Childhood in Transition

Image: Even elementary school-aged children can vote.

«Participation helps children become self-confident, responsible individuals who act in a democratic manner.»

Today, childhood is caught between two different, sometimes contradictory ideals: the ideal of a “good childhood” and that of an “educational childhood.” In recent decades, society’s understanding of childhood has undergone a fundamental shift. While functional, moral, or economic considerations often dominated in the past, the concept of a “good childhood” has become central. According to Tanja Betz, professor of childhood studies at the University of Mainz, and other researchers, many people idealize childhood as a phase of life particularly worthy of protection; it is supposed to be happy, safe, healthy, and as free as possible from excessive demands. This ideal carries strong moral weight and shapes parenting, education, and public debates.

At the same time, «educational childhood» has established itself as a second guiding principle with significant political and institutional influence. According to Betz and other scholars, this model views children primarily as subjects of a continuous educational process. Children are treated as «educational subjects» from a very early age; their development is to be observed, documented, supported, and optimized as early as possible—ideally without interruption from early childhood onward.

Protection and Optimization at the Same Time

A persistent tension arises between these two guiding principles: Children are supposed to play carefree—and at the same time, this play is to be framed in a competency-oriented manner. They are to be protected, but at the same time expected to perform well as early as possible. They are to be individuals while remaining compatible with standardized educational logic.

For children, this can create a subtle yet effective pressure. Parents find themselves caught between letting go, protecting, and nurturing. Educational institutions face a structural contradiction: a child-centered approach clashes with the mandate to prepare students for further education.

For Waldorf schools, this has been part of their core mission for decades; this is where their experience and expertise lie. As independently operated schools, they have different degrees of flexibility than public schools, which are bound by government mandates, prescribed procedures and transitions, standards, and performance assessments.

Waldorf schools should hold on to this flexibility and use it purposefully. By refraining from using grades and holding students back for a long time, they open up a space—a «moratorium»—for their students. Within this space, both can develop: a «good childhood » on the one hand, and a joy of learning as well as a positive attitude toward education on the other.

The middle school years, in particular, create opportunities to explore a broader concept of achievement with students: achievement can be understood more strongly in projects and extracurricular activities in the sense of «achievement for others»—rather than as competition and rivalry.

Even in the context of all-day schools, having more time can be beneficial. Waldorf schools should counter the pervasive pressure to perform not only by slowing down, but also by proactively advocating a redefinition of responsibility and «contribution to others».

Democracy education requires genuine participation

Democracy education begins by taking children seriously as active shapers of their own educational processes. Findings from childhood research suggest that children often have too few opportunities in everyday school life to contribute their perspectives. Many do not feel sufficiently heard, yet have a strong need for a say in decisions. This seems paradoxical, as participatory structures can foster a willingness to learn and have a positive impact on psychosocial well-being.

Adults should therefore actively involve children in decision-making processes and take their contributions seriously. Emmi Pikler demonstrated long ago that even infants can experience participation, for example, during diaper changes.

One example is the Freie Célestin-Freinet School in Moritzburg, Saxony. There, children in grades one through four are taught; each class is supported by a teacher and an educational specialist. Structural elements such as class councils, morning circles, student conferences, and presentation circles create spaces for democratic experiences.

Beyond traditional lecture-style instruction, the school uses workshops with individual or collective weekly plans and self-correction tools. Teachers actively involve the children so that they can help shape their own learning paths. Pedagogical responsibility is not relinquished—rather, children are involved in shaping their own educational processes.

Participation helps children become self-confident, responsible individuals who act in a democratic manner—a principle that also underlies Waldorf education. Waldorf schools are also working to establish democratic structures. Rudolf Steiner emphasizes that children understand the world through practical activity; learning, therefore, does not occur primarily through the transmission of abstract knowledge, but through direct experience—in sensory perception, artistic creation, or craftsmanship. John Dewey (1859–1952), a 20th-century American philosopher and educator, also views democracy less as an institutional order and more as a social way of life that is realized in everyday practices and experienced and learned through collective action.

Waldorf education aims to build upon children’s individual interests. To meet this goal not only in theory but also in practice, age-appropriate opportunities for participation are needed: forms that allow us to listen to children and take them seriously as individuals with their own needs, desires, and experiences.

Note: A version of this text containing all references, sources, and bibliographic citations is available upon request from the editorial office.