Quick Search
For faster results please use our Quick Search engine.

Advanced Search

Search across titles, abstracts, authors, and keywords.
Advanced Search Guide.

2169 results

Article

TEP Listings

Available from: ProQuest

Publication: Montessori Life, vol. 32, no. 1

Pages: 54-55

⛔ No DOI found

See More

Abstract/Notes: Teacher education programs affiliated by the American Montessori Society provide comprehensive courses of study that prepare the adult learners of today to be the highly skilled, highly qualified Montessori teachers and leaders of tomorrow. ARIZONA ARIZONA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Chandler KHALSA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary II, Elementary I-II Tucson ARKANSAS ARKANSAS CENTER FOR MONTESSORI STUDIES Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Little Rock CALIFORNIA CAPITAL EDUCATION INSTITUTE Early Childhood Claremont COTTAGE MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Fresno Additional Site: Lancaster EAST BAY MONTESSORI TRAINING Early Childhood Fremont FOUNTAINHEAD MONTESSORI ADULT EDUCATION Early Childhood Dublin MONTESSORI CENTER FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary II, Elementary I-II San Diego MONTESSORI HILLS ACADEMY TEACHER CERTIFICATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Chula Vista MONTESSORI INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED STUDIES Early Childhood Castro Valley MONTESSORI TEACHER ACADEMY Early Childhood Dana Point MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER/SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II San Leandro, San Mateo, Sunnyvale Additional Site: West Covina MONTESSORI TRAINING CENTER Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Shingle Springs UNIVERSITY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM AT UC IRVINE Early Childhood Irvine COLORADO MONTESSORI EDUCATION CENTER OF THE ROCKIES Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II, Administrator Boulder DELAWARE DELAWARE INSTITUTE FOR MONTESSORI EDUCATION Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Hockessin MONTESSORI INSTITUTE FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Wilmington FLORIDA BARRY UNIVERSITY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I-II Miami Shores DUHOVKA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I-II Additional Site: Fernandina Beach MAITLAND MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Maitland MONTESSORI ACADEMY TRAINING INSTITUTE Early Childhood Pembroke Pines MONTESSORI TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE/MTTI Early Childhood Palmetto Bay ORLANDO MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTE Early Childhood Celebration PALM HARBOR MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Tarpon Springs SUMMIT MONTESSORI TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I Davie GEORGIA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTE-ATLANTA Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Atlanta HAWAII CHAMINADE UNIVERSITY OF HONOLULU MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Honolulu ILLINOIS MIDWEST MONTESSORI TEACHER TRAINING CENTER Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Evanston MONTESSORI HEARTLAND TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Moline SETON MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Administrator Clarendon Hills INDIANA MONTESSORI TEACHER ACADEMY AT EDISON LAKES Early Childhood Mishawaka KENTUCKY GREATER CINCINNATI CENTER FOR MONTESSORI EDUCATION Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Covington MAINE MAINE MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Early Childhood Falmouth MARYLAND INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED MONTESSORI STUDIES Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II, Administrator Silver Spring MARYLAND CENTER FOR MONTESSORI STUDIES Early Childhood Lutherville MONTGOMERY MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Rockville MASSACHUSETTS CAMBRIDGE MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler Cambridge MONTESSORI ELEMENTARY TEACHER TRAINING COLLABORATIVE Elementary I, Elementary II, Elementary I-II Lexington MONTESSORI INSTITUTE - NEW ENGLAND Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Beverly NEW ENGLAND MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Newton NORTHEAST MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Wenham MICHIGAN ADRIAN DOMINICAN MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTE Early Childhood Adrian MICHIGAN MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II, Elementary II Waterford MINNESOTA VIRGINIA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Additional Site: Excelsior MISSOURI HOPE MONTESSORI EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood St. Louis MONTANA MONTANA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTE Early Childhood Kalispell NEBRASKA MID-AMERICA MONTESSORI TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Omaha NEVADA MONTESSORI TRAINING OF SOUTHERN NEVADA Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Las Vegas NEW JERSEY MONTESSORI CENTER FOR TEACHER DEVELOPMENT Early Childhood Morristown MONTESSORI TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE OF MERCER COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE Early Childhood Robbinsville PRINCETON CENTER TEACHER EDUCATION Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II, Administrator Princeton WEST SIDE MONTESSORI SCHOOL TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Infant & Toddler Additional Site: Whitehouse Station NEW YORK BUFFALO MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Clarence CENTER FOR MONTESSORI EDUCATION I NEW YORK Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Administrator New Rochelle WEST SIDE MONTESSORI SCHOOL TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II, Administrator New York City NORTH CAROLINA CENTER FOR MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION/NORTH CAROLINA Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Huntersville OHIO CINCINNATI MONTESSORI SECONDARY TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Secondary I, Secondary I-II Cincinnati COLUMBUS MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Columbus XAVIER UNIVERSITY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Cincinnati OKLAHOMA OKLAHOMA CITY UNIVERSITY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Oklahoma City OREGON MONTESSORI OF ALAMEDA TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Portland PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT HILL COLLEGE MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Philadelphia PUERTO RICO INSTITUTO NUEVA ESCUELA Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II, Secondary I Rio Piedras SOUTH CAROLINA GULF COAST MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Elementary I, Elementary I-II Additional Site: Charleston HOUSTON MONTESSORI CENTER Secondary I-II, Administrator Additional Site: Charleston LANDER UNIVERSITY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary II, Elementary I-II Greenwood NORTHEAST MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Early Childhood Additional Site: Mt. Pleasant SEACOAST CENTER FOR EDUCATION Elementary I, Elementary I-II Charleston TENNESSEE MONTESSORI TRAINING CENTER OF BRENTWOOD Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Brentwood TEXAS DALLAS MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Plano GULF COAST MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Elementary I, Elementary I-II Houston HOUSTON MONTESSORI CENTER Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary II, Elementary I-II, Secondary I, Secondary I-II, Administrator Houston MONTESSORI DEVELOPMENT CENTER OF DFW Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Irving MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTE-HOUSTON Early Childhood Houston NORTH TEXAS MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Early Childhood Frisco SHELTON MONTESSORI TRAINING Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Dallas UTAH INSTITUTE FOR MONTESSORI INNOVATION AT WESTMINSTER COLLEGE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary II, Elementary I-II, Administrator Salt Lake City VIRGINIA NORTHERN VIRGINIA MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Early Childhood Ashburn VIRGINIA CENTER FOR MONTESSORI STUDIES Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Richmond VIRGINIA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Chesapeake WASHINGTON MONTESSORI CENTER FOR TEACHER EDUCATION-WASHINGTON STATE Early Childhood Bellevue MONTESSORI EDUCATION INSTITUTE OF THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Bothell WISCONSIN UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN- RIVER FALLS MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II River Falls INTERNATIONAL BAISHAN MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Qingdao, CHINA BEIJING HEART & MIND MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Beijing, CHINA Early Childhood Additional Site: Yiwu, CHINA CADALIN GLOBAL EDUCATION Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Hsinchu City, TAIWAN CAPITAL COLLEGE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Richmond, BC, CANADA CAPITAL EDUCATION INSTITUTE Early Childhood Additional Site: Nanning, CHINA CENTRE FOR ADVANCED MONTESSORI STUDIES-VANCOUVER Elementary I, Elementary I-II Vancouver, BC, CANADA CENTRO DE ENSEÑANZA MONTESSORI, A.C. Early Childhood Tijuana, BC, MEXICO CENTRO DE ENTRENAMIENTO MONTESSORI Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Monterrey, NL, MEXICO THE CHILDREN'S HOUSE MONTESSORI EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Beijing, CHINA DR. JUN INSTITUTE OF MONTESSORI EDUCATION Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA DUHOVKA MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Prague, CZECH REPUBLIC ETONKIDS MONTESSORI TEACHER TRAINING ACADEMY Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Beijing, CHINA HOUSTON MONTESSORI CENTER Secondary I, Secondary I-II Additional Site: Prague, CZECH REPUBLIC INFINITY MONTESSORI ACADEMY OF HONG KONG Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Kowloon Tong, Kowloon, HONG KONG INTERNATIONAL MONTESSORI EDUCATION INSTITUTE Early Childhood, Elementary I, Elementary I-II Taichung City, TAIWAN INTERNATIONAL MONTESSORI TEACHING INSTITUTE Early Childhood Beijing, CHINA KOREAN INSTITUTE FOR MONTESSORI Early Childhood Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA KOREAN MONTESSORI COLLEGE Early Childhood Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA LMS MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Windsor, ON, CANADA MONTESSORI INSTITUTE FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Early Childhood Additional Site: Istanbul, TURKEY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER/SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA Infant & Toddler Additional Site: Taipei City, TAIWAN Early Childhood Additional Site: Kowloon Tong, HONG KONG NORTHEAST MONTESSORI INSTITUTE Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood Additional Site: Chengdu, CHINA OKLAHOMA CITY UNIVERSITY MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Early Childhood Additional Site: Taipei City, TAIWAN PALM HARBOR MONTESSORI TEACHER EDUCATION CENTER Early Childhood Additional Site: Beijing, CHINA SHANGHAI MONTESSORI EDUCATION ACADEMY Infant & Toddler, Early Childhood, Administrator Shanghai, CHINA WEIMING MONTESSORI EDUCATION CENTRE Early Childhood Beijing, CHINA WEST SIDE MONTESSORI SCHOOL TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM Infant & Toddler Additional Site: Beijing, CHINA

