My son was in a standard non-montessori private kindergarten.
Every day we dropped him off he would cry and throw a tantrum, and it would break our hearts, but you know... that's life.
He was falling behind all his classmates, his speech hadn't developed, he didnt sing the songs, do the dances, etc. All the other kids were doing great.
I attended one of his classes and noticed he refused to sit at his chair, all he wanted to do was stare out the window to try to spot airplanes.
That's when we decided to switch over to Montessori, mainly because I wanted him to have more freedom, and at least enjoy school even if he didn't learn much.
The change frankly has been incredible, after just one week he was waiting inpatiently at the front door of our home, anxious to go to school. The only crying when we dropped him off was from my wife, when he ran into the school without looking back every morning.
His speech and abilities have normalized with the rest of his class after a year.
Now I'm not saying everyone will have the same outcome,maybe he just grew and would've developed any way.
I just wanted to share my personal experience in case anyone finds it useful.
Montessori is fundamentally based on one simple principle I wish people adhered to more often: first, observe the child.
Taiichi Ohno called it genchi genbutsu in the context of manufacturing. First, go to the floor and look at the work that is being done.
Edwards Deming said "Don't just do somthing; stand there!" in the context of data analysis. Allow the data to tell you something. If you meddle with it you destroy the signal.
In other words. First, observe. Try to understand the problem before you rush in with a solution.
This is like step 0 of the scientific method and yet we forget about it so often, in a hurry to just do something.
I'm sure nobody would argue against that in principle, but the reality in most countries is that society is willing to pay for 1 to 1.5 FTE per 30 children. And even with such numbers, education is typically already one of the top public expenditures. How much child observation and taylored (vs mass manufactured) education can be done within these constraints?
If one wants to have a conversation about privilege and childhood education it is useful to look beyond labels for how one teaches and actually look at how schools change with social class.
Jean Anyon's work is really the baseline[0] and describes just how fundamentally different the schooling process experienced by the privileged and less privileged is. She looked entirely at public schools.
>In the two working-class schools, work is following the steps of a procedure. The procedure is usually mechanical, involving rote behavior and very little decision making or choice. The teachers rarely explain why the work is being assigned, how it might connect to other assignments, or what the idea is that lies behind the procedure or gives it coherence and perhaps meaning or significance. ...Work is often evaluated not according to whether it is right or wrong but according to whether the children followed the right steps.
>In the executive elite school, work is developing one's analytical intellectual powers. Children are continually asked to reason through a problem, to produce intellectual products that are both logically sound and of top academic quality. A primary goal of thought is to conceptualize rules by which elements may fit together in systems and then to apply these rules in solving a problem.
If you want to see how an egalitarian education system reaches the best education system results in the world - Estonia and Finland are the countries to look at. Their education indeed follows the second model here. But rote learning is also included - the point is to challenge and support the child in manifold ways and keep in mind that they should enjoy themselves.
My point is though while in some countries this might be a class difference, really it comes down to a quality difference. Good quality does not actually need to be very expensive/rare, you can reach it at system level as do Estonia and Finland.
I’m part of a now-large-ish Montessori startup and am a sort of Montessori scholar. The biography reviewed here is very good and worth checking out. Overall it’s the best of the biographies available, and is a significant improvement over Kramer’s from a few decades ago.
Just an aside: the extended tangents in the review about Montessori’s entrepreneurialism turning her method into a classist privilege are, uh, really strange. The idea in the review seems to be that the rarity and expense of Montessori in the US is because she charged for trainings and tried to parent some materials. Purely as a matter of historical fact, this is a narrative in search of evidence that isn’t there, and a narrative that isn’t really face plausible. Montessori education is rare because the progressive intellectuals that built the US school system adamantly and vociferously rejected Montessori for pedagogical reasons. There are just way better explanations available for why her work didn’t take hold more widely.
Glad to see Montessori and Stefano’s biography in particular getting coverage though. I’ve enjoyed reading the many comments here about people’s experiences with Montessori!
Thanks - I'd be interested in your alternative explanations if you're willing to comment here? I know it's never simple, and often even just timing is a factor in markets. Sounds like you've given it a lot of thought though.
Just checked out your startup and it looks interesting. I glanced through the different brands but didn't see anything related to public schools. Are you guys doing anything on that front? In your opinion, what are the challenges to more widespread adoption of Montessori in the US.
There certainly were objections to Montessori and, as we see today, fierce arguments among the many thought leaders who dedicated their lives to transforming education. But I disagree that “progressive intellectuals” “adamantly and vociferously rejected Montessori for pedagogical reasons.” Education often becomes bogged down in idealogical warfare because we become distracted by differences instead of uniting on common ground. I think there is a lot of common ground, both historically and today. Building on that will advance both Montessori pedagogy and the transformation of education.
