Pub Date : 2021-05-19DOI: 10.17161/jomr.v7i1.13401
Romali Rosales Chavarria
This work reports, from a qualitative research perspective, the development of an English Corner project for a preschool Children’s House classroom in central Mexico over the course of a 3-year period. It shows the transition of a language specialist over six consecutive periods of work, from a traditional understanding and practice of teaching English as a second language to young learners into a more comprehensive one of the Montessori Method. The analysis of my own practice is used to recover insights through a reflective process with the intention to develop a second language (L2) Montessori program for 3- to 6-year-olds that aligns better with Montessori pedagogy. Variables such as instruction time, setting, group constitution, materials, and teaching and learning strategies allowed for certain aspects to arise as leading points of interest for the focus of the analysis and the methodological and pedagogical adaptations that followed each period. This paper is an attempt to fill the gap between the need to deliver a second language effectively in Montessori education and the lack of guidance for doing it the Montessori way; it is especially for practitioners who do not have a Montessori background but also for Montessori-trained teachers for whom more specific preparation would aid their practice. I also hope to stimulate further research in the field of second language acquisition and multilingualism in Montessori education at every level of education.
{"title":"Second Language Corner for Children’s House","authors":"Romali Rosales Chavarria","doi":"10.17161/jomr.v7i1.13401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v7i1.13401","url":null,"abstract":"This work reports, from a qualitative research perspective, the development of an English Corner project for a preschool Children’s House classroom in central Mexico over the course of a 3-year period. It shows the transition of a language specialist over six consecutive periods of work, from a traditional understanding and practice of teaching English as a second language to young learners into a more comprehensive one of the Montessori Method. The analysis of my own practice is used to recover insights through a reflective process with the intention to develop a second language (L2) Montessori program for 3- to 6-year-olds that aligns better with Montessori pedagogy. Variables such as instruction time, setting, group constitution, materials, and teaching and learning strategies allowed for certain aspects to arise as leading points of interest for the focus of the analysis and the methodological and pedagogical adaptations that followed each period. This paper is an attempt to fill the gap between the need to deliver a second language effectively in Montessori education and the lack of guidance for doing it the Montessori way; it is especially for practitioners who do not have a Montessori background but also for Montessori-trained teachers for whom more specific preparation would aid their practice. I also hope to stimulate further research in the field of second language acquisition and multilingualism in Montessori education at every level of education.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"203 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133727845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-13DOI: 10.17161/jomr.v6i2.13882
Marusa Mavric
I present a brief overview of the key elements of personalized learning and Montessori education, a related pedagogical approach, aiming to examine common theoretical principles and key elements. I discuss the common features of personalized instruction and the Montessori approach of education. Both personalized instruction and the Montessori approach stand firmly on a constructivist paradigm and share many philosophical and theoretical principles. Research has shown that Montessori education is one of the most visible models that incorporates numerous aspects of personalized instruction and shares many common elements with personalized learning. This research has shown that, while personalized instruction also suggests many strategies for implementation of the concept, Montessori education actualizes the principles of personalized learning.
{"title":"The Montessori Approach as a Model of Personalized Instruction","authors":"Marusa Mavric","doi":"10.17161/jomr.v6i2.13882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v6i2.13882","url":null,"abstract":"I present a brief overview of the key elements of personalized learning and Montessori education, a related pedagogical approach, aiming to examine common theoretical principles and key elements. I discuss the common features of personalized instruction and the Montessori approach of education. Both personalized instruction and the Montessori approach stand firmly on a constructivist paradigm and share many philosophical and theoretical principles. Research has shown that Montessori education is one of the most visible models that incorporates numerous aspects of personalized instruction and shares many common elements with personalized learning. This research has shown that, while personalized instruction also suggests many strategies for implementation of the concept, Montessori education actualizes the principles of personalized learning.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133838228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The purpose of this study was to understand typically developing children’s repetitive behavior in a free-play, daycare setting. By studying repetition in a non-Montessori setting, we tested the assumption that repetition is a characteristic behavior of all young children and not limited to the Montessori environment. Although Maria Montessori identified repetition during her observations, there is little empirical evidence to support her claim: most research has considered repetition in terms of psychopathology. We collected naturalistic observational data on 31 3- to 6-year-old children for a total of 101 hours to investigate the frequency, contexts, and structure of repetitive bouts. Multilevel model results suggest the ubiquity of repetition, as all children in the study engaged in motor repetition. Furthermore, repetition occurred throughout all free-play activities (construction, animation, fantasy play, rough-and-tumble play, and undirected activity), although repetition was not equally distributed across activities. Motor repetition was not equal across ages either; younger children engaged in more motor repetition than did older children. To understand the structure of repetition, our study also looked at the length of repetition bouts, which ranged from 2 to 19 repetitions and averaged 2.86 repetitions per bout. This natural history of repetition is an influential starting point for understanding the role of repetition in development and is informative to both Montessori and non-Montessori early childhood educators.
