wie man sagt, sitzenbleiben läßt, nicht mitkommen läßt, dann wird es ja im nächsten Jahre für ein Lebensalter unterrichtet, das es gar nicht hat. Daher vermeiden wir das unter allen Umständen, daß wir Kinder, wenn sie, wie man sagt, nicht das Lehrziel erreichen, zurückbleiben lassen. Es ist das unbequemer, als wenn man einfach die Kinder sitzenbleiben läßt, sie die Klasse repetieren läßt; aber wir vermeiden das. Wir haben nur das eine Korrektiv, daß wir diejenigen, die ganz schwach sind, in eine Klasse für geistig minderbegabte Kinder zusammenfassen. Und die sind dann unterrichtet von Dr. Karl Schubert, der ja in diesem Gebiete seine ganz besondere Aufgabe und Geschicklichkeit hat.

Da werden aber auch von allen Klassen diejenigen zusammengefaßt, die nun in irgendeiner Weise minderbegabt sind. Wir können natürlich, da wir so viele Kinder haben, nicht auch noch viele Klassen für Schwachsinnige errichten.

Wir lassen, wie gesagt, die Kinder in der Klasse nicht zurück, sondern suchen sie unter allen Umständen mitzunehmen, so daß die Kinder wirklich dasjenige finden, was ihrem entsprechenden Lebensalter gemäß ist.

Diejenigen Kinder, die nicht weiterschreiten können, nicht weiter teilnehmen können an allem Schulunterricht, als bis sie geschlechtsreif sind, bis sie also die Volksschule verlassen müssen, versuchen wir durch die ganze Anlage des Unterrichtes nach zwei Richtungen hin zu einer lebensgemäßen Weltempfindung zu bringen; dadurch, daß wir auf der einen Seite allen naturkundlichen und geschichtlichen Unterricht so anlegen, daß das Kind zuletzt eine gewisse Erkenntnis der menschlichen Wesenheit hat, also ungefähr weiß, welche Stellung der Mensch in der Welt einnimmt. Menschenkunde ist daher dasjenige, worauf wir alles hinorientieren. So daß wir wirklich eine Art von Abschluß von Menschenkunde herbeiführen können, wenn die Kinder so in der 7., 8. Klasse, das heißt also im 13., 14. Jahr angekommen sind. Da hat das Kind also dann durch alles das, was es bis dahin gelernt hat, die Möglichkeit, sich eine Vorstellung davon zu machen, was für Gesetzmäßigkeiten, Kräfte, Stoffe an dem Menschen selbst beteiligt sind, wie der Mensch zusammenhängt mit allem Physischen, mit allem Seelischen, mit allem Geistigen in der Welt. So daß das Kind weiß, in seiner Art natürlich, was ein Mensch ist innerhalb des ganzen Kosmos. Das ist es, was wir versuchen auf der einen Seite mit dem Kinde zu erreichen.

Auf der anderen Seite versuchen wir mit dem Kinde das zu erreichen, daß wir es überleiten zu einem Lebensverständnis. Es ist Ja wirklich heute so, daß die meisten Menschen, die namentlich in der Stadt aufwachsen, keine Ahnung davon haben, wie, sagen wir, irgendein Stoff, zum Beispiel das Papier, zustande kommt und so weiter. Zahlreiche Menschen wissen nicht, wie das Papier zustande kommt, auf dem sie schreiben. Zahlreiche Menschen wissen nicht, wie irgendwie ein Stoff entsteht, den sie sich anziehen, oder wenn sie Lederschuhe haben, wie das Leder zustande kommt.

Denken Sie nur, wie unzählige Menschen Bier trinken und keine Ahnung davon haben, wie das Bier gemacht wird. Das ist eigentlich im Grunde genommen etwas Ungeheuerliches. Nun, es läßt sich natürlich nicht alles in dieser Richtung tun, aber wir versuchen soviel als möglich darauf hin zu arbeiten, daß das Kind ungefähr weiß, wie gearbeitet wird in den verschiedenartigsten Gewerben, und daß das Kind auch wirklich lernt, Arbeiten zu verrichten, die im Leben drinnenstehen.