If you have not read “Founding Mothers and Others”, I highly recommend it. Many progressive schools were founded by women who studied with Montessori, sought to spread her pedagogy and gave her great respect and credit. Helen Salz and Flora Arnstein,founders of San Francisco’s Presidio Hill School, were inspired to launch their school after observing Montessori work with children in a glass walked classroom at the 1915 San Francisco Exposition. Other Californians attended her California lectures, studied her work, traveled to Italy or trained in her US programs. They went on to found schools and train teachers. This didn’t stop in 1916, indeed most of these schools were founded between 1918 and 194o. They still exist and acknowledge their Montessori roots.
Margaret Naumberg, who trained extensively with Montessori, simultaneously launched a public Montessori and a private one in New York. The schools had very different results but I don’t know why the public program was not replicated or sustained. I wonder what lessons we could learn from the difference in the public implementation and the private one which grew into The Children’s School, later the Walden School, which lasted for over 50 years.
Helen Parkhurst was purportedly the only person Maria Montessori authorized to train teachers. She is known as the “mother of the Dalton School” and the architect of the Dalton Plan which was extremely influential in inspiring school design not just in the US but internationally. Dalton remains a leading school in both popularity with families, credibility with college admissions offices, and with the education community.
It would be interesting to learn how you think it is aligned with Montessorian pedagogy and how it differs.
The bigger question is what are the essential elements of a Montessori education and how are they adapted across different contexts? Should Montessori classrooms only have Montessori materials? For example, can they incorporate Caroline Pratt’s unit blocks? Can’t we teach educators to observe play with unit blocks & facilitate intellectual development through applying Montessori methods with these excellent non-Montessori materials?
Montessori principles are widely taught in education philosophy, early childhood, and child development courses. The basic principles are familiar but not the practices. Is that because the education establishment has shut them out or because the AMI & AMS have not made training accessible? That is probably a hot button question for a highly visible and rapidly growing start up but, IMO, the success of Higher Ground & the Bezos “Montessori inspired” schools will hinge on three things, accessibility, adaptability, and accountability. Indeed any form of transformation will have to tackle those three areas and that is one reason finding common ground is important.
Your work is interesting and important. Good luck!
In the New Yorker article, the author takes issue with the fact that there are very few public Montessori schools, but fails to suggest why this might be the case. I'd offer that perhaps this this is because a Montessori education is child-focused, while public educational institutions (like the ones I attended) tend to be institution-focused. Valuing the worth of the child is somehow antithetical to the structure and order they impose.
Large systems, like a school system, need rules and procedures that help guarantee a relatively consistent outcome. The unstructured, exploratory nature of Montessori doesn't lend itself well to a a large-scale, systematic approach.
It’s a simple matter of economics. The level of attention a child is getting in a M school is not possible with the typical 20:1 or even 25:1 kids:teacher ratio. I‘d argue that you need a ratio of 10:1 or lower to give kids the level of attention and care usual in M schools.
Or it could just be that Montessori education really isn't that special and for most people a standard education is as good or even superior. If Montessori kids really were obviously more successful public education would change.
Montessori schools are pretty interesting, another type that flies further under the radar are Sudbury schools
I find the Sudbury model more fascinating because the student bodies I’ve seen came across as motivated, and other education models seemed demotivating except to a few students with a externality of a self motivating gene or environment.
Sudbury specifically makes students part of a democracy for most operations and education. My skepticism was quelled by the outcomes.
I would pay a premium for Montessori or Sudbury schooling. How about an article from people that can comfortably afford it? I would alternatively consider having my future child(ren) schooled in a non-US developed country. The public option isnt in the running.
You should take a look at Acton. It’s Montessori-like but much more modern and with a focus on self-determination and entrepreneurship.
Our five year old was playing at the park a week ago and chatted with another little girl about their respective schools. Afterwards he asked us why she said her school was boring. He couldn’t fathom a school that wasn’t interesting and fun.
Our prospective Montessori school even extends this principle by integrating all parents into a sociocratic system. Basically all decisions are made with universal consent in the respective circles.
My oldest daughter is going to a public Montessori elementary school, and my youngest daughter will start this summer. To understand the following points, you need to know that German elementary school is grade 1 to 4, usually starting when kids are 6, and in Montessori schools the students are in mixed-age classes.
Some things I noticed:
- there are kids who are doing really well, and there are other kids who (I think) have more trouble than I'd expect in a classic elementary school
- a few kids are learning at a faster pace, like my daughter who skipped 2nd grade.
- there is a shocking number of kids who are having trouble and have to repeat a grade, usually 3rd grade. Last year, 3 out of 6 third graders had to repeat third grade. Not sure how statistically relevant it is, and it feels closer to home as those three are my daughter's best friends, but it was quite surprising and made us wonder whether it's the right school for our younger daughter (who's a bit wilder and has less patience and discipline).
- in addition to the usual ADHD stuff, there is a surprising number of kids who are diagnosed with dyscalculia. Not sure what's normal, and of course this is a small sample, but still makes us feel a bit uneasy.
