OP here. My favorite schools were the Reggio and Reggio-like schools. SWS and Inspired Teaching were my two favorites, but we didn't apply to ITS because we tried the commute to the new campus and it was awful. SWS is not too far from my husband's job, so that's high on our list. We also liked expeditionary learning a lot. Cap City was too far for us, but both Mundo Verde and Two Rivers ended up on our list. Finally, we liked a lot of the inquiry-based models and applied to a few DCPS international baccalaureate schools. I also really liked the inquiry-based program at Bridges.

The best explanation I received for Tools of the Mind--what they do and more importantly why they do it--came from the principal at Marie Reed. After that, I was more comfortable with the program, but it was not my top choice.

Curious what everyone ended up deciding what was a good fot for their kid after visiting schools? Any method work better than others or does it really all boil down to teachers?

Pursue their interests?

Left to his own devices, Spaceman Spiff will do exactly that... drift off into daydream and spend the afternoon having a laser battle with the evil Glarghbeast amongst the craters of Planet Zarxon IV rather than learning any of the material.

Kid creativity and exploration is fantastic and should be encouraged but that needs to be balanced with the fact that some kids need to be kept on task - to include many of the brightest ones. Montessori doesn't work well for some kids.

Speaking for my little spaceman - Montessori didn't work. There are ways to be teacher-lead that remind him to stay on task without being boring, and still giving hi options. Montessori was just too open-ended.

Or maybe Montessori is exactly what Spaceman Spiff needs to allow him to follow his interests rather than sit in a teacher-led class setting he finds boring...

It's really a function of the child. If a kid can manage to stay on task and independently follow direction, he will do well in Montessori. If on the other hand the kid is a creative daydreamer, he might not do so well.

Picture Calvin as Spaceman Spiff. Not the ideal candidate for Montessori.

I was an earlier poster with an active child and wasn't too say thanks for this detailed response! I'm really warning up to Montessori.

My daughter has been in a Montessori program for two years now and it has worked well for her. I would definitely describe her as active, but a quick learner and focused. Montessori materials are meant to teach certain lessons or concepts so in general there is a "right" way to use the materials, but I would not describe this as rigid. The children are able to select their own work and there is a very large selection. A curious child would be thrilled.

Prior to our Montessori experience my child was in a play based program. In this program there was circle time where the children would sing songs and incorporated in that would be a lesson. The teacher might for instance review the numbers 1-10 in some fun way.

In Montessori there may be circle time. During circle time the guide may provide a lesson to a group of children that are learning to count/sequence to 10. This might be learned with wooden placards (10), one that displays each number. The lesson might be to place the placards in the correct sequence 1-10. This would be one way it is presented there would be others. Montessori seems to works against the concept of rote memorization, hence the use of materials not letters or numbers on a board.

A Montessori classroom would allow your child to select lessons as it interests her, not according to a curriculum plan. There is no plan as each child pursues her own interest at her own pace. Balance is promoted by the guide only when required. Your child will work with numerous materials throughout the day at her own pace and based on her interest and mastery of preceding concepts. Your child could choose from a variety of work areas or may choose to paint or sort objects using a tool (working on the gross/fine motor skills required for writing), pour water or polish (build on concentration and focus), or work on some language based lesson. Art and music is incorporated and not taught separately as a special.

Montessori does allow for socialization through group lessons and work. In this way the older children "guide" the younger one's. I am always amazed how confident and caring the older children are in my daughter's classroom. They truly enjoy their elder status.

Other notable attributes of the Montessori program is the focus on independence and social grace. Social graces are not taught in a rigid way, but allow for children to learn how to work and cooperate in a group setting. This is a very important lesson given the size of not only Montessori classroom, but most DCPS environments.

It is good that you are seeking to determine which program would be right for your child before enrolling her; but there is no harm in trying one and making a switch if you find it is not a good fit. Please do not underestimate the importance of the program being a good fit for you as a parent as well. Some programs take more trust than other. There will be no daily summary reports in a Montessori environment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another LAMB parent here. My DC was in a Reggio program for 2 years before starting at LAMB, and it was disastrous. It was just like a free-for-all. DC has blossomed with Montessori - at 5, DC is writing in cursive, reading in English and Spanish, doing addition and subtraction (simple), and loves school. And is bilingual. I encourage people to sit in on a few classes at a Montessori school; hopefully this "rigid" reputation that the method has on this board will be dispelled, because that is certainly not what my DC's experience has been.

LAMB is neither AMI nor AMS certified and their teachers come from both disciplines. Montessori does not contemplate the dual language program and so LAMB is not truly montessori. It is an outlier.

Other than the dual language, what makes LAMB different from a traditional Montessori program? Do they do things like circle time/group work, which I understand is not traditionally done in Montessori?

Anonymous wrote:Another LAMB parent here. My DC was in a Reggio program for 2 years before starting at LAMB, and it was disastrous. It was just like a free-for-all. DC has blossomed with Montessori - at 5, DC is writing in cursive, reading in English and Spanish, doing addition and subtraction (simple), and loves school. And is bilingual. I encourage people to sit in on a few classes at a Montessori school; hopefully this "rigid" reputation that the method has on this board will be dispelled, because that is certainly not what my DC's experience has been.

LAMB is neither AMI nor AMS certified and their teachers come from both disciplines. Montessori does not contemplate the dual language program and so LAMB is not truly montessori. It is an outlier.

Anonymous wrote:Not to harp on the superiority of Reggio, but I've seen it benefit a wide-variety of personalities. Extroverts learn to stop and listen to others, introverts are encouraged to share and given a variety of ways in which to do it. Even children on the spectrum seem to thrive in the model since there is such an emphasis on "different" being valuable and that there are many different ways one can communicate.

I have seen the children great with adults (only-kids in particular) who are pretty sharp get a little exhausted with having to be patient while a shy and stammering friend sings through the ABCs, but I think they're learning a valuable lesson there.

I know a child personally who has THRIVED academically in a Montessori environment, but this is a kid who took it upon himself to memorize all of the state capitals by the time he was 3. He's brilliant, but I'm not sure how hard it will hit once he finds himself needing to work in a group of other children, or the direction of a boss, at some point in the future.

All of this stated, per a PP, it really matters on the teacher. Reggio is a framework that focusses more on the social-emotional education of a child, but that doesn't mean a teacher in Montessori or TOM can't excel in teaching children community respect. I'd say more than focusing on a model: immersion, Reggio, etc, it would be better to focus on the culture of the program. All of these programs can be implemented poorly.

What does the school value? What do they hope their students leave their program with?

I wish all of you the best this new year, the lottery, and parenting in general, can be a stressful time.

Thanks, this is helpful to me.

Anonymous wrote:does anyone know what kind of program EL Haynes is? I don't see any reference to any of these types on their website. They seem to follow Common Core for math and their 'social development' is predicated on Responsive Classroom and Second Steps. I have no idea what these are....

Doesn't seem very specific to early childhood education. Common core only goes down to kindergarten. Responsive classroom is a classroom management philsophy/approach that focuses on classroom community and internal rather than external rewards.

I know a couple of PP have emphasized how wonderful reggio is as a model, especially in early childhood. I completely agree but note that like all models it depends how it is implemented. And that can vary dramatically from school to school and even classroom to classroom, depending on the training available and the teacher's willingness to really accept the model. I strongly recommend visiting, observing a classroom, and paying particular attention to the documentation of the work. That is a tale sign.