Middle/high school after Montessori Elementary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A September 2017 study published in Economics of Education Review found that a Montessori education didn't make a difference for teenagers. It tracked hundreds of students, some of whom had won a lottery to attend a Montessori high school in the Netherlands, others of whom had lost the lottery and attended a traditional secondary school. In the Netherlands, Montessori high school students did no better or worse than traditional students. They finished their secondary degrees at the same rates with similar grades and final exam results. The author, Nienke Rujis, also found no differences on soft skills. Montessori students showed similar levels of motivation, and scored no better on measures of independence, "even though these are the main characteristics that a Montessori education claims to foster," Rujis wrote.

Read the study here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775717305356?_docanchor=&_fmt=high&_origin=gateway&_rdoc=1&dgcid=raven_sd_via_email&md5=b8429449ccfc9c30159a5f9aeaa92ffb

So they do no better, but also no worse? So a kid can spend their time time in school choosing what to do, and creating their own structure, etc, and end up the same as a kid who was forced into a certain structure and lacked the freedom of choice a Montessori kid gets? I’d put my kid in Montessori if this is the case.

You deserve Montessori if think the summary above, which is itself based only on the abstract, is cause for conclusion. The socioeconomic characteristics of the population do not in any way mirror DC. The sample size is (at the bottom range) only 309 students. Other than that you NAILED it!

[Anonymous]

Someone on this thread seems to be very insecure about themselves and their decisions.

[Anonymous]

Blah Blah Blah. I wouldn't trade my kid's experience at Lee for anything. And she's doing awesome in a "regular" middle school (Deal).

For some kids it's probably totally inappropriate.

None of these simple generalizations about Montessori are worth anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Two things:

1. "Properly guided" is the escape hatch all Montessori boosters use. Anytime it fails it was because it wasn't properly implemented. Miraculously it seems to be best implemented in high income areas. Weird...

2. In ECE. That does not work in MS or HS. We have enough entitled teens and 20 somethings who think the world revolves around them and they shouldn't have to work or be told "no". Stop trying to make more!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A September 2017 study published in Economics of Education Review found that a Montessori education didn't make a difference for teenagers. It tracked hundreds of students, some of whom had won a lottery to attend a Montessori high school in the Netherlands, others of whom had lost the lottery and attended a traditional secondary school. In the Netherlands, Montessori high school students did no better or worse than traditional students. They finished their secondary degrees at the same rates with similar grades and final exam results. The author, Nienke Rujis, also found no differences on soft skills. Montessori students showed similar levels of motivation, and scored no better on measures of independence, "even though these are the main characteristics that a Montessori education claims to foster," Rujis wrote.

Read the study here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775717305356?_docanchor=&_fmt=high&_origin=gateway&_rdoc=1&dgcid=raven_sd_via_email&md5=b8429449ccfc9c30159a5f9aeaa92ffb

So they do no better, but also no worse? So a kid can spend their time time in school choosing what to do, and creating their own structure, etc, and end up the same as a kid who was forced into a certain structure and lacked the freedom of choice a Montessori kid gets? I’d put my kid in Montessori if this is the case.

Except Montessori kids have very little freedom. Being able to choose from a few rigid activities that someone has decided you are ready for isn't freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

Why do you think it’s unrealistic for middle and high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A September 2017 study published in Economics of Education Review found that a Montessori education didn't make a difference for teenagers. It tracked hundreds of students, some of whom had won a lottery to attend a Montessori high school in the Netherlands, others of whom had lost the lottery and attended a traditional secondary school. In the Netherlands, Montessori high school students did no better or worse than traditional students. They finished their secondary degrees at the same rates with similar grades and final exam results. The author, Nienke Rujis, also found no differences on soft skills. Montessori students showed similar levels of motivation, and scored no better on measures of independence, "even though these are the main characteristics that a Montessori education claims to foster," Rujis wrote.

