what I observed in a class - thoughts? - Page 3

[lach]

What everyone else is saying, but I also wanted to pop in and say that M. Montessori termed what children do in Montessori classrooms "work" specifically because a child's job is to play, and she felt that deserved more respect than is commonly given to the word play.  So she called it work to encourage others to pay attention to its true importance.

This is such a fundamental part of Montessori, and a quote I've seen hanging in every Montessori classroom I've been in, and offers such interesting food for thought that I have to say I'm a little shocked and disappointed that it didn't come up in your studies. 

(Also, as an aside, every adult that I've ever talked to about Montessori who went to a Montessori preschool gets really excited when talking about polishing silver.  They all... seriously, every last one... claim it was their favorite part.  I always think that's really funny.  Out of curiosity, why do you think it's developmentally inappropriate?  With its instant gratification in watching shiny appear from dull as if by magic, while practicing fine motor control and building hand strength, I can't think of something much more appropriate for 3 and 4 year olds.)

[nanette0269]

I must give you a lot of credit to return to the post...I think most would have created a new account here on MDC and simply started a new conversation.

That being said, anything my children want to do that serves a purpose, I want them to do!  Whether thats creating a castle out of sofa cushions or learning the concept behind multiplication.  

I actually observed the kindy class in my child's room (there is one part of the workcycle every tuesday/thursday that just the kindies are in with the teacher during part of the workcycle).  I observed the teacher ask if a child can take a lesson from her about multiplication.  He gently got up from his studies and came over and listened to this "second lesson" (typically there are three lessons presented for each work item).  I then saw the logic behind how the problem is solved/reinforced for a 5 year old:

(6X4) + (8X4) + (5X3) + (2X9) = 

When she demonstrated this one using the "snake game", she asked if he wanted to continue to work on the 3 remaining problems in this lesson or if he wanted to return to reading his book.  He chose the multiplication.  Perfect example of how this is child led.  It was up to him to learn....and more important if he didnt find the process of putting the pieces together in his brain interesting, it would not engage him to learn more.  Her job is to guide the student and find ways to encourage their intellectual development....not to spoon feed the "steps" to him.

Now, after I had another meeting with the teacher, I then saw this same studious child being a dragon on the playground :)

[GuildJenn]

Actually I was musing on this in the shower this morning and thought I'd just post a note you might want to share with your professor.

Dear Professor X,

I understand from one of your students that you assigned education students to participate in online forum discussions around education with parents. 

I'm all for young educators and parents communicating and sharing information.

But I do have concerns around the assignment as implemented.

One of your students posted advice to a parent based on what sounds like a single observation of a particular method (Montessori).  It doesn't sound like this observation was an educated one -- the student seemed to lack an understanding of the history and philosophy of the Montessori method or the research around Montessori. For example she seemed unaware of the 2006 Science article exploring the social skills gap between Montessori and non-Montessori students (in favour of the Montessori student) – and article that pops up really easily on the Internet which is how I came across it.

The student also made some assertions about age-appropriateness of the silver-polishing activity that were somewhat appalling. ("I can tell you that I do not know how to correctly polish silver, and I don't believe that this is a necessary skill for a child of the age of 4.")

There seemed to be no understanding around the real components of the activity – following a series of visual-motor tasks, developing hand strength and fine motor skills, developing executive function to stay on task, and so on. Sure, polishing silver is quaint to us modern stainless-steel types but that doesn’t make it inappropriate for early education – any more than encouraging students to make collages would be, or that sand play is a "necessary life skill." I give this as an example because there certainly are things to critique & explore in Montessori, but this assertion was really off and poorly expressed.

When education students post on message boards with very little actual information, but a lot of opinion, I believe they are undermining their field and parent-teacher relations. I really can't respect an educator who publicly posts advice to a parent that is based on ignorance — and seems unaware of the extent of that ignorance. In fact that's kind of my worst-case nightmare about education in general: A lack of willingness to research and explore in depth when developing curricula and classroom management approaches.

I also think that education students should be encouraged to research more fully than this student seems to have been. It makes me wonder what this student would perceive as appropriate research, critical thinking and analysis skills to pass on in the classroom.  And it makes me wonder about the point of the assignment. If it was to learn about the method, I think it failed because your student wasn’t interested in listening. If it was to engage with parents in a positive way, it failed. If it was to learn how smarmy moms like me can be, then mission accomplished.