- a possible reason why some kids are struggling could be the student/teacher ratio. There are 27 kids per teacher. I think that's way too high to support kids who are having difficulties.
- I should also mention that Covid interrupted Montessori schools more than traditional schools. Kids are supposed to work with Montessori materials, and they weren't available in home schooling. Teaching via video was difficult in mixed-age classes. Even today, kids do not experience the school as intended, as the class needs to stay together all day and they are not free to roam to other rooms, like workshops or the library.
My daughter is going to a private Montessori kindergarden.
First year was terrible, her educator constantly complained about her, she wasn't eating at all, a lot of days she wasn't sleeping, there were days they called us to pick her up in the middle of the day because she was inconsolable.
The moment she switched educators everything resolved -- she started eating, no more tantrums, sleeping, doing great in her activities.
Montessori is as good as the individual educators are.
Looking back I can see all the red flags -- the fact that I know about the on-and-off divorce of the first educator from her alcoholic husband tells a lot. And there were all sorts of passive-aggressive little things like "Dear parents, tomorrow will be my birthday, I will spend the time with my family and not at work, that is the way we do things here...."
An extremely heavy weighting to this experience is that there is serious developmental delays happening across all grade school children right now. Its really hard to validate any particular experience to any one system right now, I want your experience to be valid but before I sock it into my mind as something to watch out for I have to remember to check what how the non-Montessori options are doing and its struggling right now. All the kids are struggling.
> I should also mention that Covid interrupted Montessori schools more than traditional schools
My daughter went to a Montessori school here in Canada from 18-months old until high school. About the class size...
As a Montessori class has students in three different year levels together (e.g. a Casa class would have children aged 3, 4, and 5) and part of the philosophy is for the senior students in a class to assist in teaching the junior students, the class has to have a sufficient number of students in order for this approach to work. Small class sizes don't have enough students to support the learning model.
In my experience 27 children in a class is very typical and not at all an over-populated class. I've seen larger classes work just as well.
The Montessori school my daughter went to would have a director/directress and an assistant in each class.
I bought a Montessori book, and while I'm only a few chapters in, it has some ideas I really like.
I think it's important to remember that these techniques were defined in 1912 though. There seems to be a sort of worship of the Montessori method, and a "black and white" mentality about what is correct. Using a 100+ year old book/method without adjustments and chasing purity in following it seems misguided.
Have had now 3 kids thru Montessori and another starting next year. 2 of them did in New Zealand and younger 2 in HongKong. The kids have all excelled, want to rush to school every day, come home smiling. Can’t say anything like this of older kids experience of public or private( $$$) school system in either place.
My own experience is that Montessori puts the kids years ahead of age group peers and the learning benefits last into adulthood. My eldest earned a PhD in spite of learning challenges and the second eldest senior manager in a Govt department. #3 taught herself a 3rd language at age of 3. To many things to attribute just to home life and DNA.
Not familiar with other systems mentioned but I do see any environment where kids are respected and observed carefully seem to get similar and lasting results from their education.
Parent of two long-time Montessori kids here. We have been through both public and private Montessori schools. Unfortunately, the public one did not work out because they were heavily constrained by the district's requirements, so the Montessori aspects were very watered down.
What I like about Montessori is that if a child finds a "work" that interests them, they can really focus in on it until mastery instead of feeling pressured to follow a specific curriculum on a specific timeline. I also like the de-emphasis on grades and testing. These are distractions from learning IMO. As for academic progress, one of my kids picks things up early and the other picks things up late. It just depends on the child. We aren't yet to high school, so I can speak to that transition. I'd be lying if I said it didn't worry me a little, though, mostly because I think of high school as a stressful place and my kids are currently in a very low-stress place.
My wife works in a Montessori daycare that our son attends.
What's really telling is that there have been a few preschoolers who have been gently nudged out of the school for having needs the school couldn't (or didn't want to) deal with.
Still, I think there are two things Montessori gets right:
1. Giving kids a lot of structured self-direction.
2. Mixing kids of age ranges and having them instruct each other.
In my experience, everything other than that is crunchy granola window dressing.
I went to a Montessori school during all of my schooling before gymnasium.
It really was a super bad fit for me.
Now when i look back at it, it is super obvious montissori is great for talented children and those who are able to have dicipline and organize them selfs, without much guidance.
Me myself has always lacked that and always will. This made be fall behind so bad in school that the only way i was able to finish it was because of a private tutor my parents hired.
Now its not _all_ because of the school, it also is my own abilities.
I am simply not a smart learner nor very good at problem solving.
But the lack of organization, clear learning paths and a mindset of letting a child try to learn all by him self was super bad for me. It was also clear it benefitted girls a lot more than boys.
Today i really resent everything about montessori, it was a complete failure for me and only let my lack of dicipline/organization and insufficient problem solving skills run my schooling for ten years while everyone in the school thought i would just magically develop abilities i lacked on my own.