Language: English

ISSN: 1054-0040

Doctoral Dissertation

An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Korean Montessori Teacher Training Program as Perceived by Montessori Teachers and Parents of Montessori-Educated Children

Available from: ProQuest Dissertations and Theses

See More

Abstract/Notes: During the past ten years, a total of 3,642 teachers and administrators have attended the Korean Montessori Teacher Training Program (KMTTP). A sample of Montessori teachers (n = 261) and Korean parents (n = 375) from 32 Korean Montessori schools located in the major cities of Korea were surveyed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of this teacher preparation program. The EXPECTATIONS AND GOAL ATTAINMENT QUESTIONNAIRE (EGAQ), designed by the researcher, was the instrumentation used to conduct this study. Major findings demonstrated that 74.5 percent of the teachers surveyed indicated that their main reasons for attending the KMTTP were to increase their professional competency and their knowledge of child development through Montessori philosophy. The correlation between teachers' levels of satisfaction with their preparation and perceived effectiveness of the training program was higher (r =.29, p $<$.05) than between their levels of satisfaction with the program and their perceptions of their preparedness after completion of training (r =.18, p $<$.05). Significant differences existed between perceived effectiveness of the KMTTP and teachers' ages, positions, and years of experience. Older teachers and those with more advanced teaching positions expressed greater satisfaction with the program. Teachers indicated that, upon completion of the KMTTP, they felt more prepared in, than knowledgeable of, Montessori educational methodology. From the parent perspective, the most frequently cited reason (74.3%) for sending their child to a Montessori School was to provide a learning environment that nurtured their child's interpersonal growth. A majority of the parents (58.5%) were very satisfied with the Montessori experience; no parents were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. In correlating the effectiveness of Montessori education with specific outcomes, parents indicated highest levels of satisfaction in the areas of "concentration" and "academic achievement." A majority of the teachers surveyed (52.8%) encouraged the implementation of the Montessori Teacher Training Program in neighboring countries, with 42.1 percent strongly encouraging implementation. This study demonstrated the need for further development and improvement in the area of Montessori teacher training in Korea.

