top of page

Site Search

39 items found for ""

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Buckminster Fuller

    An Appreciation of Montessori Forward by Buckminster Fuller, from Education for Human Development, Mario Montessori All children are born geniuses. And 9,999 out of every 10,000 are swiftly, inadvertently, 'de-geniused' by grown-ups. This happens because humans are born naked, helpless, and -- though superbly equipped cerebrally -- utterly lacking in experience, therefore utterly ignorant. Their delicate sensing equipment is, as yet, untried. Born with built-in hunger, thirst, curiosity, the procreatvive urge, they can only learn what humanity has learned by trial and error -- by billions upon billions of errors. Yet humanity is also endowed with self-deceiving pride. All those witnessing the errors of others proclaim that they (the witnesses) could have prevented the errors had they only been consulted. "People should not make mistakes" they mistakenly say. Motivated entirely by love, but also by fear for the futures of the children they love, parents act as though they know all the answers and curtail the spontaneous exploratory acts of their children, lest the children make "mistakes'. But genius does its own thinking; it has confidence in its own exploratory findings, in its own intuitions, in the knowledge gained from its own mistakes. Nature has her own gestation rates for evolutionary development. The actions of parents represent the checks and balances of nature's gestation control. Humanity can evolve healthily only at a given rate. Maria Montessori was fortunately permitted to maintain, sustain, and cultivate her innate genius. Her genius invoked her awareness of the genius inherent in all children. Her intuition and initiative inspired her to discover ways of safeguarding this genius while allaying fears of parents. But the way was not always easy. Hers was the difficult frontiering task of genius.

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Closing Address India

    Closing Address - Maria Montessori, India First Course, 1940 Dear Friends and Unforgettable Pupils, ​ I beseech you, do not go around speaking of an educational method that has convinced you, nor of having studied the way to make culture for children easy, universal, and attractive. ​ Do not go around saying, 'We have learned the way to instruct the new Indian generation to bring them quickly to a loftier level of culture.' ​ Do not say these things - or if you do, point to them as a 'means' for attaining a more universal aim for it goes far beyond India, it involves the whole world. For the real aim is to really renew humanity while at the same time helping your beloved people, so sensitive to the new times. ​ Therefore speak to everyone of the child and of his secret; unveil the truth; reveal the powers of this 'spiritual embryo' of the human soul; proclaim him for what he is; the father of man, the builder of humanity, the creative and transforming energy which can act on the hearts of men and can offer new elements for the solution of social problems. ​ It is he, the child you must illustrate, for his image is still unknown to the heart of man: a mysterious and impenetrable darkness has hidden it. ​ How touching is the figure of the child full of love; how impressive the realization that just when he is in his first two or three years of life, he is fashioning the man adapted to his time! ​ Future peace depends on this task and remember well that peace brought about by the child does not consist of bringing to a mutual understanding adult men who are ever in rivalry, but of building a new society in which the individualities are protected during that original period in which they are constructing themselves. And this is the sort of peace that only the child can provide. What I told you of what can be done with an education based on the powers of the child is true, but it is necessary first that human consciousness be prepared to receive this truth. Now therefore go forth and begin your task, dear ones, and keep in mind that your task must be more that of apostles of a truth than of a method of education, of being fighters rather than teachers. Go forth humble and non-violent, with a luminous faith in your heart. Go forth and preach all over India so as to prepare the way for the Kingdom of the Child.

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Lectures

    Lectures How It All Happened - Maria Montessori, 1942 [PDF ] Two Questions Answered - Maria Montessori, 1924 [PDF ] Immediate Environment - Maria Montessori, 1925 [PDF ] Porter Lecture - Maria Montessori, 1946 [PDF ] Closing Address - Maria Montessori, Copenhagen Montessori Congress, 1937 [PDF ] Education & Peace - Maria Montessori, Date Unknown [PDF ] Closing Address - Maria Montessori, India First Course, 1940 [PDF ] NAZIONE UNICA - Maria Montessori, excerpts (Copenhagen 1937, San Remo 1949) [PDF ] The Psychology of Mathematics - Maria Montessori, Cambridge Education Society, 1935 [PDF ] The Child's Place in Society - Maria Montessori, 24th Conference of Educational Associations, 1936 [PDF ] The Second Plane of Education - Maria Montessori, London, 1939 [PDF ] One Can Never Hear It Too Often - Maria Montessori, London 1927 & India 1940 [PDF ] NEW An Everliving Message - Maria Montessori, India 1940 [PDF ] NEW General Considerations - Maria Montessori, 1934 [PDF ] NEW