Es ist nur außerordentlich schwierig, gegenüber dem, was heute von den Behörden an Anforderungen gestellt wird an die Kinder, mit einer Erziehung aufzukommen, die wirklich lebensgemäß ist. Man macht da die bösesten Erfahrungen. So zum Beispiel mußten wir einmal, da die Verhältnisse der Eltern das notwendig machten, einen Schüler entlassen, der eben die 2. Klasse vollendet hatte und in der 3. Klasse war. Er sollte nun in einer anderen Schule weiterlernen. Da machte man uns die bittersten Vorwürfe, denn so weit hatte er es im Rechnen nicht gebracht, als man dort wollte, so weit nicht im Lesen, nicht im Schreiben. Und man schrieb uns, mit der Eurythmie und mit dem Malen und mit all dem, was er da kann, weiß man nichts anzufangen.

Man muß also die Kinder, wenn man sie lebensgemäß, der Menschenerkenntnis nach erzieht, schon zu einer Zeit zum fertigen Lesen, Schreiben und so weiter bringen, wie man es heute verlangt. Und so ist auch eine ganze Menge notwendig, an die Kinder heranzubringen, was einfach den heutigen Gewohnheiten gemäß verlangt wird.

Daher sind wir natürlich auch in der Waldorfschule genötigt, manches an die Kinder heranzubringen, was wir nicht für so geartet halten, daß es aus einer wirklichen Menschenerkenntnis fließt. Aber trotzdem versuchen wir so weit als möglich, die Kinder an das Leben heranzubringen.

So hätte ich, wenn das durchführbar wäre, sehr gerne einen Schuster als Lehrer angestellt. Das läßt sich nicht durchführen, weil sich das nach den heutigen Anforderungen nicht in den Lehrplan eingliedern läßt. Aber zum Exempel, damit das Kind auch wirklich lernt, einmal Schuhe zu machen, und weiß, nicht theoretisch, sondern aus dem Handgriffe, was dazu gehört, Schuhe zu machen, hätte ich sehr gern vom Anfange an in der Waldorfschule unter der Lehrerschaft auch einen Schuster gehabt. Es ging eben nicht, weil man mit den Behörden nicht zurechtkommt. Mit dem Leben würde man dadurch gerade zurechtkommen. Aber wir versuchen doch, die Kinder zu praktischen Arbeitern machen zu können.

Sie können sehen, wenn Sie in die Waldorfschule kommen, wie die Kinder ganz schön Bücher einbinden, allerlei Kartonarbeiten machen, auch wie sie angeleitet werden, wirklich künstlerisch Handarbeiten zu machen. Bei uns wird der weibliche Handarbeitsunterricht nicht so erteilt, wie man heute im allgemeinen die Dinge sieht. Betrachten wir zum Beispiel, was von Frauen als Kleider getragen wird. Da wird kein Unterschied gemacht, sehen Sie, zwischen irgend etwas, was man hier oben trägt, als Gürtel oder unten als Besatz trägt. Es wird nicht darauf gesehen, daß in der entsprechenden Weise etwas, was man oben am Hals trägt, den Charakter dessen tragen muß, daß es oben am Hals getragen werden muß (siehe Zeichnung I); es ist nur schematisch gezeichnet. Es wird nicht darauf gesehen, daß man etwas, was man am Gürtel trägt, ansieht, da ist oben etwas, da ist unten etwas und so weiter (siehe Zeichnung II).

AltName

Oder man läßt Kinder niemals bei uns, sagen wir, ein Kissen machen, was auf der einen und auf der anderen Seite gleich ist, sondern man sieht dem Kissen an, wo man sich darauflegt. Man sieht es dem Kissen auch an, daß ein Unterschied ist zwischen rechts und links und so weiter. Also es wird auch in alles, was da gemacht wird, das Leben hineingewirkt und hineingewoben. Und daran lernen die Kinder sehr viel. So suchen wir auch wiederum die Kinder in das Leben hineinzustellen.

