The article doesn't really address why Montessori programs performed better at lower costs: these classrooms emphasize self-directed, hands-on learning where children choose activities based on their interests, driving independence and curiosity. Traditional classrooms follow a rigid teacher-led curriculum with structured lessons and uniform pacing for all students.
Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
131–140 of 247 posts
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#132I want to offer a different data point. I took my daughter to a Montessori-adjacent school for 3 years. It's not Montessori exactly and they didn't advertise as such but they had a different European name attached to it that is downstream from Montessori. They had multi-age education, stressed in children directed learning and individual growth, they didn't have exams, etc.
I changed my daughter this year and overall I'm disappointed in that school. There were many issues but the most important ones to me where:
- No exams, only individual growth meant there's no guarantee the kid is learning at a good pace. When I worked with her at home I could easily identify many gaps and deficiencies. She's now struggling a bit in her new school because of this but I think it will resolve soon.
- Because they didn't like comparing kids to standards or among each other the feedback I received was useless. It was always "she's doing excellent, we see strong growth" but it wasn't true.
- The school rejected most parent feedback and issues raised with something "maybe this style of education is not for you". For example, I know of a few other kids that had to leave because the school didn't take action against bullying because they didn't believe in punishments, etc.
I have to say there were good things too, in particular my daughter really enjoyed it there and formed strong bonds with other kids. I think in general it was ok for elementary education but I strongly think it's not after that and I now have a perhaps unjust bias against Montessori and derivatives.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#133I want to offer a different data point. I took my daughter to a Montessori-adjacent school for 3 years. It's not Montessori exactly and they didn't advertise as such but they had a different European name attached to it that is downstream from Montessori. They had multi-age education, stressed in children directed learning and individual growth, they didn't have exams, etc. I changed my daughter this year and overall…
I wonder sometimes if that kind of school is only good for the high-strung go-getter child prodigy types because they are so hands off. But the very lack of metrics and standardization that purports to help with that kind of mission unfortunately certainly makes the shopping a lot harder for prospective parents. Similar with other private schools later on. Is it a good academically strong place where kids get pushed and excel later? Or is it a party den where rich kids joke around and snort coke all day? Hard to tell. It also depends on the student and parent body itself. Good luck :-)
Another thing that kind of tempers my opinion of this kind of school is anecdotal, some friends were lamenting that in their otherwise excellent public elementary school in an affluent district, some parents are pulling their kids out of _first grade_ and moving to private school because "there is not enough homework." What a sad image.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like anything, there are lower and higher quality implementations of Montessori programs. What you are saying here does not reflect the Montessori program I went through myself, and I think I can credit the Montessori program with a great deal of my later stage curiosity and drive to outperform. I would say the same of the public high school that I attended. The attitude of the teachers and the other students was fan…
We visited multiple Montessori schools for both my kids and I can confidently say that I met some of the saddest and coldest teachers I have ever seen in my life. I am not sure that is really best environment for small kids. I myself went to shitty public schools and became an exceptional student later on. I am doubtful about the impact of early education on future success.
That is definitely not my experience. The teachers at my kids’ school are vivacious and friendly. They very clearly love their jobs, and love watching kids grow.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#135I want to offer a different data point. I took my daughter to a Montessori-adjacent school for 3 years. It's not Montessori exactly and they didn't advertise as such but they had a different European name attached to it that is downstream from Montessori. They had multi-age education, stressed in children directed learning and individual growth, they didn't have exams, etc. I changed my daughter this year and overall…
There is definitely a survivor bias. It probably works well for those kids who make it through. The kids who it isn’t working for, leave and there are so many of them.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like anything, there are lower and higher quality implementations of Montessori programs. What you are saying here does not reflect the Montessori program I went through myself, and I think I can credit the Montessori program with a great deal of my later stage curiosity and drive to outperform. I would say the same of the public high school that I attended. The attitude of the teachers and the other students was fan…
We visited multiple Montessori schools for both my kids and I can confidently say that I met some of the saddest and coldest teachers I have ever seen in my life. I am not sure that is really best environment for small kids. I myself went to shitty public schools and became an exceptional student later on. I am doubtful about the impact of early education on future success.
I never went to Montessori, but did cub scouts at one and those were some odd kids and parents. I felt like I was on an alien planet. Not bad people or anything, just certainly different. Like they took a class on how to act human, but lost something in translation.
I do recall there being a lot of toys and stuff. There was an old Texas Instruments computer that caught my interest as we had computers with Windows 95 at my school. Apparently nobody was allowed to touch it though.