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Porter Lecture

    Porter Lecture - Maria Montessori, 1946 The child begins to walk steadily and without help at about 1 year and 3 months. This is a great moment for the mother also. Life becomes more difficult for her. She is faced with a real problem because now the child can move about the house whereas before he had to stay wherever he was put. At this age the child is already able to use his hands, he can take and move objects. Once I knew a child of less than a year who liked to dust with a duster and take stoppers out of bottles. His mother resented this and prevented him from doing it because among the bottles she had also a bottle of lovely perfume and in putting the stopper in and out of the bottle, the child might have spilt the perfume. I have seen one-year old children putting things away when they had finished with them. These types of activities are the sort of work which usually go unnoticed, but these are the sort of work which a very small child is able to do and loves to do. It is not generally seen because usually a child has only opportunities to handle toys. We should remember that the child has used and exercised his hands before he began to use his feet. He used his hands many months before he could walk. So at this age when he can walk, the hands can be educated if only they are given the right opportunities. As it was the case previously, women used to take their children in their lap, letting them play with their hair. If a nurse was educated to the real psychic care of children, she would know that they need to use their hands in several ways if they are to develop well. She would take into consideration the physiological fact that even 4-5 months old children can use their hands. I am studying this question since long and I am continually being surprised. I understand more and more how advanced and able small children can be. My experiences are not discouraging, on the contrary, each day gives me greater hope and belief in what children can do. Once they have learned to walk, they have conquered the great step in physical independence of ambulation. They can eat and walk; they can walk quickly and steadily. They are very different from the children who a short time before needed help in taking their first unsteady steps. Theirs was not independence because they relied on others for help. At the time they were fighters, but now they are victors; now they are really independent. ​ What do we do for these children who have made this great conquest? Today we make a square box, a playpen, and put them inside. Usually we just put one child in alone; if there are others in the family they are older and therefore no longer put in the playpen. This is the reward of the independence that the child has conquered, this is the amount of freedom we allow him. We cannot tell what children want. We cannot study their psychology under these conditions. The playpen helps the mother or nurse, it frees them from having to watch the child. When he needs to have fresh air or is taken out for a walk, he is kept in a pram; again, we cannot see what happens under natural conditions to this child who has conquered independence. ​ A friend of mine had a little girl and she wanted her to grow in freedom. One day the child walked away from her room and the friend came to me in great anxiety to know what she should do in the future. I said, 'Leave the child alone and watch what she does. Do not abandon her but watch from a distance; you can go to her if she needs help.' Later she told me that the child used to take a footstool and carry it around. Although she had many toys (her mother was rich), what gave the child real happiness was carrying this heavy footstool about. This sort of activity seems general to all children of that age, for this phenomenon has been observed and proven everywhere, so much so that American books on psychology describe it as a 'phase'. This phase continues for more or less a year and a half. Children need to carry heavy things at this age. It is necessary for their development as if they were destined to become 'porters'. Perhaps the first work man did on this earth was to transport things from one place to another.

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Timeline of Life

    Timeline of Life A smaller, hand-drawn representation of the traditional chart. Scroll to view entire image. Click image to magnify. Full-size image is 36 inches by 8 inches. Right-click to download & save. Click to view & download as a PDF .

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Privacy

    Privacy Notice ​ This privacy notice discloses the privacy practices for (moteaco.org). This privacy notice applies solely to information collected by this website. It will notify you of the following: ​ ​ What personally identifiable information is collected from you through the website, how it is used and with whom it may be shared. What choices are available to you regarding the use of your data. The security procedures in place to protect the misuse of your information. How you can correct any inaccuracies in the information. ​ Information Collection, Use, and Sharing ​ We are the sole owners of the information collected on this site. We only have access to/collect information that you voluntarily give us via email or other direct contact from you. We will not sell or rent this information to anyone. ​ We will use your information to respond to you, regarding the reason you contacted us. We will not share your information with any third party outside of our organization, other than as necessary to fulfill your request. ​ Unless you ask us not to, we may contact you via email in the future to tell you about specials, new programs or services, or changes to this privacy policy. ​ Your Access to and Control Over Information ​ You may opt out of any future contacts from us at any time. You can do the following at any time by contacting us via the email address or phone number given on our website: ​​ See what data we have about you, if any. Change/correct any data we have about you. Have us delete any data we have about you. Express any concern you have about our use of your data. ​ Security ​ We take precautions to protect your information. When you submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected both online and offline. ​ Wherever we collect sensitive information (such as credit card data), that information is encrypted and transmitted to us in a secure way. You can verify this by looking for a lock icon in the address bar and looking for "https" at the beginning of the address of the web page. ​ While we use encryption to protect sensitive information transmitted online, we also protect your information offline. Only employees who need the information to perform a specific job (for example, billing or customer service) are granted access to personally identifiable information. The computers/servers in which we store personally identifiable information are kept in a secure environment. ​ If you feel that we are not abiding by this privacy policy, you should contact us immediately via email at info@moteaco.org .

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | One Can Never Hear It Too Often

    One Can Never Hear It Too Often - Maria Montessori, London 1927 & India 1940 In our casa we have 120 children who differ in age by three years, we distribute them in three classes, but instead of dividing them, as is usually done, according to age, putting all the children of one age in one class, we shall have three classes of mixed ages, and the 40 children in each class will each be doing his own individual work, solving its individual difficulties. This is what we consider social life. Another difference in our approach is that in our schools, if a child can do in one year what other children take two years to do, he has the possibility of doing so; on the other hand if there is a child who is slow in understanding, who is very young and who goes very slowly in his progress of acquiring instruction, he progresses at his own pace and does not retard the progress and mental growth and the growth of the other children in the class Thus the same class not only permits the children to be occupied at different tasks, but may also contain children who are on different mental levels. What I consider another advantage is that by working together the children find a practical solution to their difficulties. For instance, in the case of someone wanting some particular thing that is being used by another, he has to wait till it is free; moving about they meet each other. Whereas if they were on the contrary seated on benches as you are, this social meeting would not take place. Society is not formed, is it, by passive individuals who are performing actions. Another thing I find strange in society is its expression of “collective work” when a number of people are doing the same thing, in order to distinguish it from “individual work” where everyone is doing something different. I should like to say a few words in a positive sense about this concept. We consider that children of different ages should work together, and in practice we have determined that these children should be of three different ages – of one year’s difference between, for example: classes of three, four and five years or classes of six, seven and eight years, and that boys and girls should be together. Having three years of difference in one class enables the younger children to be helped through imitation or otherwise of the older children, and as it often happens that the older children give real lessons to the younger ones, it also gives an occasion to the older ones to learn to sympathize with the younger ones by realizing how one reacts when one has not yet reached the mental development of the older age. As we do not force the children to this reciprocal help it results in a form of social relationship. In returning to speak of the ordinary school, we ask ourselves what advantage is there in all the pupils doing the same thing at the same time; this may be called simultaneous work, but it could not be called collective work. We have collective work in the true sense of the word when we have the cooperation of many individuals. Collective work exists when there is a combination of labor. We have an example of this in the setting of the table in our children’s schools and homes, and the clearing away afterward