Das versuchen wir in allen Einzelheiten, zum Beispiel auch durch das Zeugniswesen. Ich habe niemals im Leben mir einen Begriff verschaffen können davon, was das heißt, die Fähigkeiten eines Kindes entsprechen 2 oder 3 oder 2 1/2. Ich weiß nicht, ob man das auch in England macht, daß man bei den Zeugnissen Zahlen oder Buchstaben gibt, die andeuten sollen, was das Kind kann. In Mitteleuropa gibt man 3 oder 4. Solche Zeugnisse geben wir nicht, sondern bei uns kennt jeder Lehrer jedes Kind und beschreibt es im Zeugnis, beschreibt, was es in seinen Fähigkeiten wirklich leistet, mit seinen eigenen Worten, mit seinen Fähigkeiten und mit seinem Fortschritt. Und dann geben wir jedem Kinde jedes Jahr in das Zeugnis hinein einen Lebensspruch, der ihm im nächsten Jahr ein Geleitwort sein kann. So sieht das Zeugnis aus: Zunächst steht da der Name des Kindes und dann ein Lebensspruch; dann charakterisiert der Lehrer, ohne stereotype Buchstaben oder Zahlen, einfach wie das Kind beschaffen ist, wie es in den einzelnen Lehrgegenständen vorwärtsgekommen ist. So daß das Zeugnis immer eine Darstellung ist. An diesen Zeugnissen haben die Kinder immer eine große Freude, und es bekommen auch die Eltern eine richtige Vorstellung von dem, wie das Kind sich in der Schule verhält.

Großen Wert legen wir darauf, daß wir in bezug auf jedes Kind wirklich mit dem Elternhaus in Kontakt stehen, so daß man von der Schule aus durch das Kind auf das Elternhaus hinaussieht. Dadurch wird einem das Kind erst verständlich; dadurch weiß man auch, wie man jede Eigenschaft bei dem Kinde zu behandeln hat. Es ist nicht so, daß, wenn man an dem Kinde eine Eigenschaft bemerkt, das dasselbe ist, wie wenn man diese Eigenschaft an einem anderen Kinde bemerkt; denn dieselbe Eigenschaft bedeutet bei dem einen Kinde etwas ganz anderes als bei dem anderen Kinde.

Sagen wir zum Beispiel, ein Kind zeigt eine gewisse Aufgeregtheit; ein anderes Kind zeigt auch Aufgeregtheit. Ja, es kommt gar nicht darauf an, daß man bloß weiß, das Kind ist aufgeregt, und man soll etwas beitragen zu seiner Beruhigung, sondern es kommt darauf an, daß man bei dem einen Kinde findet: Das ist aufgeregt, weil es einen aufgeregten Vater hat und den imitiert; das andere Kind ist aufgeregt, weil es ein schlechtes Herz hat, herzkrank ist. So muß man überall auf dasjenige eingehen können, was den Eigenschaften zugrunde liegt. Und dazu sind gerade die Lehrerkonferenzen da. Die sind dazu da, wirklich den Menschen zu studieren und dadurch in der Menschenkunde, ich möchte sagen, einen fortlaufenden Strom durch die Schule fließen zu lassen. Man studiert die Schule in den Lehrerkonferenzen. Dadurch ergibt sich das andere, was man braucht, schon von selber. Das Wesentliche ist, daß die Lehrerkonferenzen ein fortlaufendes, ein fortdauerndes Studium sind.

Das sind so die Bedingungen, die ich Ihnen für die praktische Einrichtung sagen wollte.

Nun würde sich natürlich manches noch sagen lassen, wenn wir diesen Kursus mehrere Wochen hindurch fortsetzen könnten. Aber das können wir ja nicht. Daher werde ich Sie bitten, morgen, wenn wir hier zusammenkommen, dasjenige, was Sie auf dem Herzen haben, in Form von Fragen zu stellen, so daß wir dann die morgige Stunde dazu benützen, daß Sie Fragen stellen und ich Ihnen diese Fragen beantworten kann.

Seventh Lecture

We would like to highlight a few more points from the methodology. Of course, only a few selected examples can be given in this short time.

If we look at the period between the change of teeth and sexual maturity, we see that it can be divided into three parts, and these three parts must be taken into account when guiding the child through elementary school.