I have two sons. One of which went to a public kindergarten, hated it (crying before sleeping, etc) and we found a "école nouvelle" school (1) where he is doing fine. The other one, we ended up putting him in montessori kindergarten because of issue with the nanny, just because it was the only open spot we found.
My conclusion, after having seen 3 schools: a huge part of the equation is the self-selection of the teachers. It's like comparing "SPA and microservices" with PHP as technologies, without taking into consideration that each attracts a different type of developer.
1: state curricumum, but with specific pedagogical philosophy, focusing on confidence, team-work, etc.
When you get kids, you question whether they absolutely have to go through regular education, just to become fodder for the industry. That said, I've heard from several ex-Waldorfers that their school experience was rife with bullying and crime, because the school became a place for those who didn't make it elsewhere.
Mother Theresa’s group of nuns teach catechesis using Montessori methods under the framework called ‘Catechesis of the Good Shepherd’ which in some ways is staying more true towards the original method as Montessori schools become secularized.
This sentence from the New Yorker reminded me: “that children are, in their essence, methodical, self-directed beings with a strong work ethic“
The ‘spiritual’ adjective is something that would have been in this sentence had Montessori written about it, as she discusses the spiritual well-being of children often in her writing.
That the upper-crust of secular society conveniently ignores this isn’t surprising, but I wonder if ignoring it contributes to the growing mental health crisis.
I.e. if spirituality doesn’t matter at all, how can you actually convince children they aren’t being raised as economic cogs in a materialist world?
Does someone have feedback on having kids in a Montessori school?
Looking at the materials online, it looks like the overall idea makes sense, but somehow there is a _rumor_ that most Montessori childs struggle to adapt to a _normal_ curriculum after, and generally lean toward short studies and manual jobs.
Montessori for 5 years, myself. I mostly learned how to learn, and the struggles later were that my education was well beyond that of my public school peers when I switched. I found learning by rote to be a waste of time, and continued to learn in my own ways.
As a result, I had amazing test scores in public school, but bad grades overall because I felt that the homework was a waste of my time.
I still appreciate my time on a Montessori school though.
I went to a Montessori daycare and school for the first 15-something years of my life. I have noticed I have some gaps.
In particular, I don't know small multiplications by rote as well as some others. But that's the major problem I've found.
On the other hand, I did huge 20-digit multiplications well ahead of others because I liked it.
I learned a second language (English) when I was very young because me and a friend was interested in it.
I performed violently exothermic chemistry experiments (in controlled ways, of course) after regular class hours because the teacher saw our interest in things that go boom.
I made HTML-based role-playing adventures to learn the stuff in history class.
I learned how the difference between science and fucking around is writing it down, performing endless series of flight tests of paper plane models and presenting the result.
Many of these things were highly useful to me later in education and life, and were not part of any standard curriculum. I did them because the teachers saw me and exploited an opportunity to make us both content.
I would say that adjusting to a "normal" curriculum took a little time. However, I think that learning independence and keeping my love of learning was worth that tradeoff. I was also happy going to school, something that I feel was beneficial from a developmental standpoint.
For context, I don't currently work a manual job and successfully graduated college.
Both my kids went to montessori-style preschools. If I had to attribute development of curiosity and creativity to something, I'd attribute it almost entirely to inherent personality rather than education: my two kids could not be more different from one another; one kid is passive and absent-minded and likes to immerse in fantasy worlds, and the other is an go-getter information sponge that likes to act grown up.
They're in regular primary school now and adapted just fine.
I have a relative who's in his 11th year of a Montessori education, and none of us are worried about that. The parents are huge fans of the school.
Personally, I'm envious. I did well enough in school, but I was never a great match for industrial education processes. Too curious, too independent. But that's exactly what I've needed in my tech career; technology is now so complex and changes so quickly that we're all effectively self taught.
I don't think that kind of self-directed adaptability is going to become less necessary in the future, so I hope more schools adopt similar approaches.
I'm the product of a Montessori preschool environment, as are my 3 siblings. My mother owned a Montessori school, and my wife has taught in a Montessori school for over a decade.
The most common thing you'll find are Montessori preschools (3-6 years old). The biggest thing I got out of it was the love of learning. Children in a Montessori classroom are able to learn at their own pace, so if you gravitate towards numbers before reading, that's facilitated. Other way around? No biggie. It turns out child development at that age is pretty flexible, and most children all get to where they're supposed to be by the end of those 3 years.
The other benefit is the mixed-age classrooms. Younger kids are able to see the older children as role models, and the older children are able to _be_ that role model for the newer kids. All of this together creates an environment that often graduates children that seem to be more confident in themselves and in their innate abilities.
I will say that transitioning to a traditional school in first grade was a bit of a culture shock, but the lessons learned in Montessori definitely carried over. I still have that love of learning, and a strong inner voice.
My wife's school is Montessori through 8th grade, and her experience is that the children that graduate excel in whichever high school setting they go to, but this is of course anecdotal.
