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.)
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.