First, we have the age up to the point in life that I have characterized, in which the child begins to differentiate itself from its surroundings, where it makes the distinction between itself as a subject and the things of the outside world that are objects to it. Up to this point, we must educate the child in such a way that everything within the child and everything outside the child has a unified character. I have already described how this can be done artistically. Then, when referring to the plant and animal kingdoms, we have already seen how to move on to describing the outside world. And if you present these things in a very elementary way, you will reach the age of 12. From the age of 12 to sexual maturity is the third stage, in which we can actually move on to inanimate nature, where the child basically begins to really grasp the inanimate.

So we can say: from the age of 7 to about 9 1/2 or 9 1/3, the child takes everything in spiritually. There is nothing that the child would not take in spiritually. Trees, stars, clouds, stones—everything is absorbed by the soul. From about 9 1/3 to about 11 2/3 years of age, however, the child already perceives the difference between the soul, which it sees within itself, and mere life. And we can speak of life, of the whole earth as a living being. In other words, soul and living things. Then, from 11 2/3 to about 14 years of age, the child distinguishes between soul, living things, and dead things, in other words, everything that is connected in terms of cause and effect.

We should not talk to the child about inanimate things until they are around 12 years old. Only then should we begin to talk about minerals, physical phenomena, chemical phenomena, and so on. One must simply realize that things are really so, that between the change of teeth and sexual maturity, it is still predominantly the imagination, not the intellect, that is active in the child, and that one must count on the imagination everywhere. Therefore, as I have often said, one must develop one's own imagination in particular. If one does not do this, if one moves on to all kinds of intellectual matters too early, then the child cannot undergo its physical development in a proper sense. And much of what is pathological in our present day stems precisely from the fact that in our materialistic age, too much emphasis has been placed on the intellect in children between the change of teeth and sexual maturity.

We must begin gently with death – for death must be understood with the intellect – when the 12th year approaches. Then we can approach the child with minerals, with physical and chemical phenomena, and so on. But even then, we should connect everything to life wherever possible; we should not simply start with the mineral collection, but with the earth, with the mountains, so that we first describe the mountains as they shape the earth; then talk about how the mountains are covered with earth at the bottom. The higher we go, the barer the mountains become, the fewer plants there are. Now we begin to talk about the bareness of the mountains and then draw attention to the fact that there are minerals there. So we start from the mountains and approach the minerals.

Then, once we have described the mountain in a really vivid way, we take a mineral and show it and say: this is what you would find if you went up this path on this mountain. You would find it there. Once you have done this for a few minerals, you can move on to discussing the minerals themselves. But the first thing must be to start from the whole again, and not from the part. This is of extraordinary importance.

And it is equally important to start from life when dealing with physical phenomena. Don't just start teaching physics as it is found in textbooks today, but start by simply lighting a match and letting the child watch how the match begins to burn. You should draw the child's attention to all the details, what the flame looks like, how the flame looks more on the outside, how it looks on the inside; when you extinguish the flame, that a black spot remains, a black tip; only then begin to explain how the fire came about on the match. The fire on the match was caused by heat being generated, and so on. Connect everything to life!

So, for example, don't start with the lever and say: A lever consists of a beam that is supported, with a force on one arm and a force on the other arm, as is often explained in physics books. You shouldn't do that, but start with the scales instead. You should lead the child in their thoughts to some shop where scales are used, and only then move on to the concept of equilibrium, and likewise to the concept of weight and heaviness. In other words, develop physics from everyday life. The same applies to chemical phenomena.

The essential thing is to start from everyday life and observe the individual physical and mineral phenomena. If you proceed differently, if you start from abstraction, then something very peculiar happens to the child; the child easily becomes tired during the lesson. The child does not become tired when one starts from life; it becomes tired when one starts from abstraction.

Now, it is the golden rule for teaching that the child should not become tired at all. There is something very peculiar about today's so-called experimental pedagogy. In experimental pedagogy, one determines when a child becomes tired from some mental activity. From this, one then concludes how long a child should be occupied with a particular subject so that it does not become tired.