Read the study here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775717305356?_docanchor=&_fmt=high&_origin=gateway&_rdoc=1&dgcid=raven_sd_via_email&md5=b8429449ccfc9c30159a5f9aeaa92ffb

So they do no better, but also no worse? So a kid can spend their time time in school choosing what to do, and creating their own structure, etc, and end up the same as a kid who was forced into a certain structure and lacked the freedom of choice a Montessori kid gets? I’d put my kid in Montessori if this is the case.

My kid is not in Montessori and that's kind of what I get out of this too. Traditional school is not that enjoyable for kids. I would love for my child to have more independence, be able to study things more deeply, and be allowed to be more self-driven. That feels like an argument in favor of switching to Montessori, rather than sticking with traditional school in the fear that my child would not learn math or socialization or how to follow rules in a Montessori environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

Why do you think it’s unrealistic for middle and high school?

Because the stakes are much higher and subject much more complex. In addition, teachers don’t have time to set up individualized plans or different guides for each kid. They have to get thru the material, deal with huge differences in abilities, and frankly, ask a middle school kid what he wants to do and you likely will get a retort answer of nothing.

It’s fine and dandy if the kid is learning simple addition but try above in Algebra 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

Why do you think it’s unrealistic for middle and high school?

Because the stakes are much higher and subject much more complex. In addition, teachers don’t have time to set up individualized plans or different guides for each kid. They have to get thru the material, deal with huge differences in abilities, and frankly, ask a middle school kid what he wants to do and you likely will get a retort answer of nothing.

It’s fine and dandy if the kid is learning simple addition but try above in Algebra 1.

They still do actually teach in Montessori, you know. It’s not a total free for all. And as far as I know Montessori schools still have to follow the same basic guidelines as to what students need to learn in each grade.

As far as the different abilities of each kid, it’s not like public school teachers don’t have to deal with that as well, but they get far LESS freedom to differentiate…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

Why do you think it’s unrealistic for middle and high school?

Tell me you've never had MS or HS kids without telling me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

Why do you think it’s unrealistic for middle and high school?

Tell me you've never had MS or HS kids without telling me.

I have a HS kid in Montessori right now.

(Also, everyone please stop with the “tell me whatever without telling me whatever” thing. You sound so lame.)

[Anonymous]

OP here.

Montessori almost definitely works for middle and high school, especially since it better prepares them for the realities of life. Typically, teachers provide lessons based on need in small group settings while students work through a plan they’ve developed to make sure their work gets done and they can explore topics of interest. While I’m not confident in Truth at the moment, I think their model is great and it seems like their test scores are pretty good for last year when looking at the city as a whole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would have thought a pedagogy designed for ECE that was stretched (poorly) to upper ES and wouldn't work in MS or HS. Seriously, this is a SHOCKING development.

Do to an ES open house and ask this. The [insert dumb name of tour guide here] will try and shame you and subtly suggest that if you have to ask you shouldn't attend.

Exactly correct. Montessori is great until maybe 2nd grade.

+1. It’s terrible for upper elementary and disaster for middle and high. It’s rare the 100% internally driven child. Kids need structure, direction, equal time in all subjects, no matter strengths or weaknesses but especially the weakness.

Especially the bolded. If you think even a kid who is "100% internally driven" (whatever the hell that means) can or should be deciding what they want to do and study and how then you are a bad parent.

Properly structured Montessori will guide the child and decide what they should be studying. It’s just more about choice (I.e. choosing from one of a few activities the practices fractions instead of being given one option) and the lessons are more hands on. It’s not a free for all.

Yea that might be feasible and work in ECE/early elementary but totally unrealistic in middle and high school.

Why do you think it’s unrealistic for middle and high school?

Tell me you've never had MS or HS kids without telling me.

I have a HS kid in Montessori right now.

(Also, everyone please stop with the “tell me whatever without telling me whatever” thing. You sound so lame.)

This was irony, right? Calling someone "lame" in 2023 to express how behind the times they are? No notes!