Language: English

Published: San Francisco, California, 1994

Article

The Dilemma of Scripted Instruction: Comparing Teacher Autonomy, Fidelity, and Resistance in the Froebelian Kindergarten, Montessori, Direct Instruction, and Success for All

Available from: Teachers College Record

Publication: Teachers College Record, vol. 113, no. 3

Pages: 395-430

See More

Abstract/Notes: More than a century before modern controversies over scripted instruction, the Froebelian kindergarten--the original kindergarten method designed by Friedrich Froebel--and Maria Montessori's pedagogy were criticized for rigidly prescribing how teachers taught and children learned. Today, scripted methods such as Direct Instruction and Success for All are condemned for limiting teachers' autonomy and narrowing students' learning, especially that of students from low-income backgrounds, for and with whom scripts are often designed and used. Proponents of scripted instruction counter that it is helpful for teachers and effective with students. Comparing historical and modern scripts offers an opportunity to explore teachers' reactions to this hotly debated approach to school reform and to think about some possible implications for teacher education. I examine how teachers reacted to four different models of scripted instruction. I chose to compare the Froebelian kindergarten, Montessori, Direct Instruction, and Success for All because of their longevity, wide use, and the amount of information available about them. I focus on the scripts' theory and research base and teacher training, and on teachers' assessments of the scripts' effectiveness, and ask how these factors might influence teachers' autonomy, fidelity, and resistance when using scripts. Research Design: Using historical methods, I summarize the history of scripted instruction; selectively survey research on teacher autonomy, fidelity, and resistance; and interpret primary and secondary sources on the Froebelian kindergarten, Montessori, Direct Instruction, and Success for All. Teacher autonomy, fidelity, and resistance varied in these four scripts. Froebelian kindergarten and Montessori teachers autonomously chose to receive scripted, lengthy, intensive, pre-service training and professional development in closed professional learning communities. Direct Instruction and Success for All teachers receive scripted, relatively limited pre-service training and ongoing professional development in schools in which teachers often do not autonomously choose to teach. Despite the scripted training, most Froebelian kindergarten teachers, and many Montessori, Direct Instruction, and Success for All teachers modified these scripts at the classroom level; some Froebelian and Montessori teachers made very overt, substantial changes when the social class backgrounds of the students changed. Many Froebelian and most Montessori teachers seemed to believe that these scripts helped their students learn. Direct Instruction and Success for All teachers express more mixed views of these scripts' effectiveness. Some say that the scripts "work "for their students but that as teachers they feel constrained, a situation I see as a professional dilemma. Anecdotally, some new teachers with little pre-service training say that they feel limited by scripts but daunted by the task of creating curricula and instruction on their own. My research raises questions about teachers' reactions to scripts. The examples of Froebelian kindergarten, Montessori, Direct Instruction, and Success for All teachers I studied suggest that there may be unpredictable contradictions in scripted instruction. Scripted, autonomously chosen, intensive training may strengthen teacher fidelity and resistance, by giving teachers a deep repertoire of pedagogical skills that some continue to use and others use to autonomously modify scripts in response to students' perceived needs. Scripted, externally imposed, less extensive training may give some teachers a sense of security but also create tensions between the scripts 'perceived effectiveness and the teachers' desires for autonomy, and, for new teachers, between autonomy and the difficulty of independently designing curricula and methods. I argue that these reactions suggest that educators in traditional pre-service teacher education programs may want to experiment with offering an autonomous choice of distinctly different instructional models, including scripted ones such as Direct Instruction and Success for All, in which teachers in training in professional learning communities may become deeply skilled. I also argue that script developers may want to experiment with giving teachers more explicit autonomy, both in choosing scripts and in modifying them, and more extensive pre-service training. I recommend more comparative research on teachers' reactions to scripts, especially on new teachers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Language: English