This whole view is wrong, thoroughly wrong! For you see, the thing is this — you can read about it in my books, namely in Cycles, but also in my book “Von Seelenrätseln” (On Soul Riddles) —: The human being consists of three members, the nerve-sense human — I just want to remind you of this — that is everything that supports the human being spiritually in its activity, the rhythmic human being, which includes all respiratory rhythms, all blood circulation, and so on, and the metabolic-limb human being, which includes everything that is transformed by substances.

If we consider the development of the child from birth to the change of teeth, it is particularly the organization of the head, the nerve-sense organization, that is at work. The child develops from the head in the first period of its life. You only need to look closely to see this. First, take a look at a human embryo, i.e., the unborn child. The head is powerful. Everything else is still underdeveloped. Then the child is born. Its head is still the most powerful part of its body, and all growth and everything else emanates from the head.

This is no longer the case for children between the ages of 7 and 14. The breathing rhythm, the blood rhythm, the entire rhythm prevails between the change of teeth and the sexual maturity of the child. Only the rhythm!

But what about the rhythm? Just think, when I think a lot, especially when I have to study a lot, I get tired, my head gets tired. When I have to walk a lot, that is, when I strain my limb organism, I also get tired. The head organism, the nerve-sense organism, and the metabolic-limb organism can get tired, but the rhythmic organism cannot get tired at all.

Just think, you have to breathe throughout the whole day. Your heart also beats during the night; it must never stop between birth and death. It must continue in rhythm. It must not become tired; it does not become tired at all.

Now, in education and teaching, you must turn to the system that governs human beings. So between the change of teeth and sexual maturity, you must turn to rhythm with images. You must design everything you describe and do in such a way that the head is involved as little as possible, that the heart, the whole rhythm, everything that is artistic and rhythmic, is involved. What is the result? That through such teaching, the child does not become tired at all, because you are focusing on the rhythmic system and not on the head.

People are so terribly clever, and in this materialistic age they have come up with the idea that children must always be allowed to romp around between lessons. Now, it is good to let them romp around, but of course through their souls, through the joy they derive from it. Experiments have been carried out and it has been found that when children are taught properly, they become less tired during lessons than when they romp around outside. Moving the limbs tires them more, whereas what you teach them in the right way during lessons should not tire them at all. And the more you unfold the pictorial before the children, the less you strain the intellect, the more vividly you describe, the more you simply use the rhythmic system, the less the child tires. So when experimental psychologists come and examine how tired the child becomes, what have they actually examined? How poorly you have taught! If you had taught well, they would not be able to detect any fatigue at all.

We must come to the point where we only use the rhythmic system for children in elementary school. And for this rhythmic system, which never tires, which is not strained at all when used in the appropriate way, we do not need the intellectual, but the pictorial, that which comes from the imagination. Therefore, you must definitely let your imagination run wild in school. Even in the last years, from 11 2/3 to the age of 14, bring the dead to life through imagination, connect it to life! It is entirely possible to connect all physical phenomena to life. To do this, one must have imagination; that is what is necessary.

Furthermore, it will be a matter of allowing this imagination to prevail above all in what is called an essay, when the child is asked to write an essay, to work something out for themselves. The point here is that the child should not be asked to write an essay about anything that has not first been discussed in detail, so that the child is familiar with the subject. And as a teacher and educator, you should have discussed the subject yourself. Then the child should write their essay under the influence of what you yourself have said. You should not deviate from this in the last years before puberty. Even then, you should not let the child write blindly, but rather awaken in them the feeling that there should be nothing in the essay that does not keep them in the mood that has been evoked in them by the fact that the subject of the essay has been discussed with the teacher or educator. Liveliness must prevail here too. The liveliness of the teacher must be transferred to the liveliness of the child.

As you can see from all this, all teaching and education must be taken from life. This is often said today. It is said that teaching must be done in such a way that the subject matter is lively and realistic. But first you have to really acquire a feeling for what is realistic. Even if you adhere to good theoretical educational principles, how this is sometimes done in practice is something I would like to discuss with you using an example that I myself experienced.

