curriculumdesign-blog

[curriculumdesign-blog]

Educational Change: A 12 year reflection

Montessori Education: Benefits, Blending and Balance - A 12-year reflection

The Beginning: 2009 - 2016

I began my training and career as an educator in 2009 shortly after the economic downturn in 2008. I graduated that year with a Master of Science degree in tourism studies focusing on sustainable development for cottage industries. My passion for supporting and finding solutions for those who were marginalized played itself out in finding ways through feasibility studies and hands on activities which would get those most affected involved to take hold of their agency.  The downward shift in the economy caused me to pivot towards education because it was a sound profession where I could always find employment. I preferred higher education and began to pursue studies for professorship at my local university. The recession had also affected human resources in that institution and there was a hiring freeze. I thought for sure I would never teach in an institution other than at the collegiate level. Here I am 12 years later, teaching and learning as an elementary educator with all the joy that one can experience from leaning in, listening and learning from those who are truly enlightened and untainted, 6- to 12-year-olds.  I became a Montessori elementary school guide.

In the Montessori environment we are not referred to as teachers but guides. In essence, we do as guides in any setting would do, we present, follow and guide. The Montessori environment is not unlike working in sustainable development for cottage industries.  They are small and in need of development and guidance towards growth and independence so that they may be successful in the wider society in which the must function.  My choice of Montessori education as opposed to a traditional setting had to do with my experience as a parent who worked with my child and his friends during their elementary years. There was a difference in how each child learned and the idea that they all had one content of knowledge with one way of expressing understanding was disheartening.  I quickly realized that my own child was able to move with ease while others struggled greatly. I realized, also, that there were several factors to teaching and learning and now understand that social emotional learning made all the difference. How then can each child’s needs be met and they are all expected to function at the same level? As I sought out educational approaches, I came across the Montessori method which emphasized “following the child”.  

Following the child according to Dr. Maria Montessori, founder of the method in the early 1800s, it means we follow the child to get too know how they learn – what their interests are and their general social, emotional and educational patterns are. This is done through observation of the child within their environment. The second of 3 main aspects of being a guide is preparing the environment as preparation, organization in an orderly environment allows the child to explore their interests. The third is presenting the world to the child by way of lessons without opinions or judgement and economical language. The environment is beautiful, and everything is presented at the child’s level of vision and understanding of an authentic world void of fantasy and mythical creatures – talking animals and the like, particularly in the early years of the child’s development.

Children are guided to work with manipulatives which are sensory and concrete to develop their understanding of the world. As the child passes through planes of development, their needs change and they are presented with more abstract concepts. Classrooms are multi-aged, based on these planes of development which provides the opportunity for children to model behaviors of leadership while allowing the child to work with complex concepts or revert to practicing foundational concepts through academic planes without restriction.

 Initial Beliefs: 2016 - 2019

My own beliefs about this type of education were that this needed to be accessible to everyone. This way of learning, the constructivist, child centered pedagogy, which sought to identify the needs of the child and attend to those needs, brought about a more peaceful accomplished individual. There was a connectivity to self and the world they belonged to as well as who they were in the world at an early age. A sense of purpose begins to take shape as children learn about themselves in an environment which seeks to provide, by the nature of the curriculum designed over 100 years ago, a multi-cultural approach to teaching and learning.  Dr. Montessori designed the curriculum for the underserved and marginalized population of Italy, orphaned children with learning disabilities. Who would have imagined that today this is a curriculum that is accessible to mainly the elite in private settings?

With a desire to ensure that every child have access to a Montessori education, I embarked on finding schools that had this offering in more diverse settings. My mindset was to “save the child” from route learning and introduce a new way of thinking, doing and being. My mindset was wrong. There was no saving the child as there was no one way of learning and being. My attitude was one of certainty with the absolutist mindset, that of “This IS the way the child SHOULD learn!”. Sleeter, Action in Teacher Education, (2009) shared of Shoomer (1990), of the certainty, source and structure of an educator’s beliefs – these all change over time as you move from the novice to the accomplished stage of your professional career.