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | John Holt

    How Children Fail by John Holt Originally published in 1964 by Pitman Publishing Company, New York Revised edition first published in 1982 by Merloyd Lawrence, Delta/Seymour Lawrence, New York ||| Copyright © 1964, 1982 by John Holt ISBN 0-201-48402-1 Part V: To Summarize When we talk about intelligence, we do not mean the ability to get a good score on a certain kind of test, or even the ability to do well in school; these are at best only indicators of something larger, deeper, and far more important. By intelligence we mean a style of life, a way of behaving in various situations, and particularly in new, strange, and perplexing situations. The true test of intelligence is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. The intelligent person, young or old, meeting a new situation or problem, opens himself up to it; he tries to take in with his mind and senses everything he can about it; he thinks about it, instead about himself or what it might cause to happen to him; he grapples with it boldly, imaginatively, resourcefully, and if not confidently at least hopefully;if he fails to master it, he looks without shame or fear at his mistakes and learns from them. This is intelligence. Clearly its roots lie in a certain feeling about life, and one's self with respect to life. Just as clearly, unintelligence is not what most psychologists seem to suppose, the same thing as intelligence, only less of it. It is an entirely different style of behavior, arising out of an entirely different set of attitudes. Years of watching and comparing bright children and the not bright, or less bright, have shown that they are very different kinds of people. The bright child is curious about life and reality, eager to get in touch with it, embrace it, unite himself with it. There is no wall, no barrier between him and life. The dull child is far less curious, far less interested in what goes on and what is real, more inclined to live in a world of fantasy. The bright child likes to experiment, to try things out. He lives by the maxim that there is more than one way to skin a cat. If he can't do something one way he'll try another. The dull child is usually afraid to try at all. It takes a good deal of urging to get him to try even once; if that try fails, he is through. The bright child is patient. He can tolerate uncertainty and failure, and will keep trying until he gets an answer. When all his experiments fail, he can even admit to himself and others that for the time being he is not going to get an answer. This may annoy him, but he can wait. Very often, he does not want to be told how to do the problems or solve the puzzle he has struggled with, because he does not want to be cheated out of the chance to figure it out for himself in the future. Not so the dull child. He cannot stand uncertainty or failure. To him, an unanswered question is not a challenge or an opportunity but a threat. If he can't find the answer quickly, it must be given to him, and quickly; and he must have answers for everything. Such are the children of whom a second-grade teacher once said, "But my children like to have questions for which there is only one answer." They did; and by a mysterious coincidence, so did she. The bright child is willing to go ahead on the basis of incomplete understanding and information. He will take risks, sail uncharted seas, explore when the landscape is dim, the light poor. To give only one example, he will often read books he does not understand in the hope that after a while enough understanding will emerge to make it worthwhile to go on. In this spirit some of my fifth-graders tried to read Moby Dick. But the dull child will only go ahead when he thinks he knows exactly where stands and exactly what is ahead of him. I he does not feel he knows exactly what an experience will be like, and if it will not be exactly like other experiences he already knows, he wants no part of it. For while the bright child feels that the universe is, on the whole, a sensible, reasonable, and trustworthy place, the dull child feels that it is senseless, unpredictable, and treacherous. He feels that he can never tell what may happen, particularly in a new situation, except that it will probably be bad. Nobody starts off stupid. You have only to watch babies and infants, and think seriously about what all of them learn and do, to see that, except for the most grossly retarded, they show a style of life, and a desire and ability to learn, that in an older person we might well call genius. Hardly an adult in a thousand, or ten thousand, could in any three years of his life learn as much, grow as much in his understanding of the world around him, as every infant learns and grows in his first three years. But what happens, as we get older, to this extraordinary capacity for learning and intellectual growth? What happens is that it is destroyed, and more than by any other one thing, by the process that we misname education -- a process that goes on in most homes and schools. We adults destroy most of the intellectual and creative capacity of children by the things we do to them or make them do. We destroy this capacity above all by making them afraid, afraid of not doing what other people want, of not pleasing, of making mistakes, of failing, of being wrong. Thus we make them afraid to gamble, afraid to experiment, afraid to try the difficult and the unknown. Even when we do not create children's fears, when they come to us with fears ready-made and built-in, we use these fears as handles to manipulate them and get them to do what we want. Instead of trying to whittle down their fears, we build them up, often to monstrous size. For we like children who are a little afraid of us, docile, deferential children, though not, of course, if they are so obviously afraid that they threaten our image of ourselves as kind, lovable people whom there is no reason to fear. We find ideal the kind of 'good' children who are just enough afraid of us to do everything we want, without making us feel that fear of us is what is making them do it. We destroy the disinterested (I do not mean uninterested) love of learning in children, which is so strong when they are small, by encouraging them to work for petty and contemptible rewards -- gold stars, or papers marked 100 and tacked to the wall, or A's on report cards, or honor rolls, or dean's lists, or Phi Beta Kappa keys -- in short, for the ignoble satisfaction of feeling that they are better than someone else. We encourage them to feel that the end and aim of all they do in school is nothing more than to get a good mark on a test, or to impress someone with what they seem to know. We kill, not only their curiosity, but their feeling that it is a good and admirable thing to be curious, so that by the age of ten most of them will not ask questions, and will show a good deal of scorn for the few who do. In many ways we break down children's convictions that things make sense, or their hope that things may prove to make sense. We do it, first of all, by breaking up their life into arbitrary and disconnected hunks of subject matter, which we then try to 'integrate' by such artificial and irrelevant devices as having children sing Swiss folk songs while they are studying the geography of Switzerland, or do arithmetic problems about rail-splitting while they are studying the boyhood of Lincoln. Furthermore, we continually confront them with what is senseless, ambiguous, and contradictory; worse, we do it without knowing that we are doing it, so that, hearing nonsense shoved at them as if it were sense, they come to feel the source of their confusion lies not in the material but in their own stupidity. Still further, we cut children off from their own common sense and the world of reality by requiring them to play with and shove around words and symbols that have little or no meaning to them. Thus we turn the vast majority of our students into the kind of people for whom all symbols are meaningless; who cannot use symbols as a way of learning about and dealing with reality; who cannot understand written instructions; who, even if they read books, come out knowing no more than when they went in; who may have a few new words rattling around in their heads, but whose mental models of the world remain unchanged, and, indeed, impervious to change. The minority, the able and successful students, we are very likely to turn into something different but just as dangerous: the kind of people who can manipulate words and symbols fluently while keeping themselves largely divorced from the reality for which they stand; the kind of people who like to speak in large generalities but grow silent or indignant if someone asks for an example of what they are talking about; the kind of people who, in their discussion of world affairs, coin and use such words as megadeaths and megacorpses, with scarcely a thought to the blood and suffering these words imply. We encourage children to act stupidly, not only by scaring and confusing them, but by boring them, by filling up their days with dull, repetitive tasks that make little or no claim on their attention or demands on their intelligence. Our hearts leap for joy at the sight of a roomful of children all slogging away at some imposed task, and we are all the more pleased and satisfied if someone tells us that the children don't really like what they are doing. We tell ourselves that this drudgery, this endless busywork, is a good preparation for life, and we fear that without it children would be hard to "control". But why must this busywork be so dull? Why not give tasks that are interesting and demanding? Because, in schools where every task must be completed and every answer must be right, if we give children more demanding tasks they will be fearful and will instantly insist that we show them how to do the job. When you have acres of paper to fill up with pencil marks, you have no time to waste on the luxury of thinking. By such means children are firmly established in the habit of using only