ISSN: 0161-4681

Article

AMS Teacher Education Scholarships

Available from: ProQuest

Publication: Montessori Life, vol. 28, no. 3

Pages: 25-26

⛔ No DOI found

See More

Abstract/Notes: Applications-typically about 100 per cycle-are reviewed by a small AMS selection committee, under the leadership of the chair of the Teachers Section of the AMS Board of Directors-currently Suzanne Bayer.Since the scholarship program began in 1993, AMS has awarded over $587,000 to more than 300 aspiring teachers.Sarah Chase (Early Childhood), Northeast Montessori Institute, Wenham, MA **Cristal Garza (Early Childhood), Montessori Teacher Academy, Dana Point, CA *Abigail Goeller (Early Childhood), Adrian Dominican Montessori Teacher Education Institute, Adrian, MI Elizabeth Hill (Elementary I-II), Institute for Montessori Innovation at Westminster College, Salt Lake City, UT Lisa Huff (Early Childhood), Greater Cincinnati Center for Montessori Education, Covington, KY *Ada Kulbickaite (Elementary III), Duhovka Montessori Teacher Education Program, Prague 6, Czech Republic Estefanía Maldonada (Early Childhood), Palm Harbor Montessori Teacher Education Center, Palm Harbor, FL *Jessica Marshall (Elementary I), Montessori Education Center of the Rockies, Boulder, CO Erin Mergil (Early Childhood), Center for Montessori Education I NY, New Rochelle, NY Shawnnee Miranda (Early Childhood), New England Montessori Teacher Education Center, Newton, MA *Rebekah Moore (Early Childhood), Greater Cincinnati Center for Montessori Education, Covington, KY Leah Park (Elementary I), Institute for Advanced Montessori Studies, Silver Spring, MD Misty Pasco (Infant and Toddler), Mid-America Montessori Teacher Training Institute, Omaha, NE *Stephanie Powell (Early Childhood), Montessori Center for Teacher Education, San Diego, CA *Kimberly Torres (Elementary I-II), Institute for Montessori Innovation at Westminster College, Salt Lake City, UT Mariah White (Elementary I), University of Wisconsin-River Falls Montessori Teacher Education Program, River Falls, WI Ashley Wooten (Early Childhood), Shelton Montessori Teacher Education Center, Dallas, TX Marah Zabibi (Early Childhood), Hope Montessori Educational Institute, Lake Saint Louis, MO *Scholarships partially funded from the Zell Family Scholarship Fund **Scholarship funded by the Joanne P. Hammes Scholarship Fund Scholarships were drawn from three sources, all administered by AMS: the AMS Living Legacy Scholarship Fund, for which monies were raised in honor of the 2016 Living Legacy, Carolyn Kambich; the Zell Family Scholarship Fund, established by Dr. Pamela Zell Rigg to honor the memory of her late mother, Agnes Kister, and her late brother, John Kister Zell; and the Joanne P. Hammes Scholarship Fund, established by an anonymous donor to honor Ms. Hammes' lifelong work as a Montessori educator.

Language: English

ISSN: 1054-0040

Doctoral Dissertation

A institucionalização do método Montessori no campo educacional brasileiro (1914-1952) [The institutionalization of the Montessori method in the Brazilian educational field (1914-1952)]

Available from: Federal University of Santa Catarina - Institutional Repository

Americas, Brazil, Latin America and the Caribbean, Montessori method of education - History, South America