{"title":"A Natural History of Repetition","authors":"Anne E. Jones, S. Henzi, L. Barrett","doi":"10.17161/jomr.v5i2.7407","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i2.7407","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study was to understand typically developing children’s repetitive behavior in a free-play, daycare setting. By studying repetition in a non-Montessori setting, we tested the assumption that repetition is a characteristic behavior of all young children and not limited to the Montessori environment. Although Maria Montessori identified repetition during her observations, there is little empirical evidence to support her claim: most research has considered repetition in terms of psychopathology. We collected naturalistic observational data on 31 3- to 6-year-old children for a total of 101 hours to investigate the frequency, contexts, and structure of repetitive bouts. Multilevel model results suggest the ubiquity of repetition, as all children in the study engaged in motor repetition. Furthermore, repetition occurred throughout all free-play activities (construction, animation, fantasy play, rough-and-tumble play, and undirected activity), although repetition was not equally distributed across activities. Motor repetition was not equal across ages either; younger children engaged in more motor repetition than did older children. To understand the structure of repetition, our study also looked at the length of repetition bouts, which ranged from 2 to 19 repetitions and averaged 2.86 repetitions per bout. This natural history of repetition is an influential starting point for understanding the role of repetition in development and is informative to both Montessori and non-Montessori early childhood educators.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124594249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Montessori teacher education includes an intensive and ongoing teacher transformation. This experience aids in the development of a clearly defined teacher identity. Research on teacher identity broadly has shown that while such an identity can offer guidance and support, it can also limit teachers and prevent them from exploring other strategies that may support them and, in turn, their students (e.g., Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Britzman, 2003; Sumsion, 2002). This effect is problematic when teachers face moments of uncertainty and dilemmas in their teaching practice. As Montessori classrooms become increasingly diverse, teachers may need to adopt identities that are not explicitly defined in Montessori teacher transformation. This review of literature examines components of a Montessori teacher identity and, broadly, the effects of teacher identity as well as elements of antibias and antiracist teacher-identity development that includes inner reflection and an activist approach to teaching.
{"title":"Montessori Identity in Dialogue","authors":"Olivia A. Christensen","doi":"10.17161/jomr.v5i2.8183","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i2.8183","url":null,"abstract":"Montessori teacher education includes an intensive and ongoing teacher transformation. This experience aids in the development of a clearly defined teacher identity. Research on teacher identity broadly has shown that while such an identity can offer guidance and support, it can also limit teachers and prevent them from exploring other strategies that may support them and, in turn, their students (e.g., Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Britzman, 2003; Sumsion, 2002). This effect is problematic when teachers face moments of uncertainty and dilemmas in their teaching practice. As Montessori classrooms become increasingly diverse, teachers may need to adopt identities that are not explicitly defined in Montessori teacher transformation. This review of literature examines components of a Montessori teacher identity and, broadly, the effects of teacher identity as well as elements of antibias and antiracist teacher-identity development that includes inner reflection and an activist approach to teaching. \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130023023","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Prior research has demonstrated that the characteristics of school environments can impact the development of creativity in children. Thus, we explored the construct of creativity in the context of a Montessori environment. We used the Evaluation of Potential Creativity to measure creativity in children during one academic year. The study sample comprised 77 third-grade students at a Montessori public school in the southeastern United States and 71 demographically similar students at a traditional public school. Results show that Montessori students performed somewhat better on the Evaluation of Potential Creativity assessment than similar non-Montessori students did. Subgroup analyses indicate that male Montessori students demonstrated higher creativity than did male non- Montessori students. The findings of this study augment the body of research supporting creative development in Montessori children and suggest that researchers should continue to focus on the measurement of creativity in studies related to the efficacy of the Montessori model.
