Hello there everyone out there in MDC Land.
I am a new member and have been browsing the Comparison threads and notice that while there is a lot of discussion about how Waldorf works vs. what Montessori works, for example, there is very little discussion about pedagogy in general and which techniques work best for most children (if there are any that are "best"). I find this topic really interesting so I though I would start a discussion. I would love to hear people's views on the following:
1) Individual learning vs. learning as a group (otherwise known as child-centred vs. teacher-centred) - which one is better at the preschool/kindergarten stage? I am rather partial to Montessori and have always considered child-centred approach to be the better approach but I do have friends who say that Montessori did not work for their child because in the mixed-age class, the child always wanted to do what the older children were doing even though he/she was not ready for it (example, a 3-year old who sees the older kids writing in notebooks and then wants to write in a notebook rather than just trace the sandpaper letters). When the child was then put into a classic teacher-centred kindergarten where all the children learned as a group, the child was much happier because noone was doing something else, so there was no "I want to do what he's doing". Anyone have any experience with this?
There is also the Waldorf argument that children should have routine and rhythm and the child-centred approach lacks this because the child just does what he or she wants within the prepared environment. I am less convinced by this, as I think that even within the prepared environment, there is a certain rhythm to the day.
2) reality vs. fantasy There are a couple of other threads discussing this as well. It seems that Montessori and Waldorf are diametrically opposed on this point. Montessori emphasised that a child wants and needs to learn as much about the real world as possible and that fantasy should be introduced later when a child is able to understand the difference and thereby appreciate fantasy for what it is. The Waldorf approach relishes in telling children fairy tales and immersing them in fantasy because (and here I am really summarising so please correct me if I have not explained properly) the child has his or her whole life to learn about the cold hard facts of the real world so why not let children be children. So far, with my 19-month old, I much prefer the reality approach and so, it seems, does she. She loves to look at a picture of broccoli in a book and then run to the fridge and point to the broccoli inside. She thinks that this is the coolest thing. She has a much more limited interest in Winnie the Pooh, Maisy or fantastic stories that she does not understand because she has not yet experienced that in her daily life.
3) Pre-reading and reading skills - I grew up in the public school system in Canada and learned pre-reading and reading skills when I was 6 - nothing before as far as I can remember. I don't think this hindered my ability to read and I was always in the top reading group in my class (but then the whole class learnt to read at the same age) but I do think that my reading comprehension skills would have been better had I learned at least some pre-reading skills earlier. I was certainly quite eager to learn to read before but no one would teach me.
In France, children who demonstrate that they are clearly ready learn pre-reading skills (the letters and their sounds) in Kindergarten, which I think makes sense. I also read an article in the French newspaper the other day interviewing a specialist who said that children who read the best and have the best comprehension are those who are taught using the phonics method (synthetic or analytic is fine) earlier rather than later - the reason being that children will have an easier time identifying the sound with the letter earlier rather than later in their childhood.
4) Synthetic phonics, analytic phonics or whole word - which is best for learning to read? Montessori uses synthetic phonics with seemingly huge success. Which method does Waldorf use? I don't even know and would be interested in learning.
Please note that this thread is not for slamming one type of school for the philosophy underlying its approach, whether that philosophy is religious, secular humanist or whatever. It is to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of various pedagogical techniques that are used in each type of school and that's it.
As you can see, I am clearly closer to the Montessori approach but would love to hear from others with the same or differing views on any of the topics discussed above!
Caroline
I am a new member and have been browsing the Comparison threads and notice that while there is a lot of discussion about how Waldorf works vs. what Montessori works, for example, there is very little discussion about pedagogy in general and which techniques work best for most children (if there are any that are "best"). I find this topic really interesting so I though I would start a discussion. I would love to hear people's views on the following:
1) Individual learning vs. learning as a group (otherwise known as child-centred vs. teacher-centred) - which one is better at the preschool/kindergarten stage? I am rather partial to Montessori and have always considered child-centred approach to be the better approach but I do have friends who say that Montessori did not work for their child because in the mixed-age class, the child always wanted to do what the older children were doing even though he/she was not ready for it (example, a 3-year old who sees the older kids writing in notebooks and then wants to write in a notebook rather than just trace the sandpaper letters). When the child was then put into a classic teacher-centred kindergarten where all the children learned as a group, the child was much happier because noone was doing something else, so there was no "I want to do what he's doing". Anyone have any experience with this?
There is also the Waldorf argument that children should have routine and rhythm and the child-centred approach lacks this because the child just does what he or she wants within the prepared environment. I am less convinced by this, as I think that even within the prepared environment, there is a certain rhythm to the day.
2) reality vs. fantasy There are a couple of other threads discussing this as well. It seems that Montessori and Waldorf are diametrically opposed on this point. Montessori emphasised that a child wants and needs to learn as much about the real world as possible and that fantasy should be introduced later when a child is able to understand the difference and thereby appreciate fantasy for what it is. The Waldorf approach relishes in telling children fairy tales and immersing them in fantasy because (and here I am really summarising so please correct me if I have not explained properly) the child has his or her whole life to learn about the cold hard facts of the real world so why not let children be children. So far, with my 19-month old, I much prefer the reality approach and so, it seems, does she. She loves to look at a picture of broccoli in a book and then run to the fridge and point to the broccoli inside. She thinks that this is the coolest thing. She has a much more limited interest in Winnie the Pooh, Maisy or fantastic stories that she does not understand because she has not yet experienced that in her daily life.
3) Pre-reading and reading skills - I grew up in the public school system in Canada and learned pre-reading and reading skills when I was 6 - nothing before as far as I can remember. I don't think this hindered my ability to read and I was always in the top reading group in my class (but then the whole class learnt to read at the same age) but I do think that my reading comprehension skills would have been better had I learned at least some pre-reading skills earlier. I was certainly quite eager to learn to read before but no one would teach me.
In France, children who demonstrate that they are clearly ready learn pre-reading skills (the letters and their sounds) in Kindergarten, which I think makes sense. I also read an article in the French newspaper the other day interviewing a specialist who said that children who read the best and have the best comprehension are those who are taught using the phonics method (synthetic or analytic is fine) earlier rather than later - the reason being that children will have an easier time identifying the sound with the letter earlier rather than later in their childhood.4) Synthetic phonics, analytic phonics or whole word - which is best for learning to read? Montessori uses synthetic phonics with seemingly huge success. Which method does Waldorf use? I don't even know and would be interested in learning.
Please note that this thread is not for slamming one type of school for the philosophy underlying its approach, whether that philosophy is religious, secular humanist or whatever. It is to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of various pedagogical techniques that are used in each type of school and that's it.
As you can see, I am clearly closer to the Montessori approach but would love to hear from others with the same or differing views on any of the topics discussed above!
Caroline
long trying to say this, but I think in preschool and kindergarten if too much focus, importance, and time is devoted to early reading mechanics, there is too often a price to pay later in these other domains.
Playing "I Spy" with the first or last phoneme ("I Spy something that starts with the sound /b/") or playing rhyming games...or clapping out the syllables...using movable letters to write things down...etc.
Follow Mothering