My only experience so far is myself. I received a great education overall but I’m not sure I would credit that to Montessori school specifically. I do remember enjoying the hell out of it. It was my only foray into private education. I had no trouble adjusting to regular school, attended a top tier university, and have worked as a software engineer for the entirety of my career. YMMV but I am planning to send my son to Montessori.
>Bezos’s vow prompted some early-childhood education experts, including Mira Debs, of Yale, and Joel Ryan, the executive director of Washington’s Head Start program, to ask why a man possessed of two hundred billion dollars would elect to compete with existing, cash-strapped public preschool programs instead of simply giving them lots of money. The answer may be found on the Day One Fund Web site, which states, “The customer set this team of missionaries will serve is simple: children in underserved communities across the country.” There is a novel dystopian horror in this promise—it conjures an image of Jesuit-manqué preschool teachers walking barefoot and dehydrated across miles of Amazon warehouse floor in search of a hundred-piece counting board as, elsewhere, a child waits expectantly behind her Ring Video Doorbell, anxious to Rate Her Experience.
why journalism has devolved in ideological propaganda?
We love the foundations and philosophy. My wife set up our house according to the Montessori approach of making everything accessible for the kids.
Our oldest-
She did fine at Montessori but we noticed that she would never push herself or be pushed - per the method. For example she would only go to the shelf with puzzles that she could easily master. It wasn’t a competitive environment and she thrives on that. She moved on to regular Kindergarten and is doing well.
Our second-
Same problem as the first - but this was a bigger issue because he was far behind his developmental milestones and needed speech and occupational therapy just to get to Kindergarten.
Our third-
She was born for Montessori. She loves independence and is the most capable two year old I’ve come across. She’s the only one who uses the Montessori set-up(s) at home that my wife made happen.
[+] [-] jayski|4 years ago|reply
Every day we dropped him off he would cry and throw a tantrum, and it would break our hearts, but you know... that's life.
He was falling behind all his classmates, his speech hadn't developed, he didnt sing the songs, do the dances, etc. All the other kids were doing great.
I attended one of his classes and noticed he refused to sit at his chair, all he wanted to do was stare out the window to try to spot airplanes.
That's when we decided to switch over to Montessori, mainly because I wanted him to have more freedom, and at least enjoy school even if he didn't learn much.
The change frankly has been incredible, after just one week he was waiting inpatiently at the front door of our home, anxious to go to school. The only crying when we dropped him off was from my wife, when he ran into the school without looking back every morning.
His speech and abilities have normalized with the rest of his class after a year.
Now I'm not saying everyone will have the same outcome,maybe he just grew and would've developed any way.
I just wanted to share my personal experience in case anyone finds it useful.
[+] [-] kqr|4 years ago|reply
Taiichi Ohno called it genchi genbutsu in the context of manufacturing. First, go to the floor and look at the work that is being done.
Edwards Deming said "Don't just do somthing; stand there!" in the context of data analysis. Allow the data to tell you something. If you meddle with it you destroy the signal.
In other words. First, observe. Try to understand the problem before you rush in with a solution.
This is like step 0 of the scientific method and yet we forget about it so often, in a hurry to just do something.
[+] [-] em500|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gloryjulio|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] blodkorv|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] avs733|4 years ago|reply
Jean Anyon's work is really the baseline[0] and describes just how fundamentally different the schooling process experienced by the privileged and less privileged is. She looked entirely at public schools.
>In the two working-class schools, work is following the steps of a procedure. The procedure is usually mechanical, involving rote behavior and very little decision making or choice. The teachers rarely explain why the work is being assigned, how it might connect to other assignments, or what the idea is that lies behind the procedure or gives it coherence and perhaps meaning or significance. ...Work is often evaluated not according to whether it is right or wrong but according to whether the children followed the right steps.
>In the executive elite school, work is developing one's analytical intellectual powers. Children are continually asked to reason through a problem, to produce intellectual products that are both logically sound and of top academic quality. A primary goal of thought is to conceptualize rules by which elements may fit together in systems and then to apply these rules in solving a problem.
[0]https://www1.udel.edu/educ/whitson/897s05/files/hiddencurric...
[+] [-] estaseuropano|4 years ago|reply
If you want to see how an egalitarian education system reaches the best education system results in the world - Estonia and Finland are the countries to look at. Their education indeed follows the second model here. But rote learning is also included - the point is to challenge and support the child in manifold ways and keep in mind that they should enjoy themselves.
My point is though while in some countries this might be a class difference, really it comes down to a quality difference. Good quality does not actually need to be very expensive/rare, you can reach it at system level as do Estonia and Finland.
[+] [-] antishatter|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] mbateman|4 years ago|reply
I’m part of a now-large-ish Montessori startup and am a sort of Montessori scholar. The biography reviewed here is very good and worth checking out. Overall it’s the best of the biographies available, and is a significant improvement over Kramer’s from a few decades ago.