{"title":"The Montessori Model and Creativity","authors":"David J. Fleming, B. Culclasure, Daniel Zhang","doi":"10.17161/jomr.v5i2.7695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i2.7695","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Prior research has demonstrated that the characteristics of school environments can impact the development of creativity in children. Thus, we explored the construct of creativity in the context of a Montessori environment. We used the Evaluation of Potential Creativity to measure creativity in children during one academic year. The study sample comprised 77 third-grade students at a Montessori public school in the southeastern United States and 71 demographically similar students at a traditional public school. Results show that Montessori students performed somewhat better on the Evaluation of Potential Creativity assessment than similar non-Montessori students did. Subgroup analyses indicate that male Montessori students demonstrated higher creativity than did male non- Montessori students. The findings of this study augment the body of research supporting creative development in Montessori children and suggest that researchers should continue to focus on the measurement of creativity in studies related to the efficacy of the Montessori model. \u0000","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131050461","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Researchers who study any intervention must rule out potential alternative explanations for their results by establishing that the program being investigated is implemented with fidelity. Various instructional practices are attributed to the Montessori Method because the term is not legally protected, meaning any school can say it is Montessori regardless of the degree to which it adheres to practices generally understood to represent Montessori education. Researchers have used a variety of tools to measure the fidelity of Montessori environments they study, but most of these tools lack an extensive psychometric foundation or are labor intensive, requiring in-person observation. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of instruments that were developed to measure Montessori implementation through Early Childhood (EC) and Elementary (EL) teachers’ reported instructional practices. Findings supported three hypothesized dimensions of Montessori implementation (structure, curriculum, and freedom), which worked fairly well in describing practices. While the properties of these instruments are promising and provide preliminary supporting evidence, results of this analysis suggest further refinement of the items in these instruments is necessary with larger and more diverse samples. While we do not suggest that these are finalized tools, we believe they provide a valuable starting point that is a vast improvement over the requirement of investigators to develop their own instruments as part of each Montessori study they design. The authors hope other researchers will incorporate these instruments into their studies to help build a robust body of evidence supporting their use.
{"title":"Developing Instruments to Measure Montessori Instructional Practices","authors":"Angela K. Murray, PhD, Jie Chen, C. Daoust","doi":"10.17161/JOMR.V5I1.9797","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/JOMR.V5I1.9797","url":null,"abstract":"Researchers who study any intervention must rule out potential alternative explanations for their results by establishing that the program being investigated is implemented with fidelity. Various instructional practices are attributed to the Montessori Method because the term is not legally protected, meaning any school can say it is Montessori regardless of the degree to which it adheres to practices generally understood to represent Montessori education. Researchers have used a variety of tools to measure the fidelity of Montessori environments they study, but most of these tools lack an extensive psychometric foundation or are labor intensive, requiring in-person observation. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of instruments that were developed to measure Montessori implementation through Early Childhood (EC) and Elementary (EL) teachers’ reported instructional practices. Findings supported three hypothesized dimensions of Montessori implementation (structure, curriculum, and freedom), which worked fairly well in describing practices. While the properties of these instruments are promising and provide preliminary supporting evidence, results of this analysis suggest further refinement of the items in these instruments is necessary with larger and more diverse samples. While we do not suggest that these are finalized tools, we believe they provide a valuable starting point that is a vast improvement over the requirement of investigators to develop their own instruments as part of each Montessori study they design. The authors hope other researchers will incorporate these instruments into their studies to help build a robust body of evidence supporting their use.