I understand that in this case it's probably largely a first-semester problem, but I wish you would set clearer guidelines for your students so that they don’t essentially put parents like me off. I also hope that your classroom in fact provides more detail and thought than this student demonstrated. And I do encourage a closer look at research into alternative education methods; I assume that’s next semester. 

[sapphire_chan]

I think what is bothering me the most is that apparently the professor decided to require his/her students to use themselves as the "authority" in a spurious appeal to authority logical fallacy. And that "authority" near as I can figure was supposed to stem from one day (was it even a day?) of observation.

(Just to clarify, my problem is not with a student, particularly a beginning student, following the assignment, what bothers me is that a professor would GIVE the assignment.)

[lach]

GuildJenn inspired me, and I sent a polite note to the School of Education (asking that it be forwarded to the appropriate person) voicing some concern about the way this assignment was assigned and interpreted.  It's really a little upsetting to me that she obviously believes that she's spent all semester learning about different educational philosophies, but she didn't seem to know or understand things that should have come up in the first five minutes of a lecture about Montessori.  And the way that she talks about the course being all talking about opinions and experiences makes me think this is a serious failing with the course instruction.  Taking other people's opinions, which seem to be based on an extremely superficial knowledge of the suject, as fact, without learning about the solid factual foundations of what you're talking about, is not really how I think a teacher (or anyone) should be trained.

GuildJenn, I think you should send yours, too.  It was very good.  I just went to the department webpage and put it into their "questions and suggestions" form.

[GuildJenn]

Originally Posted by lach 

GuildJenn inspired me, and I sent a polite note to the School of Education (asking that it be forwarded to the appropriate person) voicing some concern about the way this assignment was assigned and interpreted.  It's really a little upsetting to me that she obviously believes that she's spent all semester learning about different educational philosophies, but she didn't seem to know or understand things that should have come up in the first five minutes of a lecture about Montessori.  And the way that she talks about the course being all talking about opinions and experiences makes me think this is a serious failing with the course instruction.  Taking other people's opinions, which seem to be based on an extremely superficial knowledge of the suject, as fact, without learning about the solid factual foundations of what you're talking about, is not really how I think a teacher (or anyone) should be trained.

GuildJenn, I think you should send yours, too.  It was very good.  I just went to the department webpage and put it into their "questions and suggestions" form.

Done! Although I hope the student also discusses it with the prof.

Sora sorry this got so off track. I guess it's not surprising that parents who seek out early education methods get a bit hot under the collar about educating the educators. :)

[ollyoxenfree]

Originally Posted by badgergirl08 

I'm sorry if I offended anyone, that certainly was not my intention. I understand that you as parents will feel very strongly about the schools you are involved with. I was simply sharing some of my personal beliefs and conclusions. We are not taught in our classes to dismiss any type of instruction. Instead, we are given readings that support all types of schools and in turn are allowed to make our own opinions about them. The project was also not to come on here and dismiss others’ ideas, but rather to have a meaningful discussion. So I appreciate everyone’s very thoughtful responses to my post. As one poster seemed to allude to, it is obviously rare to find a teaching method that is a perfect fit for all students. I thought many of you brought up valid points, however I still have a few concerns that I would express to Sora. I have many years of experience working with small children in educational settings, and I believe that children need the opportunity to be kids, and being goofy and fun. There are ways of providing activities that enhance concentration,motor skills and other skills, which are more developmentally appropriate than polishing silver. I also do not believe that children need to be loud and goofy at all parts of the day, nor do I support having children sit behind a desk all day. There are significant changes that need to happen to our education system, and I commend Montessori and other types of schools that try to modify and improve the traditional classroom. Once again, I appreciate all of the attention my post received. It is always helpful to hear varied points of view as I continue to develop my own teaching philosophy. Sora, I hope you found the answers and help you were looking for! :) 

I also think it took some courage to return to the conversation. Your response raises more misunderstandings though. 

I honestly don't know any Montessori educators who disagree with the idea that "children need the opportunity to be kids". Montessori is all about honouring the child's development and respecting the child's choices, and following the child's lead in learning. That's the fundamental cornerstone of Montessori philosophy and if you don't understand that about Montessori, then you understand nothing at all about it.