My guess is the best school for your kids is one where they're safe and one with curious and motivated kids and enthusiastic teachers that can help inspire and unlock talent. The method is secondary, but kids should be both challenged and given some amount of freedom to explore. It also helps if the parents care and ensure their kids are functioning members of society.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are missing the context of what I said: I didn't say: all countries with large class sizes are self-centered. I said: in a self-centered society, smaller class sizes would be a big help to undo the harm that currently exists. Don't underestimate the influence schools and school communities have on the formation of character. It is huge.
that sounds more reasonable, even though i don't see why that would work, but i too did not read that in you previous message. how would small class sizes help make children less self centered? more attention from the teacher? why would that help? i have to admit i have no clue what factors help kids be less self centered.
Two main reasons:
1. It's easier to form friendships in a smaller group. In larger groups it is much easier for it to became a wall of people rather than individual persons. Large groups can be extremely overwhelming for children (they are still overwhelming for many adults).
2. It is much easier for the teacher to see the group dynamics, and jump in to make sure nobody is excluded. If the teacher doesn't do this, many of the benefits of smaller class size will be lost. Teachers need to very vigilant to teach that it's not okay to exclude kids and not play with them, its not ok to bully, etc. If there is nobody in the room to foster healthy relationships, they will never reach even close to their full potential.
I have seen and talked about this in quite a bit of detail with educators who are continually successful, and it is not hard to figure out - it requires devotion rather than advanced pedagogical theory and strategy.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#138I want to offer a different data point. I took my daughter to a Montessori-adjacent school for 3 years. It's not Montessori exactly and they didn't advertise as such but they had a different European name attached to it that is downstream from Montessori. They had multi-age education, stressed in children directed learning and individual growth, they didn't have exams, etc. I changed my daughter this year and overall…
I wonder sometimes if that kind of school is only good for the high-strung go-getter child prodigy types because they are so hands off. But the very lack of metrics and standardization that purports to help with that kind of mission unfortunately certainly makes the shopping a lot harder for prospective parents. Similar with other private schools later on. Is it a good academically strong place where kids get pushed…
I attended Montessori in the 80s up to high school level and was part of a "gifted" group who went on to a public school a couple of years younger than typical. I was completely unprepared for student bullying in HS and the generally harsh attitudes of teachers. Also my learning style had to completely change, and I did not adapt well.
My Montessori persona was to be competitive about "finishing my weeks work first" usually on Monday or Tuesday, so I could enjoy working with other students on their work lists, and getting a crack at the highschool algebra book when the teacher would let our group at it. I had some strengths in English, math and computing, but weaknesses in foreign language and science where there were fewer opportunities for social learning. Obviously there were no opportunities for that in HS.
In addition to terrible grades, the transition to public school completely destroyed my social confidence and I had to stop playing sports due to my small stature. My dad noted this year (in my 40s now) later that I was unrecognisable after just a few months but he lost the argument to pull me out. It wasn't until my late 20s that I started to find my original confidence.
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder sometimes if that kind of school is only good for the high-strung go-getter child prodigy types because they are so hands off. But the very lack of metrics and standardization that purports to help with that kind of mission unfortunately certainly makes the shopping a lot harder for prospective parents. Similar with other private schools later on. Is it a good academically strong place where kids get pushed…
I attended Montessori in the 80s up to high school level and was part of a "gifted" group who went on to a public school a couple of years younger than typical. I was completely unprepared for student bullying in HS and the generally harsh attitudes of teachers. Also my learning style had to completely change, and I did not adapt well. My Montessori persona was to be competitive about "finishing my weeks work first"…
Very interesting story. If I may ask, looking back, do you blame Montessori for the “lack of real world preparation” or do you think rather that it was the regular school that had a bad system and you were in a better one and should have stayed there? If you had stayed there until uni do you think you’d adapted well to higher edu?
Re: Public Montessori programs strengthen learning outcomes at lower costs: study
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my hometown there is something like that. There are two schools, one of them had a year with particularly good approval rates. Competitive parents started preferring that school, finding ways to send their kids there. That school has been sustaining better approval rates since then. Which should make no sense because the teachers themselves work odd years in one school, even years in the other school.
> Which should make no sense because the teachers themselves work odd years in one school, even years in the other school. Peers make a huge difference. Before university, I split my high school between two schools - one that was near the top academically, and one that was quite poor. The latter did have some smart students intellectually, but almost none did well academically because it wasn't valued by their peers.…
It's even worse than that: in some circles, kids are expected to be ignorant, or expected to be emotionless, or mean to each others, or asocial etc. We became mostly what was expected from us, with little variations. Once you've set the wrong expectations, education is an uphill battle.