Do Waldorf Schools do a service or a disservice to their students by not teaching with technology tools?

I've also read this article and been involved in many discussions about technology in the classroom. The first thing that stuck with me in this article was the note about shelves of Britannica encyclopedias.  You can never duplicate the richness of the experience of exploring information and learning on the internet.  I remember using those encyclopedias.  I remember wishing for more pictures and more information.  Children that only have them as a resource will never follow random bits of information just because it's random or interesting or more information or fascinating.  That's one of the core pieces of learning. As for technology in general in the classroom, the Waldorf model is correct.  Teaching is about well designed, interesting lessons and engaged teachers.  The Waldorf model offers a very good and successful model for lower income school districts. Technology is part of the modern world and children need to learn how to utilize it successfully and that includes the ability to evaluate sources and information.  That is a skill that is not picked up as easily as just learning search strategies.  Older generations are not as adept with technology. However, the promise of technology making education better is still that- potential.  Most of the educational uses of technology that I've seen are still reflections of traditional teaching using digital media.  That doesn't make the technology by itself any better.  It's still the tool.  Until technology is truly better, there is no reason to insist that technology be used in the classroom.

Great question.  This quote from the NYT article summarizes my gut on the issue: “Teaching is a human experience,” he said. “Technology is a distraction when we need literacy, numeracy and critical thinking.” And Waldorf parents argue that real engagement comes from great teachers with interesting lesson plans. “Engagement is about human contact, the contact with the teacher, the contact with their peers,” said Pierre Laurent, 50, who works at a high-tech start-up and formerly worked at Intel and Microsoft. He has three children in Waldorf schools, which so impressed the family that his wife, Monica, joined one as a teacher in 2006. And where advocates for stocking classrooms with technology say children need computer time to compete in the modern world, Waldorf parents counter: what’s the rush, given how easy it is to pick up those skills? “It’s supereasy. It’s like learning to use toothpaste,” Mr. Eagle said. “At Google and all these places, we make technology as brain-dead easy to use as possible. There’s no reason why kids can’t figure it out when they get older.” If kids have email and Facebook, which they probably naturally will, they are likely to be able to pick up most other skills, absent programming, design, and video. Also, its likely that the parents that send kids to a Waldorf school are likely to have computers at home or for their kids to be friends with someone who uses technology.

I personally know a Waldorf Family (caps quite intentional), the parents of which were about as Anthroposophically Waldorf as humanly possible. They could be considered to be among the top philosophical leaders in Anthroposophy today. They raised 4 boys who attended one of the leading Waldorf schools in the US for a full K-12 education. During that time the family never owned a TV or computer, nor did they own a cell phone. Yet, all four now work in Tech, one even works for Google. They write code, design websites and live professional lives immersed in Tech. One told me recently, that it does not matter what you learn in tech today because in 5 years it will be obsolete. So having kids involved in tech early is actually not a good thing. For it inhibits the proper development of white matter in the brain.  They should learn to play a musical instrument instead. White matter is best developed by establishing a very good sence of balance and regular, complex use of the hands, as in learning to play and practicing a musical instrument well.  Furthermore, using a computer early on can lead to attention deficit disorder and an antisocial personality. It also becomes a crutch, that stifles the ability to learn how to learn. Lastly, it only has two dimensions. One needs to regularly engage all their senses in the learning process while growing up. So, the short of it is, Waldorf has a good thing going on.

Technology is giving additional tools to teachers. It does not change education nor is it a reform. We often hear about educational technology used to enhance the learning experience, enrich the classroom, improve students engagement etc. But in Waldorf Schools the mode of teaching is a bit different. The learning is rich and exciting because they teach through experiencing. Engagement is different because the kids are engaged in discussions and creating. So, I am not saying let the kids grow up without technology - that's taking it a bit too far - but when the schooling is built and planned better, the technology isn't a must. **Having said that, at the end of the day, each child needs a different learning environment. Personalizing education to the student's need is the key to answer the question of "service or disservice". One may need the real life experience, the other may need the world connectivity. It's all about the kids.

I think the question here is not so much about technology as it is about using different media to deliver education. The more information comes from the teacher's mouth, the better it is for the student, long-term. Even writing by hand is more beneficial to the life-long lessons of that student. Handwriting requires a much higher level of focused concentration, which, in turn, trains the brain to work faster without artificial stimulants, including TV, video games, and other visually oriented stimuli. If you can place your kid into a school like that, do it. Your child will thank you later.

I think the question is irrelevant. The question is not whether technology is useful or not, it's about what you do with it. Depending on the teacher and the pupil, the answers will differ.

Tech advocates in education are fond of saying that technology only amplifies great teaching. If you have a poor teacher no amount of tech will make them better. Our public middle school instituted a "bring your own device program" just last year. It was a difficult sell to parents and the technology was so varied it was difficult to land on a common collaborative platform so the students could use the technology authentically (they ended up using Schoology which never was able to accept document drops from an iPad). Compared to a local private school that has had 10 years to create a fully integrated environment where they use OneNote and eBooks - and you have apples and oranges. I also think it's important understand that it's not about learning how to operate Outlook - rather it is about learning how to distinguish between a good resource and a bad one - or how to use technology to collaborate with experts in a particular field - or how to learn safely in an online world or how to be a responsible member of a learning community. The Waldorf school is an interesting option for students (and parents) for whom a classic learning environment is important - but it would not be a school I would choose.