a small part of their thinking capacity. They feel that school is a place where they must spend most of their time doing dull tasks in a dull way. Before long they are deeply settled in a rut of unintelligent behavior from which most of them could not escape even if they wanted to. School tends to be a dishonest as well as a nervous place. We adults are not often honest with children, least of all in school. We tell them, not what we think, but what we feel they ought to think; or what other people feel or tell us they ought to think. Pressure groups find it easy to weed out of our classrooms, texts, and libraries whatever facts, truths, and ideas they happen to find unpleasant or inconvenient. And we are not even as truthful with children as we could safely be, as the parents, politicians, and pressure groups would let us be. Even in the most noncontroversial areas our teaching, the books, and the textbooks we give children present a dishonest and distorted picture of the world. The fact is that we do not feel an obligation to be truthful to children. We are like the managers and manipulators of news in Washington, Moscow, London, Peking, and Paris, and all the other capitals of the world. We think it our right and our duty, not to tell the truth, but to say whatever will best serve our cause -- in this case, the cause of making children grow up the kind of people we want them to be, thinking whatever we want them to think. We have only to convince ourselves (and we are very easily convinced) that a lie will be "better" for the children than the truth, and we will lie. We don't always need even that excuse; we often lie only for our own convenience. Worse yet, we are not honest about ourselves, our own fears, limitations, weaknesses, prejudices, motives. We present ourselves to children as if we were gods, all-knowing, all-powerful, always rational, always just, always right. This is worse than any lie we could tell about ourselves. I have more than once shocked teachers by telling them that when kids ask me a question to which I don't know the answer, I say, "I haven't the faintest idea"; or that when I make a mistake, as I often do, I say, "I goofed again"; or that when I am trying to do something I am no good at, like paint in watercolors or play a clarinet or bugle, I do it in front of them so they can see me struggling with it, and can realize that not all adults are good at everything. If a child asks me to do something that I don't want to do, I tell him that I won't do it because I don't want to do it, instead of giving him a list of "good" reasons sounding as if they had come down from the Supreme Court. Interestingly enough, this rather open way of dealing with children works quite well. If you tell a child that you won't do something because you don't want to, he is very likely to accept that as a fact he cannot change; if you ask him to stop doing something because it drives you crazy, there is a good chance that, without further talk, he will stop, because he knows what that is like. We are, above all, dishonest about our feelings, and it is this sense of dishonesty of feeling that makes the atmosphere of so many schools so unpleasant. The people who write books that teachers have to read say over and over again that a teacher must love all the children in a class, all of them equally. If by this they mean that a teacher must do the best he can for every child in a class, that he has an equal responsibility for every child's welfare, an equal concern for his problems, they are right. But when they talk of love they don't mean this; they mean feelings, affection, the kind of pleasure and joy that one person can get from the existence and company of another. And this is not something that can be measured out in little spoonfuls, everyone getting the same amount. In a discussion of this in a class of teachers, I once said that I liked some of the kids in my class much more than others and that, without saying which ones I liked best, I had told them so. After all, this is something that the children know, whatever we tell them; it is futile to lie about it. Naturally, these teachers were horrified. "What a terrible thing to say!" one said. "I love all the children in my class exactly the same." Nonsense; a teacher who says this is lying, to herself or to others, and probably doesn't like any of the children very much. Not that there is anything wrong with that; plenty of adults don't like children, and there is no reason why they should, which makes them feel guilty, which makes them feel resentful, which in turn makes them try to work off their guilt with indulgence and their resentment with subtle cruelties -- cruelties of a kind that can be seen in many classrooms. Above all, it makes them put on the phony, syrupy, sickening voice and manner, and the fake smiles and the forced, bright laughter that children see so much of in school, and rightly resent and hate. As we are not honest with them, so we won't let children be honest with us. To begin with, we require them to take part in the fiction that school is a wonderful place and that they love every minute of it. They learn early that not to like school or the teacher is verboten, not to be said, not even to be thought. I have known a child, otherwise healthy, happy, and wholly delightful, who at the age of five was being made sick with worry by the fact that she did not like her kindergarten teacher. Robert Heinemann worked for a number of years with remedial students whom ordinary schools were hopelessly unable to deal with. He found that what choked up and froze the minds of these children was above all else the fact that they could not express, they could hardly even acknowledge, the fear, shame, rage, and hatred that school and their teachers had aroused in them. In a situation in which they were and felt free to express these feelings to themselves and others, they were able once again to begin learning. Why can't we say to children what I used to say to fifth-graders who got sore at me, "The law says you have to go to school; it doesn't say you have to like it, and it doesn't say you have to like me either." This might make school more bearable for many children. Children hear all the time, "Nice people don't say such things." They learn early in life that for unknown reasons they must not talk about a large part of what they think and feel, are most interested in, and worried about. It is a rare child who, anywhere in his growing up, meets even one older person with whom he can talk openly about what most interests him, concerns him, worries him. This is what rich people are buying for their troubled kids when for $25 per hour they send them to psychiatrists. Here is someone to whom you can speak honestly about whatever is on your mind, without having to worry about his getting mad at you. But do we have to wait until a child is snowed under by his fears and troubles to give him this chance? And so we have to take the time of a highly trained professional to hear what, earlier in his life, that child might have told anybody who was willing to listen sympathetically and honestly? The workers in a project called Street corner Research, in Cambridge, Mass., have found that nothing more than the opportunity to talk openly and freely about themselves and their lives, to people who would listen without judging, and who were interested in them as human beings rather as problems to be solved or disposed of, has totally remade the lives and personalities of a number of confirmed and seemingly hopeless juvenile delinquents. Can't we learn something from this? Can't we clear a space for honesty and openness and self-awareness in the lives of growing children? Do we have to make them wait until they are in a jam before giving them a chance to say what they think? Behind much of what we do in school lie some ideas that could be expressed roughly as follows: (1) Of the vast body of human knowledge, there are certain bits and pieces that can be called essential, that everyone should know; (2) the extent to which a person can be considered educated, qualified to live intelligently in today's world and be a useful member of society, depends on the amount of this essential knowledge that he carries about with him; (3) it is the essential duty of schools, therefore, to get as much of this essential knowledge as possible into the minds of children. Thus we find ourselves trying to poke certain facts, recipes, and ideas down the gullets of every child in school, whether the morsel interests him or not, and even if there are other things that he is much more interested in learning. These ideas are absurd and harmful nonsense. We will not begin to have true educational or real learning in our schools until we sweep this nonsense out of the way. Schools should be a place where children learn what they most want to know, instead of what we think they ought to know. The child who wants to know something remembers it and uses it once he has it; the child who learns something to please or appease someone else forgets it when the need for pleasing or the danger of not appeasing is past. This is why children quickly forget all but a small part of what they learn in school. It is of no use or interest to them; they do not want, or expect, or even intend to remember it. The only difference between bad and good students in this respect is that the bad students forget right away, while the good students are careful to wait until after the exam. If for no other reason, we could well afford to throw out most of what we teach in school because the children throw out almost all of it anyway. The notion of a curriculum, an essential body of knowledge, would be absurd even if children remembered everything we "taught" them. We don't and can't agree on what knowledge is essential. The man who has trained himself in some special field of knowledge or competence thinks, naturally, that his specialty should be in the curriculum. The classical scholars want Greek and Latin taught; the historians shout for more history; the mathematicians urge more math and the