See More

Abstract/Notes: Montessori constituiu, em 1907, em Roma, uma escola pública para crianças em situação de risco, a Casa dei Bambini, embasada numa educação integral alicerçada na liberdade, na atividade e na individualidade. Durante aproximadamente quatro décadas, Montessori realizou pesquisas sobre o desenvolvimento infantil, cujos resultados foram difundidos transnacionalmente, configurando práticas e pensamento educacional inovadores fundamentados na relação entre o professor, o aluno e um ambiente de aprendizagem promotor da paz, da autoeducação, da autonomia, do respeito ao outro e do espírito científico e crítico. Com isso, também empreendeu uma didática para professores e a venda em série dos materiais que idealizou. O objeto desta narrativa historiográfica respaldada em Certeau (2014), Chartier (2010) e Magalhães (2004) foi a institucionalização do Método Montessori no Brasil, no âmbito cronológico das cinco primeiras décadas do século passado. Objetivou: reconhecer as formulações teóricas que permitiram identificar a origem do Método Montessori e cotejá-las com os projetos brasileiros desenvolvidos entre 1914-1952 apontando permanências e contribuições à educação brasileira; historicizar o processo de institucionalização da Pedagogia montessoriana no Brasil; problematizar a sua forma de apropriação na Educação Infantil e Ensino Primário, identificando por que o método é relacionado principalmente ao uso de materiais didáticos específicos e de mobiliário adequado ao tamanho das crianças. Foi constatado que a primeira escola montessoriana no Brasil, proveniente da vertente educacional estadunidense, atendeu ao público infantil, em São Paulo, no ano de 1915, num investimento particular de Ciridião Buarque e Mary Buarque. Esta pedagogia se irradiou por intermédio das apropriações realizadas pelos docentes da Escola Normal da Praça, em São Paulo, estado que possuía, desde 1924, legislação que indicava o uso de materiais didáticos de Montessori e de Froebel, mas de forma desarticulada dos princípios pedagógicos. No Paraná, a educação montessoriana foi institucionalizada na legislação educacional da Pré-escola em 1915 e investimentos foram realizados em 1924, quando Lysímaco Costa adquiriu os ?enxovais montessorianos? para quatro Jardins de Infância. Em Curitiba, em 1927, durante a Primeira Conferência Nacional da Associação Brasileira de Educação (ABE) foram apresentadas teses com base montessoriana. Ainda no Paraná, no final da década de 1940, a utilização do método ocorreu no ensino público no Programa da Pré-escola e do Ensino Primário e em 1952 foi inaugurada a Escola Experimental Montessoriana Rural para crianças do Ensino Primário, por iniciativa de Eny Caldeira. Ela e Piper de Lacerda Borges, presidente da Associação Montessori do Brasil, fizeram curso com Montessori, na Itália, em 1951. Já na Bahia, em 1927, efetivaram-se cursos de férias para formação de professores durante os quais foram disseminadas pelos docentes da Escola Normal de Salvador concepções montessorianas e a ressignificação dos materiais, tanto para a Pré-escola como para o Ensino Primário. O teor destes cursos foi divulgado por revistas pedagógicas. No mesmo local, em 1924, Alípio Franca traduziu o Livro Pedagogia Científica. No Rio de Janeiro, materiais e frações do método montessoriano se disseminaram para a Educação Infantil por meio da legislação educacional, em 1921 e em 1929. Evidências da utilização do Método Montessori em perspectiva não restrita ao uso de materiais didáticos foram encontradas nos programas infantis radiofônicos realizados por Mary Buarque, em São Paulo, a partir de 1936; no vínculo do método com a assistência social e teosófica, na década de 1950, disseminado por Piper de Lacerda Borges; no reuso dado ao método pelo lusitano Agostinho da Silva, também nos anos 1950, na criação de algumas universidades. Conclui-se que, entre 1914 e 1952, o processo de institucionalização do método Montessori no Brasil foi capitaneado por diversos sujeitos, em diferentes lugares do país, com apropriações e representações. [Abstract : Montessori established, in 1907, in Rome, a public school to children at risk, The Casa dei Bambini, which since then preserve the Montessori method characteristics, advocating the integral education based on freedom, action and on the individuality. For approximately four decades, Montessori researched about Children development, whose results were spread abroad, defining practices and innovative educational thoughts grounded on the relationship between teacher, the student and the learning environment advancing peace, self-education, self-correction with autonomy in sight, mutual respect, critic and the scientific spirit. The Objective of this study is the Montessori method establishment in Brazil, on the chronologic aspect along the first five decades from the last century. It?s a biographical research and documentary with a historical focus. The analysis is grounded in Certeau (2014), Chartier(2010) e Magalhães(2004). Objective: Recognize the formulation of the Montessori method in projects of its establishment in Brazil between 1914-1952; To Problematize political conditions, social, economical and cultural to set up the Montessori method in Brazil and its Educational applicability, questioning the reductionist mode relating to its use as specific materials and its adequate child-sized furniture. It has been verified that The First Montessori-based in Brazil served the children?s audience, in São Paulo, in the year of 1915, coming from the American strand, in a private enterprise of Ciridião Buarque e Mary Buarque. Such pedagogy irradiated by the mediation of these appropriation and representations made by teachers of the Escola Normal da Praça. São Paulo possessed, since 1924, laws that indicated the use of Montessori and Froebel?s course-ware, mas in a inarticulate way to the pedagogical principles. In Paraná, the Montessori-based education was established in the child education legislation in 1915 and investments were performed in 1924, when Lysímaco Costa acquired the ?montesorri layettes? to 4 Kindergarden. In Curitiba, in 1927, at the First National Conference of The Brazilian Association of Education (ABE), were presented thesis with Montessori bases. Still in Paraná, at the end of 40s, the method utilization occurred in the public education in the Preschool Program and Primary School and in 1952 was opened in Curitiba The Rural Montessori Experimental School to primary school, by the enterprise of Eny Caldeira.Piper Borges de Lacerda and Eny Caldeira speeches, whom realized in 1950 a course with Montessori in Perugia.In 1927, in Bahia, were realized vacation courses to teachers complementary training which were disseminated by the teacher of the Normal School of Salvador the Montessori concepts and the course-ware new meanings to the child education such as primary education. The matters discussed in these courses were spread by pedagogical magazines. In 1924, Alípio Franca translated The Method of Scientific Pedagogy applied to the Child Education at the Boys? House. In Rio de Janeiro, course-wares and parts of Montessori method were spread to Children education by education law, in 1921 and in 1929. Evidences of the Montessori use in perspective non-restricted to materials were found in children radio shows performed by Mary Buarque, in São Paulo, from 1936, whereupon self-education, the independence, the knowledge of child development phases, the singers freedom movement and the minimal intervention of the adult tutor made part of the proposal. In a mystic perspective, there was a link with the method and the social and theosophic assistance, in the 50 decade, disseminating in Rio de Janeiro and Paraná, by Piper Lacerda Borges and his husband. In the reuse given to the Agostinho da Silva method, also in the 1950, were present in the some universities creations, such as the Federal University of Santa Catarina as well from Paraíba and The University of Brasilia. Concluded that between 1914 and 1952, the establishment process of the Montessori method in Brazil was lead by several different individuals, from different parts of the country, with appropriations and personal representations.]

