Thoughts on Sojourner Truth Montessori?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

[Anonymous]

And lots of parents are desperate to get out of their IB MS, and enroll students in whatever school is safe and seems reasonably well run. They care less about fit than most of the people who hang out here.

[Anonymous]

How many people were at the open house?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

It’s not about being self-directed. It’s that as learning gets more sophisticated, the ideas actually have to be taught by a knowledgeable person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

It’s not about being self-directed. It’s that as learning gets more sophisticated, the ideas actually have to be taught by a knowledgeable person.

You can’t apply ideas if you don’t have a knowledge or content base to start with. Most of these kids lack that. It’s not a good approach for poor performing kids.

What has been proven to work in these kids is actually structure, direction, and direct instruction like the KIPP model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

It’s not about being self-directed. It’s that as learning gets more sophisticated, the ideas actually have to be taught by a knowledgeable person.

You can’t apply ideas if you don’t have a knowledge or content base to start with. Most of these kids lack that. It’s not a good approach for poor performing kids.

What has been proven to work in these kids is actually structure, direction, and direct instruction like the KIPP model.

How are they going to self-directedly learn actual middle school level content if they're several years behind in reading and math? Because that's what a lot of the feeder school kids are, and a lot of the new kids will be too.

[Anonymous]

If they're not going to be good at test-taking, how will they do on the Walls exam?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

It’s not about being self-directed. It’s that as learning gets more sophisticated, the ideas actually have to be taught by a knowledgeable person.

You can’t apply ideas if you don’t have a knowledge or content base to start with. Most of these kids lack that. It’s not a good approach for poor performing kids.

What has been proven to work in these kids is actually structure, direction, and direct instruction like the KIPP model.

that’s what all kids serious about learning content need - not just “those” kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

It’s not about being self-directed. It’s that as learning gets more sophisticated, the ideas actually have to be taught by a knowledgeable person.

You can’t apply ideas if you don’t have a knowledge or content base to start with. Most of these kids lack that. It’s not a good approach for poor performing kids.

What has been proven to work in these kids is actually structure, direction, and direct instruction like the KIPP model.

How are they going to self-directedly learn actual middle school level content if they're several years behind in reading and math? Because that's what a lot of the feeder school kids are, and a lot of the new kids will be too.

+100. I think montessori is going to be a disaster for the poor performing kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is everyone just going to give up any hope of attending Walls, Banneker, McKinley Tech, if their kids have terrible PARCC scores? Or does "Truth" have a plan to improve test scores?

Montessori schools are traditionally designed for hands on learning, applied, learn to think, experiences. They are kind of the anti fill in the bubble memorize information testing.
I imagine the hands on self paced learning middle will work really well for kids that are below grade level if they have enough staff. That strikes me as the issue really. It would take a lot of time, class room management and extra staff to help older kids/teens adjust and learn how to function well in a Montessori environment. After all it was designed for preschool kid how are generally wired to be curious and learn. Teen are not necessarily wired that way, especially after years of miss matched or negative learning experiences.

It's not that teen's aren't "wired" to learn like preschoolers - it's that the learning is fundamentally different. By mid-late elementary, kids actually need curriculum and teachers to lead the instruction. They're not 3 year olds that can get what they need by pouring beads between cups, or whatever. Some direct instruction is needed; and for kids who are behind, even more direct instruction. And yes, that does mean you have to memorize some information.

I agree. It’s rare for a teen to be self directed. A generalization but even more rare for a teen who does not do well in school. Montessori sounds like a disaster for low performing teens.

It’s not about being self-directed. It’s that as learning gets more sophisticated, the ideas actually have to be taught by a knowledgeable person.

You can’t apply ideas if you don’t have a knowledge or content base to start with. Most of these kids lack that. It’s not a good approach for poor performing kids.

What has been proven to work in these kids is actually structure, direction, and direct instruction like the KIPP model.

that’s what all kids serious about learning content need - not just “those” kids.

Sure but studies have shown that poor performing kids from low income families lack many experiences as compared to their middle class peers that develop a large portion of that content.

[Anonymous]

Good grief. You all can debate until you are blue in the face. So much “expertise” amongst us. Who is going to step out from behind their computer and create a program where the children perfect the test, love it while doing so, and are fresh entrepreneurs (because my parent told me to be!) by age 18.

Jesus. I am so sad for so many of our growing children.

Good luck to truth! May they stay “true” to their mission of providing authentic Montessori education to children who so desperately need a break from their overbearing parents funneling them into a non-thinking but high scoring individual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. You all can debate until you are blue in the face. So much “expertise” amongst us. Who is going to step out from behind their computer and create a program where the children perfect the test, love it while doing so, and are fresh entrepreneurs (because my parent told me to be!) by age 18.

Jesus. I am so sad for so many of our growing children.

Good luck to truth! May they stay “true” to their mission of providing authentic Montessori education to children who so desperately need a break from their overbearing parents funneling them into a non-thinking but high scoring individual.

Because that's not how it works here! Public funds, public accountability. It is a real question whether this school is financially viable and whether it will be able to hit performance metrics necessary to exist. How much public money will be wasted trying to find out?

SSMA is already at risk of being shut down. If you really want a Montessori school with sucky test scores you can pay for it on your own dime.

[Anonymous]

If you've paid attention to the performance of the schools that were recently up for charter renewal and allowed to continue to operate, you would know that SSMA is not at risk for being shut down. Not that it's not a sucky school, but because "public funds" and "accountability" are not in DCPCSB's vocabulary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you've paid attention to the performance of the schools that were recently up for charter renewal and allowed to continue to operate, you would know that SSMA is not at risk for being shut down. Not that it's not a sucky school, but because "public funds" and "accountability" are not in DCPCSB's vocabulary.

Not this year, because its 5-year average is high even though its PMF score cratered by over 20 points and is approaching Tier 3. I agree that the PCSB tolerates way too much incompetence, and I am skeptical that they would treat high-income kids the same way they treat low-income kids by shutting down their school. But if it continues to hemorrhage students and struggle academically, financial problems are soon to follow. I do not think their 15-year review will go well (since higher PMF scores are required) unless they make some big changes.

[Anonymous]

Will LAMB feed into this school? How have other public school districts fared with Montessori at the middle/high school levels? I thought Montessori was best suited for children through age 10 or 11, but not so much after.