scientists more science; the modern language experts want all children taught French, or Spanish, or Russian; and so on. Everyone wants to get his specialty into the act, knowing that as the demand for his special knowledge rises, so will the price that he can charge for it. Who wins this struggle and who loses depends not on the teal needs of our children or even of society, but on who is most skillful in public relations, who has the best educational lobbyists, who can best capitalize on events that have nothing to do with education, like the appearance of Sputnik in the night skies. The idea of the curriculum would not be valid even if we could agree on what ought to be in it. For knowledge itself changes. Much of what a child learns in school will be found, or thought, before many years, to be untrue. I studied physics at school from a fairly up-to-date text that proclaimed that the fundamental law of physics was the law of conservation of matter -- matter is not created or destroyed. I had to scratch that out before I left school. In economics at college I was taught many things that were not true of our economy then, and many more that are not true now. Not for many years after I left college did I learn that the Greeks, far from being a detached and judicious people surrounded by chaste white temples, were hot-tempered, noisy, quarrelsome, and liked to cover their temples with gold leaf and bright paint; or that most of the citizens of Imperial Rome, far from living in houses in which the rooms surrounded an atrium, or central court, lived in multistory tenements, one of which was perhaps the largest building in the ancient world. The child who really remembered everything he heard in school would live his life believing many things that were not so. Moreover, we cannot possibly judge what knowledge will be most needed forty, or twenty, or even ten years from now. At school, I studied Latin and French. Few of the teachers who claimed then that Latin was essential would make as strong a case for it now; and the French might better have been Spanish, or better yet, Russian. Today the schools are busy teaching Russian but perhaps they should be teaching Chinese, or Hindi, or who-knows-what? Besides physics, I studied chemistry, then perhaps the most popular of all science courses; but I would probably have done better to study biology, or ecology, if such a course had had been offered (it wasn't). We always find out, too late, that in the past we studied the wrong things; but this is bound to remain so. Since we can't know what knowledge will be most needed in the future, it is senseless to try to teach it in advance. Instead, we should try to turn out people who love learning so much and learn so well that they will be able to learn whatever needs to be learned. How can we say, in any case, that one piece of knowledge is more important than another, or indeed, what we really say, that some knowledge is essential and the rest, as far as school is concerned, worthless? A child who wants to learn something that the school can't and doesn't want to teach him will be told not to waste his time. But how can we say that what he wants to know is less important than what we want him to know? We must ask how much of the sum of human knowledge anyone can know at the end of his schooling. Perhaps a millionth. Are we then to believe that one of these millionths is so much more important than another? Or that our social and national problems will be solved if we can just figure out a way to turn children our of schools knowing two millionths of the total instead of one? Our problems don't arise from the fact that we lack experts enough to tell us what needs to be done, but out of the fact that we do not and will not do what we know needs to be done now. Learning is not everything, and certainly one piece of learning is as good as another. One of my brightest and boldest fifth-graders was deeply interested in snakes. He knew more about snakes than anyone I've ever known. The school did not offer herpetology; snakes were not in the curriculum; but as far as I was concerned, any time he spent learning about snakes was better spent than in ways I could think of to spend it; not least of all because, in the process of learning about snakes, he learned a great deal more about many other things than I was able to "teach" those unfortunates in my class who were not interested in anything at all. In another fifth-grade class, studying Romans in Britain, I saw a boy trying to read a science book behind the cover of his desk. He was spotted and made to put the book away and listen to the teacher; with a heavy sigh he did so. What was gained here? She traded a chance for an hour's real learning about science for, at best, an hour's temporary learning about history -- much more probably no learning at all, just an hour's worth of daydreaming and resentful thoughts about school. It is not subject matter that makes some learning more valuable than others, but the spirit in which the work is done. If a child is doing the kind of learning that most children do in school, when they learn at all -- swallowing words, to spit back at the teacher on demand -- he is wasting his time, or rather, we are wasting it for him. This learning will not be permanent, or relevant, or useful. But a child who is learning naturally, following his curiosity where it leads him, adding to his mental model of reality whatever he needs and can find a place for, and rejecting without fear or guilt what he does not need, is growing -- in knowledge, in the love of learning, and in the ability to learn. He is on his way to becoming the kind of person we need in our society, and that our "best" schools and colleges are not turning out, the kind of person who, in Whitney Griswold's words, seeks and finds meaning, truth, and enjoyment in everything he does. all his life he will go on learning. Every experience will make his mental model of reality more complete and more true to life, and thus make him more able to deal realistically, imaginatively, and constructively with whatever new experience life throws his way. We cannot have real learning in school if we think it is our duty and our right to tell children what they must learn. We cannot know, at any moment, what particular bit of knowledge or understanding a child needs most, will most strengthen and best fit his model of reality. Only he can do this. He may not do it very well, but he can do it a hundred times better than we can. the most we can do is try to help, by letting him know roughly what is available and where he can look for it. Choosing what he wants to learn and what he does not is something he must do for himself. There is one more reason, and the most important one, why we must reject the idea of school and classroom as places where, most of the time, children are doing what some adult tells them to do. The reason is that there is no way to coerce children without making them afraid, or more afraid. We must not try to fool ourselves into thinking that this is not so. The would-be progressives, who until recently had great influence over most American public school education, did not recognize this -- and still do not. They thought, or at least talked and wrote as if they thought, that there were good ways and bad ways to coerce children (the bad ones mean, harsh, cruel, the good ones gentle, persuasive, subtle, kindly), and that if they avoided the bad and stuck to the good they would do no harm. This was one of their greatest mistakes, and the main reason why the revolution they hoped to accomplish never took hold. The idea of painless, non-threatening coercion is an illusion. Fear is the inseparable companion of coercion, and its inescapable consequence. If you think it your duty to make children do what you want, whether they will or not, then it follows inexorably that you must make them afraid of what will happen to them if they don't do what you want. You can do this in the old-fashioned way , openly and avowedly, with the threat of harsh words, infringement of liberty, or physical punishment. Or you can do it in the modern way, subtly, smoothly, quietly, by withholding the acceptance and approval which you and others have trained the children to depend on; or by making them feel that some retribution awaits them in the future, too vague to imagine but too implacable to escape. You can, as many skilled teachers do, learn to tap with a word, a gesture, a look, even a smile, the great reservoir of fear, shame, and guilt that today's children carry around inside them. Or you can simply let your own fears about what will happen to you if the children don't do what you want, reach out and infect them. Thus the children will feel more and more that life is full of dangers from which only the goodwill of adults like you can protect them, and that this goodwill is perishable and must be earned anew each day. The alternative -- I can see no other -- is to have schools and classrooms in which each child in his own way can satisfy his curiosity, develop his abilities and talents, pursue his interests, and from the adults and older children around him get a glimpse of the great variety and richness of life. In short, the school should be a great smorgasbord of intellectual, artistic, and athletic activities, from which each child could take whatever he wanted, and as much as he wanted, or as little. When Anna was in the sixth grade, the year after she was in my class, I mentioned this idea to her. After describing very sketchily how such a school might be run, and what the children might do, I said, "Tell me, what do you think of it? Do you think it would work? Do you think the kids would learn anything?" She said, with utmost conviction, "Oh yes, it would be wonderful!" She was silent for a minute or two, perhaps remembering her own generally unhappy schooling. Then she said thoughtfully, "You know, kids really like to learn; we just don't like being pushed around." No, they don't ; and we should be grateful for that. So, let's stop pushing them around, and give them a chance.