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128273263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Maria Montessori developed a form of education in the first half of the last century that came to be called by her surname, and research indicates it often has positive outcomes. In the years since its development, tens of thousands of schools worldwide have called their programs Montessori, yet implementations vary widely, leading to confusion about what Montessori education is. Although there are varied opinions, here we use Dr. Montessori’s books and transcribed lectures to describe the conclusions of her work at her life’s end. We term this final conclusion authentic in the sense of “done in the traditional or original way,” (the primary definition of the adjective in Oxford English Dictionary, 2019). We do not claim that the original is superior to variants; this is an issue for empirical science. Our overarching goal is to provide researchers, policy makers, administrators, teachers, and parents with a benchmark from which to measure and evaluate variations from the education method Dr. Montessori bequeathed at the end of her life. In the ongoing search for alternative educational methods, the time-honored and burgeoning Montessori system is of considerable interest. Dr. Montessori conceptualized the system as a triangle for which the environment, the teacher, and the child formed the legs. Part I of this two-part article examines Dr. Montessori’s view of what constitutes the environment, in terms of its material, temporal, and social features. An appendix to Part II summarizes the features. In the ongoing search for alternative educational methods, the time-honored and burgeoning Montessori system is of considerable interest. Dr. Montessori conceptualized the system as a triangle for which the environment, the teacher, and the child formed the legs. Part I of this two-part article examines Dr. Montessori’s view of what constitutes the environment, in terms of its material, temporal, and social features. An appendix to Part II summarizes the features.
{"title":"Authentic Montessori: The Dottoressa’s View at the End of Her Life Part I","authors":"Angeline S. Lillard, Virginia McHugh","doi":"10.17161/JOMR.V5I1.7716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/JOMR.V5I1.7716","url":null,"abstract":"Maria Montessori developed a form of education in the first half of the last century that came to be called by her surname, and research indicates it often has positive outcomes. In the years since its development, tens of thousands of schools worldwide have called their programs Montessori, yet implementations vary widely, leading to confusion about what Montessori education is. Although there are varied opinions, here we use Dr. Montessori’s books and transcribed lectures to describe the conclusions of her work at her life’s end. We term this final conclusion authentic in the sense of “done in the traditional or original way,” (the primary definition of the adjective in Oxford English Dictionary, 2019). We do not claim that the original is superior to variants; this is an issue for empirical science. Our overarching goal is to provide researchers, policy makers, administrators, teachers, and parents with a benchmark from which to measure and evaluate variations from the education method Dr. Montessori bequeathed at the end of her life. In the ongoing search for alternative educational methods, the time-honored and burgeoning Montessori system is of considerable interest. Dr. Montessori conceptualized the system as a triangle for which the environment, the teacher, and the child formed the legs. Part I of this two-part article examines Dr. Montessori’s view of what constitutes the environment, in terms of its material, temporal, and social features. An appendix to Part II summarizes the features. \u0000In the ongoing search for alternative educational methods, the time-honored and burgeoning Montessori system is of considerable interest. Dr. Montessori conceptualized the system as a triangle for which the environment, the teacher, and the child formed the legs. Part I of this two-part article examines Dr. Montessori’s view of what constitutes the environment, in terms of its material, temporal, and social features. An appendix to Part II summarizes the features.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129877765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Part II of this two-part article continues the discussion of what Maria Montessori viewed to be the important components of her educational system. Because she developed the system over her lifetime, we prioritized later accounts when contradictory accounts were found. Whereas Part I focused on the environment, Part II examines the second and third components of the Montessori trinity: the teacher and the child. This article includes descriptions of Montessori teacher preparation, children’s developmental stages, and the human tendencies on which Montessori education capitalizes. It ends with child outcomes as described by Dr. Montessori and as shown in recent research, and provides an appendix summarizing features of authentic Montessori described in Part I and Part II.