I left the Montessori environment to join a group of educators in a somewhat blended environment. Their mission was to use the Montessori method to augment their curriculum as they found aspects of the curriculum to be beneficial to the socio-emotional development of the child. In theory, this model can work and takes time, talent and skill to develop a deep understanding and appreciation of what Dr. Montessori’s vision was for child development. It was not developed to prepare a child to take a test but to take the time to gain knowledge on their terms with guidance. The challenge of balance and who the authority was for the implementation and efficacy of the method lay in the hands of the leader. If the leader’s vision for the school was misaligned, then the mission would also be misaligned for those who where not in alignment with that vision or mission. I was not aligned. My ideals were challenged, and I moved on to something new.

For 3 years following, I spent time in quasi-traditional schools of choice. This deepened my understanding of traditional pedagogy and responsive teaching and learning environments. It was teacher centered, autocratic and regimented. There were many skills gained during that time and curricula and standards for learning that provided benchmarks for teaching and learning. There was exposure to and comparison of teaching styles and how technology could enhance delivery of instruction. There was new language and understanding of educational systems which I learned on the job. There was also a limit on the time students needed to process information and an unrealistic expectation for “mastery” of a topic even when the curriculum in a box required time.  There was switching curriculum every few weeks of pre-tests like throwing putty at a wall to see which one would stick. There was confusion and a lack of direction at times as teachers had to take the lead and decide how best to serve the students. There was limited time for expression or agency for students and there was burnout for teachers. Sleeter (2009) “Developing curriculum that is intellectually rich and relevant to diverse students, in contexts already furnished with a fairly prescribed curriculum, requires teachers to judge what is most worth teaching and learning and to identify of space.”. We are a group were forced to question the direction we were being directed and dissect every aspect of the myriad curricula presented and establish one based on what would be best for our student’s needs.

The Shift: Balance - 2019 - Present

           There is a moment of discomfort when change is about to occur. This discomfort is destabilizing as you release hard held beliefs of what you believed was true and what is the truth. Having been in several environments and served hundreds of children and families, I questioned whether any of this effort was worth it. Reldan Nalder, psychologist, addresses this in the Therapeutic Process of Change, that there is a moment of disequilibrium which occurs as a result of an awareness that ���the previous way of processing information no longer applies to the new experience. It is a state of internal conflict that provides motivation for an individual to make personal changes.”(1993).

           The constant shifting of goals and vison and mission led me to believe that there would never be an opportunity to enhance curriculum let alone effect any change. Who then directs the curriculum as teachers pursue their professional endeavors? When the questions are possessed by developing teachers in Sleeters study, “Who produced this document? How is it intended to be used? By whom? What is its purpose? And Whose knowledge does it ignore, undermine or ignore? I think of my current teaching environment. Have I become an accomplished educator who questions the validity and structure of curriculums in all forms? Whether Montessori’s or any other, the question surfaces, these questions arise from a diagnostic standpoint.

           Having returned to the Montessori environment and had the unique opportunity to explore both the traditional and the non-traditional spaces, the idea of balance comes to mind as a theme going forward.  While the Montessori approach has a sound educational approach which looks at the development of the whole child, how much authority do guides have to alter the curriculum to make it their own? Sleeter’s case study of “Ann”, a second-year teacher found that she experienced shifts in her epistemological beliefs over time. Inclusion and exposure to the world through a multicultural curriculum is the foundation of the Montessori approach yet the curriculum’s cultural studies lessons are limited to the history of Egypt’s contribution to modern civilization. There are few if any other specific mention of other African nations, however, the benefit of this curriculum is that you can make it your own and guide the child towards the same by presenting the world through ideas and discussion and clear objectives.  A balanced approach which includes rigor, accountability, freedom, agency while acknowledging the social and emotional needs of the child, acceptance of learning differences and destigmatizing neurodiversity by ridding our language of labels such as “special education”, can create a more balanced environment of guiding and learning.