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Home

    COLLECTIVE TEACHERS MONTESSORI Maria Tecla Artemisia Montessori Born: August 31, 1870, Chiaravalle, Marche, Italy Died: May 6, 1952 (aged 81), Noordwijk, South Holland, Netherlands Resting Place: Noordwijk, Netherlands Nationality: Italian Education: University of Rome La Sapienza Medical School ​ SOURCE: WIKIPEDIA/MARIA_MONTESSORI About Dr. Montessori Dr. Maria Montessori (1870 - 1952) created a system of learning known as the Montessori Method . She was one of several charismatic and ingenious pioneers of early childhood education who were active during the first half of the 20th century. ​ READ MORE ABOUT Montessori Teachers Collaborative Established: December 8, 1997 on AOL Hometown Montessori Teachers Collective Established: March 7, 1998 at moteaco.com ​ "A proudly non-commercial, distinctly unaffiliated, grass-roots organization with community on its collective mind and devoted to one intent: To Promote the Health & Good Humor of Montessorians Everywhere." About MOTEACO The Montessori Teachers Collective was created in 1997 by an American Montessori teacher from Massachusetts. ​ READ MORE

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Archive

    Moteaco & The Internet Archive Montessori Teachers Collective: December 6, 1998 Excerpts: About | Classroom Stories | Classroom Ideas Montessori Parents Forum: January 17, 1999 Montessori Schools Online Webring: October 22, 2000 Montessori Teachers Collective: October 29, 2000 Excerpts: Discussion Forum | Free? | Global School List Montessori Teachers Collective: The Homepage Project, September 2, 2000 Montessori Teachers Collective: Apps, Stacks, and Tech Stuff, December 10, 2000 Learn more about the Internet Archive.