Language: Portuguese

Published: Florianópolis, Brazil, 2017

Doctoral Dissertation

The Effects of Montessori Teacher Training on Classroom Teaching Skills: The Public Montessori Teachers' Perspective

Available from: ProQuest Dissertations and Theses

See More

Abstract/Notes: This study compares the opinions of public school teachers of their classroom teaching skills due to participation in the Montessori model of teacher training and the traditional teacher education training programs. The data were collected through a survey of 223 public Montessori schools across the United States. The design used in this study is causal comparative to establish cause and effect. The independent variable is the participation in the Montessori Model of Teacher Training. The dependent variables are the opinions of public school teachers as perceived from participation in the Montessori Model of Teacher Training. Comparisons of teacher opinions were compiled from a survey to ascertain the impact of participation in the Montessori Model of Teacher Training. The population for this study included all teachers employed in the public Montessori schools. The sample included the entire population of teachers who participated in traditional teacher training to earn state licensure and in a Montessori teacher training program. A total of thirty-eight states were included in the survey. A total of 560 surveys were received from the population sample. The teachers surveyed included 81% females and 19% males. The years of teaching experience in public schools were 0–5 years 31%; 6–10 years 28%; 11–15 years 16%; and over 15 years 25%. The years of teaching experience in Montessori schools were 0–5 years 57 %; 6–10 years 23%; 11–15 years 11%; and over 15 years 9%. The basic conclusions from this study indicated that there are significant differences, p < .05, in the responses of teachers who participated in the Montessori model of teacher training and the traditional teacher training for preparation of classroom instruction. In 11 out of the 12 survey items, the diverse approach of teaching used in the Montessori model of teacher training was perceived to be superior to traditional teacher training. However, in one survey question, the traditional teacher training was viewed superior for preparation of teaching in a whole group setting. This study suggest that the responses of teachers strongly recommend the Montessori model of teacher training.