It's a principle of Montessori that children are entitled to live, work and play in an environment that has been adapted and organized specifically to their smaller size and developing gross and fine motor skills. If you take the time to visit a Montessori classroom, the first thing you might notice is that furniture, equipment and materials are all adapted and organized for the children's needs. Parents are encouraged to make sure the home environment is likewise comfortable, child-friendly and respects the child's needs. Again, this all grows out of the recognition that "children need the opportunity to be kids". 

I also don't know any Montessori educators who disagree with the idea that "children need the opportunity...[of] being goofy and fun".  What on earth has left you with the impression that they might believe otherwise? 

Since you have experience with small children in other educational settings, I continue to encourage you to research Montessori and observe Montessori classrooms and compare them with an open mind. Consider how well those other educational settings truly nurture a child's development and respect the individual. I would honestly be surprised if you continue to believe that Montessori methods are somehow inappropriate.  

[lach]

I think what is really bothering me is that there seems to be an underlying belief that "all opinions are equally valid, even the uninformed ones" in the way that Badger is speaking, and in the way that she describes her course.  She does mention readings, but she makes it sound like most of the class is people sharing their experiences.  And some of the students (not Badger) have done some cursory Montessori observations, and came back with some superficial observations which were then shared with the class.  Which is a fine starting point for a conversation.  And that's the point where a professor who knows something about educational theories (and, I'm sorry, but Montessori is one of the major ones, so a professor teaching about educational theory who can't give an off the cuff lecture about Montessori has no business teaching that class) steps in and says "Your opinions are really interesting.  Let's take a look at the reasons behind some of the things that you saw."  And then there's an interesting class discussion, and everyone learns something.

Instead, it sounds like the students came back and said "OMG it was so quiet!  And the kids were polishing silver!  I remember my mom making me polish silver once a year, before we had out big Thanksgiving dinner, and here they're making little kids doing it!  WTH?"  And the teacher let it stand.  And now Badger, and the rest of the class, think that they understand Montessori.

Opinions are great, but you have to know what you're talking about.  I'm not confident that this professor gave the students any grounding.  There's a reason that in college, first year courses are usually large lecture classes, and you don't get into seminars where everyone is supposed to contribute until after you've finished your prerequisites.

On this forum, we get people who don't like Montessori fairly frequently.  Some are a lot blunter than Sora's husband's mental hospital joke ;)  But I always get the impression that though their criticisms are sharp, they are interested in learning more and having their misconceptions cleared up.  Badger is pretty clear that she is already an authority on the matter, and her opinions are quite firm.  I think that her professor has done the students a huge disservice by basing so much of this course on uninformed opinion, as opposed to actual facts.

[MattBronsil]

I really wanted to give a more complete response, but with the way the board has been working lately, it's just too frustrating to reply on here.  I hope it holds out this time.  (It seems to be so far).

I think part of the frustration comes from the fact that this is often how teacher education programs approach Montessori.  I love this quote from John Chattin-McNichols's book (slightly edited for brevity...so it's not a direct quote): 

Choose a university, either a famous one, or a local college that offers Masters or Doctoral level programs in Early Childhood Education.  Call the School or College of Education on the telephone, and ask the secretary to speak to the chair or program coordinator in early childhood.  When you actually get a faculty member on the telephone, ask three things:

1)  What text is used in the introductory course in early childhood?

2)  if the University offers any courses in Montessori education or the professor thinks of the Montessori method in general.

3)  The professor's own knowledge in Montessori

 

....

 

The results of these interrogations are not uniform, but they reveal a pattern that is quite consistent....

 

The textbook used will (usually) have only historical references to Montessori....

 

The professor will typically admit to a lack of detailed familiarity with the Montessori method, but will typically recommend against it in favor of "more modern" programs....

 

The professor may or may not have read any of Montessori's books, has been to one or two Montessori classrooms in his or her lifetime, and is typically unable to suggest a single piece of research on Montessori.

So I doubt we're dealing with a student that doesn't WANT to learn about Montessori.  It's more just a student that doesn't have anyone to guide them through it at the University.  This is a common thing and it is frustrating because it means we often have to start over at square 1 a LOT.

