Interview with Dr. Philipp Gelitz: “Transparency Is Crucial”

Plenty of time for free play, spaces for experience for body, soul, and spirit: In his doctoral dissertation, Philipp Gelitz examines how parents and educators perceive and describe everyday life in Waldorf kindergartens – with surprising results.

What is actually “typically Waldorf kindergarten”? Philipp Gelitz explored this question as part of his doctoral studies, which he recently completed as the fourth scholarship holder of the Graduate College for Waldorf Education. His expert interviews with professionals and parents document an educational practice that connects in many respects with current psychological and educational concepts. As a staff member at the Institute of Early Childhood Education at Alanus University, he wants to help bring it more strongly into academic discourse in the future.

Mr. Gelitz, in your doctoral dissertation you examined the particular characteristics of educational quality in Waldorf kindergartens and Waldorf crèches and conducted expert interviews with professionals, lecturers, and parents. What picture emerged?

The interviews make it clear that educational practice is shaped by a particular idealistic view of the human being: when asked about guiding motifs and orientations, respondents speak of a person’s arrival, their finding a home in the world, and the essence of the child—these are very specific formulations that are hardly found in other educational science discourses. However, I would have thought that anthroposophical terminology would play a much greater role in this context, terms such as destiny or karma. But that is not the case. With regard to educational practice—at least as I asked about it—these topics apparently are not relevant.

From the perspective of the adults interviewed, what characterizes the institutions’ everyday practice?

At the level of actual educational processes, for example, free play is mentioned, as well as the importance of sensory experiences and of rhythms and rituals. The latter in particular is a distinctive feature of Waldorf education. The whole area of shelter and security is equally important—the desire to create protected spaces in which children feel safe. Experiencing community is an important aspect—among the children, but also in collegial collaboration. What surprised me was how strongly the respondents placed social interaction, belonging, and community building in the foreground. Other special features are the many seasonal festivals, artistic activities such as puppet theater or watercolor painting, as well as the domestic and craft activities of the adults. At the level of work structures, the interviewees mention conference work. Waldorf teacher training is also important to them.

What about exchange with current educational science positions?

For some time now, the Waldorf school has been part of educational science debate. The relevant studies are not widely received, but there are quite a large number of them. This is not the case for Waldorf kindergartens and crèches. The few studies in this field are barely noticed at all; bridge-building has not yet begun on either side. Here I see a task for myself personally, but also for Alanus University—naturally with an open attitude and not out of the conviction that Waldorf education somehow and always already knows everything better. Transparency is crucial: In what respects does it differ from other models? Where can it be contextualized, where is it compatible, where does it need to change?

For some time now, the concept of so-called embodiment has also played a role in educational discourse. Put simply, it concerns the interplay between body, psyche, and environment. What impulses can Waldorf early childhood education provide here?

First of all, it is fully in line here with current embodiment theory and phenomenological educational science. The idea that a person’s inner attitude and personal views depend on the bodily experiences they have is now a matter of consensus. There is, however, also a difference, namely the anthroposophical perspective of reincarnation. As I saw in the interviews, however, this aspect plays no role in educational practice. Whether a floor is made of wood or not, whether the walls are glazed pink, whether I bake, sweep, wash dishes, and so on, does not depend on whether I hold a belief in reincarnation, but on the importance I assign to the here and now and to its sensory experience.

What are some other commonalities?

There is also a high degree of compatibility with psychological concepts: themes such as self-efficacy, autonomy and belonging, the perception of competence, the entire salutogenesis discourse. So far, Waldorf education has not shown particularly strong interest in these points of contact. Yet it would be good to discuss them and likewise to make the differences clear, so that parents can make a conscious decision in favor of this pedagogy, not just based on a feeling. One can openly discuss the fact that a spiritual perspective is also being taken into account here. Some parents can relate to that, others rather less so—in that case, a different educational approach may be more suitable for them.

Where do you see development potential in the institutions?

An interesting aspect, also from my personal experience as an educator, is how traditions are handled. What a Waldorf kindergarten day looks like was, after all, not developed by Rudolf Steiner. Its practical form was initially established by a few female protagonists before the Second World War, but above all in the postwar period. All well founded, but there are some things we should re-examine today: Why do we do it this way? In practice, each individual has to set out on that path. If I do not know why the veil over the play stand is pink, I should think about it again—or perhaps do it differently. Another area is inclusion and participation. The pedagogy of Waldorf crèches, which has only emerged over the past 20 to 25 years, offers interesting impulses here, some of which go back to the Hungarian pediatrician and educator Emmi Pikler. Her perspective on the young child and on how it can concretely experience self-efficacy can also provide valuable inspiration for work with somewhat older children.

You have been employed at Alanus University for a year now, where you are involved in teaching and research at the Institute of Early Childhood Education. What topics will occupy you in the near future?

Already in the fall semester of 2022/23, I organized a public lecture series on early childhood in which we brought various social issues into dialogue with Waldorf educational practice: language, media, and also health-related questions. The contributions are now being published as a book, and I am currently working on that. In these expert lectures and the subsequent discussions, I heard a number of things that I would like to take up, for example critical questions about the exclusivity of the Waldorf educational bubble. For the next fall semester, I am planning a continuation, but this time with a more theoretical orientation: for example, looking at the history of early childhood Waldorf education or of other reform pedagogy movements, or the influence of Emmi Pikler on crèche pedagogy. Here, too, another publication is to emerge—a further contribution to placing and discussing important topics within educational science discourse. In addition, I was able to uncover a great many individual findings in my doctoral work, several of which appear worthwhile to examine for their representativeness.

In what form did the Graduate College for Waldorf Education at Alanus University support your work, and which aspects were particularly helpful to you?

In this program, very different colleagues work together. It is not tied to pursuing your doctorate at Alanus University; it can also take place elsewhere. In my case, it was Passau. My primary supervisor was Professor Guido Pollak from the university there. This means that Waldorf education is not only discussed internally at Alanus University, but in an open discourse with professors who are decidedly not socialized in Waldorf education. That is particularly excellent for the doctoral process. The funding, which usually lasts three years, is a strong enabling gesture. It creates freedom—as is important for research and teaching. Equally important is the non-material support provided by the working meetings and the associated exchange four times a year. I found these encounters extraordinarily enriching and invigorating; they truly brought fresh air into my own work.

The interview was conducted by Laura Krautkrämer

Philipp Gelitz: Educational Quality in Waldorf Kindergartens and Waldorf Crèches. A qualitative empirical study of specific quality characteristics from the perspective of participating adults. Wiesbaden: Springer VS 2022
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-658-40377-5