Just an aside: the extended tangents in the review about Montessori’s entrepreneurialism turning her method into a classist privilege are, uh, really strange. The idea in the review seems to be that the rarity and expense of Montessori in the US is because she charged for trainings and tried to parent some materials. Purely as a matter of historical fact, this is a narrative in search of evidence that isn’t there, and a narrative that isn’t really face plausible. Montessori education is rare because the progressive intellectuals that built the US school system adamantly and vociferously rejected Montessori for pedagogical reasons. There are just way better explanations available for why her work didn’t take hold more widely.
Glad to see Montessori and Stefano’s biography in particular getting coverage though. I’ve enjoyed reading the many comments here about people’s experiences with Montessori!
[+] [-] warble|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nouveaux|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwilsonsf|4 years ago|reply
If you have not read “Founding Mothers and Others”, I highly recommend it. Many progressive schools were founded by women who studied with Montessori, sought to spread her pedagogy and gave her great respect and credit. Helen Salz and Flora Arnstein,founders of San Francisco’s Presidio Hill School, were inspired to launch their school after observing Montessori work with children in a glass walked classroom at the 1915 San Francisco Exposition. Other Californians attended her California lectures, studied her work, traveled to Italy or trained in her US programs. They went on to found schools and train teachers. This didn’t stop in 1916, indeed most of these schools were founded between 1918 and 194o. They still exist and acknowledge their Montessori roots.
Margaret Naumberg, who trained extensively with Montessori, simultaneously launched a public Montessori and a private one in New York. The schools had very different results but I don’t know why the public program was not replicated or sustained. I wonder what lessons we could learn from the difference in the public implementation and the private one which grew into The Children’s School, later the Walden School, which lasted for over 50 years.
Helen Parkhurst was purportedly the only person Maria Montessori authorized to train teachers. She is known as the “mother of the Dalton School” and the architect of the Dalton Plan which was extremely influential in inspiring school design not just in the US but internationally. Dalton remains a leading school in both popularity with families, credibility with college admissions offices, and with the education community. It would be interesting to learn how you think it is aligned with Montessorian pedagogy and how it differs.
The bigger question is what are the essential elements of a Montessori education and how are they adapted across different contexts? Should Montessori classrooms only have Montessori materials? For example, can they incorporate Caroline Pratt’s unit blocks? Can’t we teach educators to observe play with unit blocks & facilitate intellectual development through applying Montessori methods with these excellent non-Montessori materials?
Montessori principles are widely taught in education philosophy, early childhood, and child development courses. The basic principles are familiar but not the practices. Is that because the education establishment has shut them out or because the AMI & AMS have not made training accessible? That is probably a hot button question for a highly visible and rapidly growing start up but, IMO, the success of Higher Ground & the Bezos “Montessori inspired” schools will hinge on three things, accessibility, adaptability, and accountability. Indeed any form of transformation will have to tackle those three areas and that is one reason finding common ground is important.
Your work is interesting and important. Good luck!
[+] [-] glial|4 years ago|reply
https://harpers.org/archive/2022/02/every-child-an-emperor-o...
In the New Yorker article, the author takes issue with the fact that there are very few public Montessori schools, but fails to suggest why this might be the case. I'd offer that perhaps this this is because a Montessori education is child-focused, while public educational institutions (like the ones I attended) tend to be institution-focused. Valuing the worth of the child is somehow antithetical to the structure and order they impose.
[+] [-] rp3|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aidenn0|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] manmal|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rr808|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vmception|4 years ago|reply
I find the Sudbury model more fascinating because the student bodies I’ve seen came across as motivated, and other education models seemed demotivating except to a few students with a externality of a self motivating gene or environment.
Sudbury specifically makes students part of a democracy for most operations and education. My skepticism was quelled by the outcomes.
I would pay a premium for Montessori or Sudbury schooling. How about an article from people that can comfortably afford it? I would alternatively consider having my future child(ren) schooled in a non-US developed country. The public option isnt in the running.
[+] [-] sanedigital|4 years ago|reply
Our five year old was playing at the park a week ago and chatted with another little girl about their respective schools. Afterwards he asked us why she said her school was boring. He couldn’t fathom a school that wasn’t interesting and fun.
[+] [-] manmal|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] richardanaya|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tjansen|4 years ago|reply
Some things I noticed:
- there are kids who are doing really well, and there are other kids who (I think) have more trouble than I'd expect in a classic elementary school
- a few kids are learning at a faster pace, like my daughter who skipped 2nd grade.
- there is a shocking number of kids who are having trouble and have to repeat a grade, usually 3rd grade. Last year, 3 out of 6 third graders had to repeat third grade. Not sure how statistically relevant it is, and it feels closer to home as those three are my daughter's best friends, but it was quite surprising and made us wonder whether it's the right school for our younger daughter (who's a bit wilder and has less patience and discipline).