The silver polishing discussion actually got me laughing early.  My mom went to China about a year ago to help a school that was starting there.  She met with the parents who actually asked her, "Why do the children need to polish silver?  We have maids that do that!"  Square 1....square 1....  :-)

So...let me start at square 1 and use that example.

What we really have to remember is Montessori ideas are centered around a few things:

1)  Certain assumptions about the child, which I will get to in a minute.

2)  Observation.  We observe children to see what happens, much like a scientist in the woods might quietly observe an elephant to find its nature.

3)  Materials are there to meet the needs of the children based on those assumptions and observations.

When I say we have assumptions, I also have to say that these assumptions can readily be taken away if the observations do not show it.  The biggest assumptions we have include:

--Children are developing.  Children subconsciously or instinctively know more about what their own needs than we do.

--Children enjoy meaningful activities.

--Children have a sense of wonder and awe about the world.

These are assumptions I think EVERY Early Childhood Educator has.  The first one may be more debatable than the others, but I doubt any early childhood educator (outside of Taiwan) would say, "Children need meaningless activities."  (Taiwan comment...side note.  Sorry.  haha)

So then the question is what do we do with this?  The Montessori method has the solution of providing the students with an environment that is suited to their needs and observing them.  Observation, for well over 100 years by schools all across the world, have shown the same things.  Children consistently:

--Prefer to do the Montessori activities when they have the choice between the Montessori activities and toys.

--Develop a love of learning.

--Develop concentration.

--Develop independence.

(I could add a big list, but I'll stick to those points).

So this brings us up to the question of what parents want for their children.  Schools are set up with a HUGE range of options from this point. 

Parents often want their children to be immersed in a fantasy world...welcome to Waldorf!

Parents often want a place where their children can play all day with other children....welcome to most of what's out there for Preschool!

Parents often want their child to sit still and do worksheets that make them feel like they're paying for something....welcome to a (thankfully) very small minority of what's out there.

Parents often want their child to become independent, have confidence in doing an activity themselves, be able to focus on something they love for a long time, love learning (not love going to school and playing games necessarily...love the process of learning), develop creativity, develop without any sort of sense of negative competition, develop academically as best they can and love doing it, and be respected for the choices they make....welcome to Montessori! :-)

How does this relate to the silver polishing?  It's a perfect example of an activity for Montessori and I can relate it from a 5 year old's perspective perfectly.  When I was 5, there was a penny polishing activity.  Every day, I chose this penny polishing activity.  I remember that fact because I recall one morning walking into the classroom.  I was the first student there and I went right to the practical life shelf.  Sitting on the shelf where the penny polishing always sat was a completely different activity.  The penny polishing was gone.  I looked at other shelves...the penny polishing was gone. 

My teacher was in the coat room and I walked up to the door and asked where it was.  She said she put it away because she had no more pennies that needed shined (I guess I did them all.  haha) and said she would put it out tomorrow.  I said OK and walked away, but she knew I needed that activity.  Almost immediately, she said to wait a minute and told the assistant/intern she'll be right back.  She went around to other teachers and faculty members in the building and came back with pennies for me to shine.

I remember shining a penny that day.  I put the apron on.  I sat down.  I opened the lid and placed it carefully where I always do.  I took a q-tip, dipped it in, and began polishing the penny.  After I had scrubbed and covered the penny with the polish, I set the q-tip down and began wiping off the penny.  I remember seeing that shine.  I remember that *I* created that shine.  More importantly, I remember that ritual that came with the activity.

So much stuff is rushed in our lives.  At that time, about 3/4 of the rest of Cincinnati was rushing around, trying to get to work after they woke up late, getting their kids dressed and running around, taking their car in to get fixed while trying to plan the rest of their day, or listening to the traffic report, frustrated that they're stuck on interstate 71 when they have to be somewhere in 5 minutes.  On the other hand, there was at least one single solitary boy who was allowed to have time to himself to perform this otherwise unimportant ritual.

When I was finished, I am sure I put the polishing activity away.  I'm sure I likely went and did more "challenging" activities.  I'm 99% sure I did math at some point, since I'm still addicted to and fascinated by the math materials.  But providing me with that ritual was something that still stays with me after almost 30 years.

Finally, I think this article states it better than I ever could.  I posted this a few times here, but it's ideal for this discussion again:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4097/is_200310/ai_n9314410/

Sorry for the long winded reply.  :-)