I once visited a school class, I won't say where, where a math problem was given. It was given for the purpose of connecting addition to real life. One should not simply add 14 2/3 and 16 5/6 and 25 3/5, but one should have something from real life. Well, the arithmetic problem went something like this: One person was born on March 25, 1895, a second on August 27, 1898, and a third on December 3, 1899. How old are these three people together? That was the question. And the following calculation was made in all seriousness: from 1895 to 1924 is 29 3/4. That is how old one of them is. The other is about 26 1/2 years old in 1924, and the third, since he was only born on December 3, we can say is 25 years old. Now it was said that if you add these up, you get their combined age.

But now I would like to ask how they are supposed to do that, how they can possibly reach that combined age? How do you do that? It's true that the numbers add up quite nicely, but how do you make that sum exist somewhere in reality? They all live at the same time. So it's impossible for them to experience that together somehow! It's not realistic to make such a calculation.

Someone showed me that this calculation was taken from a schoolbook. I then looked at this schoolbook. It contained several such witty things.

I have found in some areas that this now has an effect on life, and that is the most important thing.

So what we do in school has an impact on real life! If we teach incorrectly in school, if we teach in such a way that we include something in a calculation that is not real at all, then this way of thinking is absorbed by young people and carried over into their lives. I don't know if it's the same in England, but in Central Europe it's the case everywhere that when, say, several criminals are charged and convicted together, you sometimes find in the newspapers that all five of them have received prison sentences totaling 75 1/2 years. One has received 10 years, another 20 years, and so on, but you add it all up. You can find this in the newspapers time and time again. Now I would like to know what such a sum actually means. For the individual who is convicted, the 75 years together certainly have no meaning; but all together they will also be finished sooner. So it has no reality.

You see, the important thing is that you go for reality everywhere. You are literally poisoning a child by giving them such an addition, which is completely impossible in reality.

You must guide the child to think only about things that are present in life. Then reality will be carried back into life from the classroom. In our time, we suffer terribly from people's unrealistic thinking. Teachers really need to think about this.

There is a theory in our time which, although the people who developed it are considered to be extremely intelligent, has emerged purely from education; it is the so-called theory of relativity. I hope you have already heard something about this theory, which is associated with the name Einstein. Much of it is correct. I do not want to dispute what is correct, but it is extended in the following way. Let us say that a cannon is fired somewhere. Now we say: after a certain amount of time, we hear the bang of the cannon when we are a certain number of miles away. If you are not standing still, but moving with the sound, going in the same direction, you will hear the sound later. You will hear the bang later, and the faster you move away, the later the sound will reach you. If you do the opposite, if you move towards the sound, it will reach you earlier and earlier.

Now, if you continue this line of thought, you come to the conclusion, which is not a realistic possibility, that you can move toward the sound faster than it is traveling. And if you think this through to its conclusion, you come to the conclusion that it is also possible to hear the sound before the cannon is fired!

This is what theories that arise from unrealistic thinking lead to. Those who can think correctly in reality can sometimes endure tremendous pain. In Einstein's books, you will even find instructions on how to take a clock, send it out into space at the speed of light, and then bring it back again; it is explained what happens to this clock when it goes out at the speed of light and comes back again. But now I would like to look at this clock in a realistic way, to see what it looks like when it shoots out at this speed and comes back again. The point is that one must never stray from reality in one's thinking.

The fundamental problem with our education system is that so much of it is removed from reality. This is also the basis for much of what is done in exemplary kindergartens today. There, tasks have been devised for children to do. In reality, children should be allowed to do nothing else, even in play, than imitate life. So all the Fröbel activities and so on that have been devised are actually harmful. It is absolutely essential that children are only allowed to do things, even in play, that imitate life. This is of tremendous importance.

And that is why, as I have already told you, you should not devise toys that are artistically designed, as they say, but should leave as much as possible to the child's imagination when it comes to dolls or anything else. This is of great importance.