- in addition to the usual ADHD stuff, there is a surprising number of kids who are diagnosed with dyscalculia. Not sure what's normal, and of course this is a small sample, but still makes us feel a bit uneasy.
- a possible reason why some kids are struggling could be the student/teacher ratio. There are 27 kids per teacher. I think that's way too high to support kids who are having difficulties.
- I should also mention that Covid interrupted Montessori schools more than traditional schools. Kids are supposed to work with Montessori materials, and they weren't available in home schooling. Teaching via video was difficult in mixed-age classes. Even today, kids do not experience the school as intended, as the class needs to stay together all day and they are not free to roam to other rooms, like workshops or the library.
[+] [-] raducu|4 years ago|reply
First year was terrible, her educator constantly complained about her, she wasn't eating at all, a lot of days she wasn't sleeping, there were days they called us to pick her up in the middle of the day because she was inconsolable.
The moment she switched educators everything resolved -- she started eating, no more tantrums, sleeping, doing great in her activities.
Montessori is as good as the individual educators are.
Looking back I can see all the red flags -- the fact that I know about the on-and-off divorce of the first educator from her alcoholic husband tells a lot. And there were all sorts of passive-aggressive little things like "Dear parents, tomorrow will be my birthday, I will spend the time with my family and not at work, that is the way we do things here...."
[+] [-] vmception|4 years ago|reply
> I should also mention that Covid interrupted Montessori schools more than traditional schools
Oof yeah thatll amplify this issue
[+] [-] gavinmckenzie|4 years ago|reply
As a Montessori class has students in three different year levels together (e.g. a Casa class would have children aged 3, 4, and 5) and part of the philosophy is for the senior students in a class to assist in teaching the junior students, the class has to have a sufficient number of students in order for this approach to work. Small class sizes don't have enough students to support the learning model.
In my experience 27 children in a class is very typical and not at all an over-populated class. I've seen larger classes work just as well.
The Montessori school my daughter went to would have a director/directress and an assistant in each class.
[+] [-] spacemanmatt|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rudedogg|4 years ago|reply
I think it's important to remember that these techniques were defined in 1912 though. There seems to be a sort of worship of the Montessori method, and a "black and white" mentality about what is correct. Using a 100+ year old book/method without adjustments and chasing purity in following it seems misguided.
[+] [-] zoom6628|4 years ago|reply
My own experience is that Montessori puts the kids years ahead of age group peers and the learning benefits last into adulthood. My eldest earned a PhD in spite of learning challenges and the second eldest senior manager in a Govt department. #3 taught herself a 3rd language at age of 3. To many things to attribute just to home life and DNA.
Not familiar with other systems mentioned but I do see any environment where kids are respected and observed carefully seem to get similar and lasting results from their education.
[+] [-] picodguyo|4 years ago|reply
What I like about Montessori is that if a child finds a "work" that interests them, they can really focus in on it until mastery instead of feeling pressured to follow a specific curriculum on a specific timeline. I also like the de-emphasis on grades and testing. These are distractions from learning IMO. As for academic progress, one of my kids picks things up early and the other picks things up late. It just depends on the child. We aren't yet to high school, so I can speak to that transition. I'd be lying if I said it didn't worry me a little, though, mostly because I think of high school as a stressful place and my kids are currently in a very low-stress place.
[+] [-] legitster|4 years ago|reply
What's really telling is that there have been a few preschoolers who have been gently nudged out of the school for having needs the school couldn't (or didn't want to) deal with.
Still, I think there are two things Montessori gets right:
1. Giving kids a lot of structured self-direction.
2. Mixing kids of age ranges and having them instruct each other.
In my experience, everything other than that is crunchy granola window dressing.
[+] [-] blodkorv|4 years ago|reply
It really was a super bad fit for me.
Now when i look back at it, it is super obvious montissori is great for talented children and those who are able to have dicipline and organize them selfs, without much guidance.
Me myself has always lacked that and always will. This made be fall behind so bad in school that the only way i was able to finish it was because of a private tutor my parents hired.
Now its not _all_ because of the school, it also is my own abilities. I am simply not a smart learner nor very good at problem solving.
But the lack of organization, clear learning paths and a mindset of letting a child try to learn all by him self was super bad for me. It was also clear it benefitted girls a lot more than boys.
Today i really resent everything about montessori, it was a complete failure for me and only let my lack of dicipline/organization and insufficient problem solving skills run my schooling for ten years while everyone in the school thought i would just magically develop abilities i lacked on my own.
[+] [-] 29athrowaway|4 years ago|reply
Every Montessori school implements their own interpretation of it, sometimes so they can charge more.
Because of how inconsistent its implementation is in practice, the results will be completely random.
There are many stories of Montessori system failures out there that you can read to understand when things go wrong.
[+] [-] bigDinosaur|4 years ago|reply
Actually, in many ways we probably can.