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Terms

    Terms & Conditions ​ The Montessori Teachers Collective (MTC) website (moteaco.org) and social media accounts represent an online community of people who care about Montessori education. We encourage everyone to work together to support the method and its goals. In keeping with this spirit of cooperation, we ask that you follow a few guidelines when contributing to any of our sites: ​​​ Please do not use profanity in your messages. Please do not post personal attacks, or excessive and explicit criticism of fellow participants. Please avoid excessive negativity, and incitement and/or approval of violent or illegal activities. Please do not post unlawful or objectionable content, including unlawful, harassing, defamatory, abusive, threatening, harmful, graphic, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, racially offensive or otherwise objectionable material. Please avoid spamming or flooding comments. Please stay on topic when participating in discussions. We will remove content and messages which do not follow the above guidelines. MTC reserves the right to delete or take action against any account or content, at any time, for any reason. We reserve the right to modify the above guidelines as necessary. We welcome your use of this website and its associated social media accounts contingent upon your agreement to abide by these Terms & Conditions. If you do not agree, please do not use this website and its associated social media accounts. These Terms & Conditions may be revised periodically, and we advise you to check here from time to time for any changes. Your continued use of this website and its associated social media accounts shall be deemed your consent to such changes. Intellectual Property - Use of Website Content ​​ Except where otherwise attributed, the design of this website and its associated social media accounts and all materials published on them by MTC, including text, names, trademarks, service marks, logos, graphics, photographs, video, or other visuals or content are the property of MTC and are protected by copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. MTC authorizes you to view and download the content portion of this website only for your personal, non-commercial use and only if you keep on any copies all copyright and other proprietary notices contained on the original materials. You agree you will not otherwise reproduce, retransmit or distribute, in any manner or to any extent whatsoever, any part of this website, its design or content published by MTC, without the prior written permission of MTC. Permission will only be granted if you agree to give credit to the author and to MTC. Note: Resources available on MTC website and social media accounts are available for use and reproduction without prior contact as long as credit is appropriately given as stated above. If you would like permission to reproduce any other MTC materials on this website, please contact us at info@moteaco.org . Please specify the URL and article or feature you would like permission to reproduce. Reproduced text may not be modified or altered in any way without our express written consent. The content permitted to be copied as specified above does not include the layout or design of this website. Those elements of this site are protected by trade dress and other laws and may not be imitated or reproduced in whole or in part. Also, no logos, graphics, sounds or images on this website may be reproduced or distributed without express written consent from MTC. Postings or Uploads to Social Media Pages, Groups, Feeds, Forums or Blogs ​ By posting content, including but not limited to text and photographs, to any Social Media Pages, Groups, Feeds, Forums or Blogs, you warrant and represent that you either own or otherwise control all of the rights to that content, including, without limitation, all the rights necessary for you to post or upload the content, or that your use of the content is a protected fair use under copyright law. You agree you will not knowingly provide content with intent to defraud or submit misleading or false information. You represent and warrant also the content you supply does not violate these Terms and you will indemnify and hold MTC harmless for any and all claims resulting from content you supply. By uploading or posting to Social Media Pages, Groups, Feeds, Forums or Blogs, you are granting MTC a non-exclusive, royalty-free, assignable, perpetual, irrevocable, and worldwide license to reproduce, use and distribute your content. MTC will make an effort to credit your authorship. You understand and agree all content posted to Social Media Pages, Groups, Feeds, Forums or Blogs is the sole responsibility of the individual who originally posted the content. MTC does not necessarily approve of and is not responsible for and disclaims any and all liability that may arise from content posted by you or other individuals or groups on the Social Media Pages, Groups, Feeds, Forums or Blogs. If you believe any content posted by others is infringing or otherwise objectionable, please notify us at info@moteaco.org . ​​ You agree that MTC has the right in its sole discretion to edit, alter, or remove any content submitted by you or others to this website or associated social media accounts. User Conduct MTC’s social media accounts are intended to encourage interaction and discussion around helping animals. Please do not post personal attacks or excessive and explicit criticism against any individuals or other animal welfare organizations. You may not create and use multiple login ID's for the purpose of disrupting the community or annoying other users. In addition, you are prohibited from uploading, posting, emailing or otherwise transmitting any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, harassing, pornographic, or profane material or any material that could constitute or encourage conduct that would be considered a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any law. You further agree not to upload, post, email or otherwise transmit any confidential information, trade secrets, "junk mail," "spam," "chain letters, “pyramid schemes," any other form of solicitation, or software viruses. MTC reserves the right to remove at its sole discretion any upload or posting that violates these Terms of Use. We reserve the right to take all available and appropriate legal action to protect this website, its contents, and social media accounts associated with the organization from such misuse and abuse. DISCLAIMERS YOUR ACCESS TO AND USE OF THIS WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH MTC ARE AT YOUR SOLE RISK. YOU ARE ENTIRELY LIABLE FOR YOUR ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THIS SITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORGANIZATION. MTC DOES NOT WARRANT (A) THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, TIMELINESS OR OTHER CHARACTERISTICS OF ANY CONTENT AVAILABLE ON OR THROUGH THIS WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORGANIZATION; (B) THAT THIS WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORGANIZATION WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ACCESS ALL THE TIME OR AT ANY TIME ON A CONTINUOUS, UNINTERRUPTED BASIS; (C) THAT ANY DEFECTS IN THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT CAN OR WILL BE CORRECTED; OR (D) THAT THIS WEBSITE OR ITS SERVER ARE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL CODE OR MATERIALS. THIS WEBSITE, ITS CONTENTS, AND SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORGANIZATION ARE PROVIDED "AS IS." MTC MAKES NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. YOU MUST EVALUATE AND BEAR ALL RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF ANY CONTENT, INCLUDING ANY RELIANCE ON THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS OF THE CONTENT. MTC IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO YOUR COMPUTER, HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, PROPERTY OR PERSON, OR ANY OTHER INCONVENIENCE OR LOSS, RESULTING IN ANY WAY FROM YOUR USE OF THIS WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORGANIZATION. Where applicable law does not allow the exclusion of implied warranties, some of the foregoing exclusions may not apply to you. This Disclaimer applies to all content and services available through this site. DISCLAIMER AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL MTC BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, THAT RESULT FROM THE USE OF OR THE INABILITY TO USE THIS WEBSITE OR ASSOCIATED SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS OR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THIS WEBSITE OR ASSOCIATED SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS, EVEN IF MTC HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. YOU AGREE NEVER TO BRING A CLAIM AGAINST AND RELEASE MTC AND ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, AGENTS, FOUNDERS AND ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS FROM ALL LIABILITY ARISING FROM ACCESS, UPLOADS, POSTINGS, EMAILS, DOWNLOADS OR OTHER USE OF THE WEBSITE (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO GROUP PAGES, MEMBER PROFILES, FORUMS AND BLOGS) AND LINKED SITES. YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THIS AGREEMENT DISCHARGES MTC AND ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, AGENTS, FOUNDERS AND ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS FROM ANY LIABILITY TO YOU WITH RESPECT TO BODILY INJURY, PERSONAL INJURY, INJURY TO REPUTATION, DEFAMATION, ILLNESS, DEATH, PROPERTY DAMAGE OR OTHER LOSS THAT MAY RESULT AS A RESULT OF ACCESS, UPLOADS, POSTINGS, EMAILS, DOWNLOADS OR OTHER ACTIVITIES OR USE RELATED TO THE WEBSITE, ITS GROUP PAGES, MEMBER PROFILES, FORUMS AND BLOGS AND THEIR CONTENT AND LINKED SITES. Indemnification You agree to defend, indemnify, and hold MTC and its employees, agents, officers, directors, agents, founders, successors and assigns harmless from and against all liabilities, damages, claims, actions, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) in connection with or arising from your access, uploads, postings, emails, downloads or other use or misuse of this website, the Group Pages, Member profiles, forums and blog, and linked websites. MTC may participate in the defense of any claim or action and any negotiations for settlement at your expense. MTC reserves the right, upon notice to you, to assume exclusive defense and control of any claim or action against it that is subject to indemnification by you, without relieving you of your indemnification obligations. ​​ Interpretation If any provision of these Terms & Conditions is held invalid or unenforceable, that provision will be enforced to the maximum extent permissible, and all other provisions shall remain enforceable and in full effect. No failure or delay in enforcing any condition of the Terms of Use or Privacy Policy term shall be a waiver of that or any other term or condition. Links to Third Party Sites This website may contain hyperlinks to websites operated by persons or entities other than MTC. If you decide to access or use any such third party websites, you do this entirely at your own risk. The linked sites are not under the control of MTC and we are not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. We provide these links to you only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by MTC of the site. Choice of Law and Forum These Terms & Conditions shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the United States of America and the State of Texas, excluding choice of law provisions. You expressly agree the exclusive jurisdiction for any claim or action arising out of or relating to these Terms & Conditions or your use of this site shall be in the state or federal courts located in the State of Texas, and you further agree and submit to the exercise of personal jurisdiction of those courts for the purpose of litigating any such claim or action. MTC controls this website from its offices in the United States of America. MTC makes no representation that information and materials on this website ("Materials") are appropriate or available for use in other locations, and access to them from territories where their content is illegal is prohibited. Those who choose to access this site from other locations do so on their own initiative and are responsible for compliance with applicable local laws. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by MTC.