This is what I want to emphasize here, that you really make sure that nothing enters teaching and education that is not connected to life in some way. This must always be taken into account when the child is encouraged to describe something themselves. You should always point out to the child when they stray from reality. The intellect never penetrates reality as deeply as the imagination. The imagination can err, but it penetrates reality; the intellect actually always remains on the surface. And that is why it is so infinitely necessary for the teacher to stand in the classroom in a realistic manner. In order for the teacher to be able to stand in the classroom in a realistic way, we have the teachers' conference as the soul of the entire teaching process in Waldorf school pedagogy. In this teachers' conference, where the teachers are united, each one brings what he or she has learned in his or her own class, from the sum of his or her children, so that everyone can learn from each other. And no school is alive in which the conference, the gathering of teachers from time to time, is not the most important thing.

You can actually learn an enormous amount there. In Waldorf schools, we have mixed classes, with girls and boys sitting next to each other. Well, quite apart from what the boys and girls say to each other or what they exchange with each other consciously, you can notice a clear difference between classes where there are more girls than boys and classes where there are more boys than girls or where boys and girls are equally distributed. I have been investigating this for years, and it has always been evident: a class with more girls than boys is something completely different.

In a class with more girls than boys, you soon find that you, as a teacher, become relatively less tired because the girls grasp things more easily, but also with greater enthusiasm than the boys. But you also find numerous other differences. Above all, you soon discover that the boys themselves gain in their ease of comprehension when they are in the minority, while the girls lose when they themselves are in the minority. And so there are numerous differences that do not consist in communication or mutual treatment, but remain imponderable, are imponderables.

One must be extremely attentive to all these things. All these things, both those that relate to entire classes and those that relate to individual students, are thoroughly discussed in our conferences, so that every teacher has the opportunity to pay special attention to the characteristic individualities of their students.

Of course, this is difficult with the Waldorf school method: one has to think much more than usual in class about how to really help the students progress. Because one wants to teach in such a way—and everything I have explained to you is calculated to teach in this way—that one can tell from the age of the child what should be brought to them at this age.

Now, if you think about it, if you lightly decide to hold back a child who is between the ages of 9 and 10, i.e., in the class that corresponds to their age, as they say, and not let them move up, then next year they will be taught for an age that they do not have. That is why we avoid at all costs leaving children behind when they do not achieve the learning objectives, as they say. It is more inconvenient than simply letting the children repeat the year, but we avoid that. We have only one corrective measure, which is to group those who are very weak into a class for mentally challenged children. They are then taught by Dr. Karl Schubert, who has his own special task and skill in this area.

However, children from all classes who are in any way less gifted are also grouped together. Of course, since we have so many children, we cannot set up many classes for the mentally disabled.

As I said, we do not leave the children behind in the class, but try to include them under all circumstances, so that the children really find what is appropriate for their age.

For those children who cannot progress further, who cannot continue to participate in all school lessons until they reach puberty, until they have to leave elementary school, we try to bring them to a realistic perception of the world in two ways through the entire structure of the lessons; On the one hand, we structure all natural history and history lessons in such a way that the child ultimately has a certain understanding of human nature, i.e., knows roughly what position humans occupy in the world. Human studies is therefore what we orient everything towards. In this way, we can really bring about a kind of conclusion to human studies when the children reach the 7th and 8th grades, that is, when they are 13 and 14 years old. Through everything they have learned up to that point, the child then has the opportunity to form an idea of the laws, forces, and substances involved in the human being itself, how the human being is connected with everything physical, everything soul-related, and everything spiritual in the world. So that the child knows, in its own way of course, what a human being is within the whole cosmos. That is what we try to achieve with the child on the one hand.

On the other hand, we try to achieve with the child that we lead it to an understanding of life. It is really the case today that most people who grow up in the city, for example, have no idea how, say, a material such as paper is made, and so on. Many people do not know how the paper they write on is made. Many people do not know how the fabric they wear is made, or, if they have leather shoes, how the leather is made.

Just think how countless people drink beer and have no idea how beer is made. That is actually something monstrous, when you think about it. Well, of course, not everything can be done in this direction, but we try as much as possible to ensure that children have a rough idea of how work is done in a wide variety of trades and that they also really learn to do the work that is part of life.