[+] [-] ThePowerOfFuet|4 years ago|reply
AMI begs to differ, even though their certification is by no means obligatory.
[+] [-] ArnoVW|4 years ago|reply
My conclusion, after having seen 3 schools: a huge part of the equation is the self-selection of the teachers. It's like comparing "SPA and microservices" with PHP as technologies, without taking into consideration that each attracts a different type of developer.
1: state curricumum, but with specific pedagogical philosophy, focusing on confidence, team-work, etc.
[+] [-] tannhaeuser|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mensetmanusman|4 years ago|reply
This sentence from the New Yorker reminded me: “that children are, in their essence, methodical, self-directed beings with a strong work ethic“
The ‘spiritual’ adjective is something that would have been in this sentence had Montessori written about it, as she discusses the spiritual well-being of children often in her writing.
That the upper-crust of secular society conveniently ignores this isn’t surprising, but I wonder if ignoring it contributes to the growing mental health crisis.
I.e. if spirituality doesn’t matter at all, how can you actually convince children they aren’t being raised as economic cogs in a materialist world?
[+] [-] Galanwe|4 years ago|reply
Looking at the materials online, it looks like the overall idea makes sense, but somehow there is a _rumor_ that most Montessori childs struggle to adapt to a _normal_ curriculum after, and generally lean toward short studies and manual jobs.
[+] [-] jerrysievert|4 years ago|reply
As a result, I had amazing test scores in public school, but bad grades overall because I felt that the homework was a waste of my time.
I still appreciate my time on a Montessori school though.
[+] [-] kqr|4 years ago|reply
In particular, I don't know small multiplications by rote as well as some others. But that's the major problem I've found.
On the other hand, I did huge 20-digit multiplications well ahead of others because I liked it.
I learned a second language (English) when I was very young because me and a friend was interested in it.
I performed violently exothermic chemistry experiments (in controlled ways, of course) after regular class hours because the teacher saw our interest in things that go boom.
I made HTML-based role-playing adventures to learn the stuff in history class.
I learned how the difference between science and fucking around is writing it down, performing endless series of flight tests of paper plane models and presenting the result.
Many of these things were highly useful to me later in education and life, and were not part of any standard curriculum. I did them because the teachers saw me and exploited an opportunity to make us both content.
[+] [-] antasvara|4 years ago|reply
I would say that adjusting to a "normal" curriculum took a little time. However, I think that learning independence and keeping my love of learning was worth that tradeoff. I was also happy going to school, something that I feel was beneficial from a developmental standpoint.
For context, I don't currently work a manual job and successfully graduated college.
[+] [-] lhorie|4 years ago|reply
They're in regular primary school now and adapted just fine.
[+] [-] wpietri|4 years ago|reply
Personally, I'm envious. I did well enough in school, but I was never a great match for industrial education processes. Too curious, too independent. But that's exactly what I've needed in my tech career; technology is now so complex and changes so quickly that we're all effectively self taught.
I don't think that kind of self-directed adaptability is going to become less necessary in the future, so I hope more schools adopt similar approaches.
[+] [-] oo0shiny|4 years ago|reply
The most common thing you'll find are Montessori preschools (3-6 years old). The biggest thing I got out of it was the love of learning. Children in a Montessori classroom are able to learn at their own pace, so if you gravitate towards numbers before reading, that's facilitated. Other way around? No biggie. It turns out child development at that age is pretty flexible, and most children all get to where they're supposed to be by the end of those 3 years.
The other benefit is the mixed-age classrooms. Younger kids are able to see the older children as role models, and the older children are able to _be_ that role model for the newer kids. All of this together creates an environment that often graduates children that seem to be more confident in themselves and in their innate abilities.
I will say that transitioning to a traditional school in first grade was a bit of a culture shock, but the lessons learned in Montessori definitely carried over. I still have that love of learning, and a strong inner voice.
My wife's school is Montessori through 8th grade, and her experience is that the children that graduate excel in whichever high school setting they go to, but this is of course anecdotal.
[+] [-] xanaxagoras|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duxup|4 years ago|reply
Many adopt a few ideas but really aren’t much different than other schools.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] kwere|4 years ago|reply
why journalism has devolved in ideological propaganda?
[+] [-] jpthurman|4 years ago|reply
We love the foundations and philosophy. My wife set up our house according to the Montessori approach of making everything accessible for the kids.
Our oldest- She did fine at Montessori but we noticed that she would never push herself or be pushed - per the method. For example she would only go to the shelf with puzzles that she could easily master. It wasn’t a competitive environment and she thrives on that. She moved on to regular Kindergarten and is doing well.
Our second- Same problem as the first - but this was a bigger issue because he was far behind his developmental milestones and needed speech and occupational therapy just to get to Kindergarten.
Our third- She was born for Montessori. She loves independence and is the most capable two year old I’ve come across. She’s the only one who uses the Montessori set-up(s) at home that my wife made happen.
Our fourth- Still a baby - we shall see