{"title":"Authentic Montessori: The Dotteressa’s View at the End of Her Life Part II","authors":"Angeline S. Lillard, Virginia McHugh","doi":"10.17161/jomr.v5i1.9753","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i1.9753","url":null,"abstract":"Part II of this two-part article continues the discussion of what Maria Montessori viewed to be the important components of her educational system. Because she developed the system over her lifetime, we prioritized later accounts when contradictory accounts were found. Whereas Part I focused on the environment, Part II examines the second and third components of the Montessori trinity: the teacher and the child. This article includes descriptions of Montessori teacher preparation, children’s developmental stages, and the human tendencies on which Montessori education capitalizes. It ends with child outcomes as described by Dr. Montessori and as shown in recent research, and provides an appendix summarizing features of authentic Montessori described in Part I and Part II.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127803541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
B. Culclasure, C. Daoust, Sally Morris Cote, Susan M. Zoll
Montessori education has a long history, but its recent growth in American public schools has led to increased interest in research efforts, particularly in exploring the potential of the Montessori experience to moderate the effects of poverty and in gathering data to evaluate public investment in Montessori schools. To assist research efforts, this paper introduces a comprehensive visual model, or logic model, that depicts the core components, underlying assumptions, and intended outcomes of the Montessori approach. Logic modeling, which results in a visual representation depicting the connections among a program’s inputs, primary activities, and outcomes, is often used in program planning and research to provide a common framework from which to work. Developed over a 3-year period by a collaborative group of experienced Montessori researchers and practitioners, the Logic Model for Montessori Education presented in this paper is a valuable tool for researchers with the potential to lay a foundation across disciplines for future research that is both rigorous and systematic in its measurement of Montessori processes and outcomes.
{"title":"Designing a Logic Model to Inform Montessori Research","authors":"B. Culclasure, C. Daoust, Sally Morris Cote, Susan M. Zoll","doi":"10.17161/JOMR.V5I1.9788","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/JOMR.V5I1.9788","url":null,"abstract":"Montessori education has a long history, but its recent growth in American public schools has led to increased interest in research efforts, particularly in exploring the potential of the Montessori experience to moderate the effects of poverty and in gathering data to evaluate public investment in Montessori schools. To assist research efforts, this paper introduces a comprehensive visual model, or logic model, that depicts the core components, underlying assumptions, and intended outcomes of the Montessori approach. Logic modeling, which results in a visual representation depicting the connections among a program’s inputs, primary activities, and outcomes, is often used in program planning and research to provide a common framework from which to work. Developed over a 3-year period by a collaborative group of experienced Montessori researchers and practitioners, the Logic Model for Montessori Education presented in this paper is a valuable tool for researchers with the potential to lay a foundation across disciplines for future research that is both rigorous and systematic in its measurement of Montessori processes and outcomes.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115554521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article explores the ways Ngaanyatjarra students in Australia respond to Montessori pedagogy in a remote Aboriginal early childhood context. The article initially presents key literature pertaining to early childhood education, Aboriginal education, and Montessori education in Australia. The qualitative methodology underpinning the research is subsequently outlined. The approach emphasized in this research is that of interpretivism. The data analysis process highlighted three headings: concentration and engagement, student autonomy, and student independence. The findings of this research indicate the potential for Montessori pedagogy as a viable alternative practice of education for remote Aboriginal early childhood contexts, as Montessori pedagogy may align more harmoniously with the cultural dispositions of Ngaanyatjarra students. Finally, recommendations are presented in light of the research.
{"title":"Introduction of Montessori Education to a remote Indigenous Early Childhood program: A study of the ways in which Aboriginal students respond","authors":"C. Holmes","doi":"10.17161/JOMR.V4I2.6715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17161/JOMR.V4I2.6715","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the ways Ngaanyatjarra students in Australia respond to Montessori pedagogy in a remote Aboriginal early childhood context. The article initially presents key literature pertaining to early childhood education, Aboriginal education, and Montessori education in Australia. The qualitative methodology underpinning the research is subsequently outlined. The approach emphasized in this research is that of interpretivism. The data analysis process highlighted three headings: concentration and engagement, student autonomy, and student independence. The findings of this research indicate the potential for Montessori pedagogy as a viable alternative practice of education for remote Aboriginal early childhood contexts, as Montessori pedagogy may align more harmoniously with the cultural dispositions of Ngaanyatjarra students. Finally, recommendations are presented in light of the research.","PeriodicalId":416731,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Montessori Research","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132299608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：