Musings

[aelfie]

So one of my mantra's lately when I'm feeling blue has been.

I am who I am and that is enough, And its enough because I am where I am and its enough. Its enough because I am who I am....etc, etc

I'm perusing my various Waldorf homeschooling blogs, forums, yahoo groups, etc, and silently lamenting to myself that I'm not Waldorfy enough.

Then I said wait a minute. I am enough. We are enough. Okay, so we aren't the full on all organic food and clothing, living on a farm growing our own food, while raising our own sheep and using it to create our clothes, and haven't owned a TV in years, who's kids not only don't own a single plastic toy but have no idea who in the hell Spiderman is, never seen a comic book, never played a video game family. But its okay. We are enough.

We are our own family. And although my kids watch more TV than I think is healthy, and they have plastic toys, we are doing our best to raise them to be ethical, thoughtful, and kind people. We are giving them the best education possible. Guess what? Its enough. And it will continue to be enough as long as we continue to do our best and strive to improve.

It is enough.

Now where in the hell is the heavy duty lamp timer I bought to put on the TV? I'm gonna cut down their babble box consumption somehow. I'm almost ready to get rid of it...but not yet.

Comments

[mollygm.livejournal.com]

I feel like I should add more.

As you know, I was a child development major. The first two classes you take are Child Development, where you learn the major theories- Piaget, Erickson, Freud and Vygotsky, and Child in the Community, where you learn sociological principals. We didn't learn about Waldorf and the othe pop-philosophies until after we learned the science of the developing child. The way we learned them was basically they were all just ways of interpreting the major theories.

So I don't get wrapped up in subscribing to any one philosophy, whether it's Waldorf, Montessori, Reggio Emelia, etc. I look at individual practices, like logic toys from Montessori, longterm art projects from Reggio or form drawing from Waldorf and compare to what Piaget said, Erickson said and so on. And of course, does it fit with our family's lifestyle, my teaching style and, most importantly, would it work for Mel?

[aelfie.livejournal.com]

What do you mean by pop-philosophy? To me it sounds as if you are saying its something new and hasn't been around long.

Steiner was a contemporary of Freud and Vygotsky.

I totally agree on taking what fits. For us, its pretty much all waldorf, the philosophy is finally being backed up by science.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, I know he was a contemporary, but his works are not included among the major theories. Or at least it's not when you study child development.

[(Anonymous)]

And technically, Vygotsky is an "emergent" theory, but he was at least in the texbook. And I really liked him. When I first started Montessori was all the rage for middle-class white families.

[(Anonymous)]

I just read that over and it sounds like I'm saying Vygotsky has something to do with Montessori. He doesn't. I threw that in there because that's why I say "pop-philosophy." Different teaching philosophies go in and out of style.