  • Montessori Teachers Collective | Education and Peace

    Education & Peace - Maria Montessori, Date Unknown The question of peace cannot be considered only in its negative side as is generally done in politics: that is as a problem of 'avoiding war' and consequently of solving the conflicts between nations without violence. ​ Peace also has a positive side which consists in a constructive social reform. It is often repeated that 'to have a new society a new man must be formed', but that is an abstract sentence. It is true that man himself can be improved and that society could be founded on principles of justice and love, but this represents a remote aspiration. ​ There is however a positive and immediate question to be considered with regard to peace: the society of man has stayed behind as to the form of organization needed at its present state. What must be considered therefore is the 'need of the present moment' not the organization of a better 'future'. ​ Today society lacks an adequate training of man for the present state of civil life, and a 'moral organization' of the masses. There is an absolute disorganization of humanity. Men are educated to consider themselves as isolated individuals who have to satisfy their own immediate interests in competition with other individuals. Instead there should be a powerful organization to understand and organize social events, to propose and pursue collective aims, thus ordaining the progress of civilization. ​ Today there is only an 'organization of things', but not of man. The environment is the only thing organized. Technical progress has set in motion a formidable mechanism that now moves of its own accord and drags the individuals after itself, as a magnet draws a cloud of iron dust, and they are crushed in its gearing. This can be said of everybody, manual and intellectual workers as well. They are all isolated in their interests; they are only looking for the profession that secures their material life; they are all drawn and absorbed by the material machines or the bureaucratic mechanisms. But it is evident that mechanism cannot draw man toward progress, because progress must depend on the man himself. There should be a moment when mankind should take command of its products and assume the directive. This moment has arrived. Either the masses organize themselves and master the mechanical world or the mechanical world will destroy mankind. ​ If it is recognized that it is this formidable progress and this universal participation of mankind to the realized progress that needs the organization of mankind to uphold itself, it will then also be understood that a new factor must be taken into consideration. Not only, but that this factor has already set to work and therefore urges the whole ofmankind to interfere and to fill up the gap that endangers the existence of civilization. Mankind must be organized, because the 'weak spot' through which enters the enemy - that is war - is not the material frontier of nations, but the lack of preparation of man and the isolation of the individual. It is necessary to develop the spiritual life of man and then to organize mankind for Peace. Peace has its positive side in reconstruction of human society on scientifically determined bases. The peaceful social harmony should have a unique foundation, this cannot be but man himself.

bottom of page