It is extremely difficult to provide an education that is truly relevant to life in the face of the demands that the authorities place on children today. We have had some very bad experiences in this regard. For example, due to the parents' circumstances, we once had to dismiss a student who had just completed the 2nd grade and was in the 3rd grade. He was now to continue his education at another school. We were bitterly reproached for this, because he had not progressed as far as they wanted him to in arithmetic, reading, or writing. And they wrote to us saying that they didn't know what to do with eurythmy and painting and all the other things he was good at.

So if you want to educate children in a way that is appropriate to life and based on knowledge of human nature, you have to teach them to read, write, and so on at the time that is required today. And so there is a whole lot that needs to be taught to children that is simply required according to today's customs.

Therefore, we at the Waldorf School are naturally also compelled to teach children things that we do not consider to be based on a true understanding of human nature. Nevertheless, we try as far as possible to prepare children for life.

If it were feasible, I would very much like to have hired a shoemaker as a teacher. This cannot be done because it cannot be integrated into the curriculum according to today's requirements. But for example, so that the child really learns how to make shoes and knows, not theoretically but from practical experience, what is involved in making shoes, I would have very much liked to have had a shoemaker among the teaching staff at the Waldorf school from the very beginning. It just wasn't possible because it's difficult to deal with the authorities. But it would have made life easier. But we do try to turn the children into practical workers.

When you come to the Waldorf school, you can see how the children bind books beautifully, do all kinds of cardboard work, and how they are taught to do truly artistic handicrafts. In our school, female handicrafts are not taught in the way that is generally accepted today. Let's consider, for example, what women wear as clothing. No distinction is made, you see, between anything worn up here, such as a belt, or down below, such as trim. No attention is paid to the fact that something worn at the top of the neck must have the character of something that is worn at the top of the neck (see drawing I); it is only drawn schematically. No attention is paid to the fact that something worn on the belt is seen as having something at the top, something at the bottom, and so on (see drawing II).

AltName

Or we never let children make, say, a pillow that is the same on both sides, but you can see from the pillow where you lie on it. You can also see from the pillow that there is a difference between right and left and so on. So life is also woven into everything that is made there. And the children learn a lot from this. In this way, we also seek to place the children in life.

We try to do this in every detail, for example through the system of report cards. I have never in my life been able to understand what it means when a child's abilities are rated 2 or 3 or 2 1/2. I don't know if they do that in England too, giving numbers or letters on report cards to indicate what the child can do. In Central Europe, they give 3 or 4. We don't give such report cards. Instead, every teacher knows every child and describes them in the report card, describing what they are really capable of achieving, in their own words, with their own abilities and progress. And then every year we give each child a motto for life in their report card, which can serve as a guiding principle for the coming year. This is what the report card looks like: First, there is the child's name and then a motto for life; then the teacher describes, without stereotypical letters or numbers, simply what the child is like and how they have progressed in the individual subjects. So the report card is always a representation. The children always enjoy these report cards, and the parents also get a real idea of how their child is doing at school.

We attach great importance to being in close contact with the parents of each child, so that the school can look beyond the child to the home. This is the only way to understand the child and to know how to deal with each of their characteristics. It is not the case that when you notice a characteristic in one child, it is the same as when you notice this characteristic in another child; because the same characteristic means something completely different in one child than in another.

Let's say, for example, that one child shows a certain agitation; another child also shows agitation. Yes, it is not enough to simply know that the child is excited and that one should do something to calm them down. Rather, it is important to find out why one child is excited because they have an excited father and imitates them, while the other child is excited because they have a bad heart, a heart condition. So you have to be able to respond to what underlies the characteristics in every situation. And that is precisely what teacher conferences are for. They are there to really study people and thereby, I would say, to allow a continuous stream of human knowledge to flow through the school. You study the school in the teachers' conferences. This automatically results in the other things you need. The essential thing is that the teachers' conferences are a continuous, ongoing study.

These are the conditions I wanted to tell you about for the practical setup.

Of course, there would be more to say if we could continue this course for several weeks. But we cannot do that. Therefore, I would ask you to come together here tomorrow and ask any questions you may have, so that we can use tomorrow's lesson for you to ask questions and for me to answer them.