Language: English

Published: Orangeburg, South Carolina, 1997

Article

Views on Montessori approach by teachers serving at schools applying the Montessori approach [Montessori yaklaşımını uygulayan okullarda çalışan öğretmenlerin Montessori yaklaşımına ilişkin görüşleri]

Available from: Eurasian Journal of Educational Research

Publication: Eurasian Journal of Educational Research [Egitim Arastirmalari], no. 66

Pages: 123-138

Asia, Middle East, Turkey, Western Asia

See More

Abstract/Notes: Problem Statement: Further studies on Montessori teachers are required on the grounds that the Montessori approach, which, having been applied throughout the world, holds an important place in the alternative education field. Yet it is novel for Turkey, and there are only a limited number of studies on Montessori teachers in Turkey. Purpose of Study: The aim was to investigate views on the Montessori approach by the teachers who serve at the schools applying the Montessori approach. Methods: Research data was collected by the basic qualitative research, one of the qualitative research methods. Descriptive analysis method was used in analysis of the qualitative data. Nine teachers serving at three different schools in Ankara province applying Montessori approach were interviewed. Findings and Results: Eight main themes were determined upon data analysis; namely, education on Montessori approach, basic qualities required for teachers applying Montessori approach, adequacy of education on Montessori approach, in-service training on the challenges experienced by Montessori teachers, plans of teachers for self-development, following existing studies in Turkey on Montessori approach, views on studies on Montessori approach, and views on the criticisms towards Montessori approach. Conclusions and Recommendations: All teachers confirmed that they internalized the approach upon training in line with Montessori philosophy. They emphasized that they received training covering all the educational fields, yet the implementation dimension was inadequate due to training without the involvement of children. Furthermore, they suggested that all the schools in Turkey were opened by commercial motives, and as such these schools failed to comply with the standards of the institutions providing education on the basis of Montessori approach. They asserted that all criticisms towards Montessori approach would be proved to be groundless upon implementation of the approach. It was seen that experienced supervisors, in-service training, and scientific studies on Montessori approach were required.

Language: English, Turkish

ISSN: 1302-597X, 2528-8911

Article

AMS Awards Teacher Education Scholarships

Available from: ProQuest

Publication: Montessori Life, vol. 27, no. 3

Pages: 17

See More

Abstract/Notes: Applications-usually about 100 per cycle-are reviewed by a small AMS work group, under the leadership of the AMS Board of Directors Teachers Section chair (currently Suzanne Bayer).Since the program's inception, AMS has awarded over $550,000 to more than 200 aspiring teachers.MARYAM BEIRAMI (Early Childhood), Institute for Advanced Montessori Studies, Silver Spring, MD SARAH BROWN (Elementary I), Montessori Education Center of the Rockies, Boulder, CO SAXON BROWN (Early Childhood), Hope Montessori Educational Institute, Lake St. Louis, MO NEUS CARMONA SAUS (Early Childhood), New England Montessori Teacher Education Center, Goffstown, NH SARAH GALLEY (Early Childhood), Center for Montessori Teacher Education/NC, Angier, NC MONICA GUCWA (Elementary I), Montessori Education Center of the Rockies, Boulder, CO *KRISTINE HABELMANN (Elementary I), Montessori Education Center of the Rockies, Boulder, CO MOLLY HARDY (Early Childhood), New England Montessori Teacher Education Center, Goffstown, NH **DANIELLE HINES (Infant & Toddler), Virginia Center for Montessori Studies, Richmond, VA KAYLA IANNUZZO (Early Childhood), Summit Montessori Teacher Training Institute, Davie, FL FARZANA KHAN (Early Childhood), Dallas Montessori Teacher Education Program, Dallas, TX DEEPIKA KOTTE GANGODA THALAPITIGODAGE (Early Childhood), Midwest Montessori Teacher Training Center, Libertyville, IL CHRISTINA KRENICKI (Early Childhood), Northeast Montessori Institute, Warren, ME LAUREN LUND (Secondary I-II), Cincinnati Montessori Secondary Teacher Education Program, Cincinnati, OH KYLEE MEYER (Early Childhood), Center for Montessori Education/NY, White Plains, NY EILYS ORTA (Infant & Toddler), Village Montessori Training Center, Miami, FL ALYNA PHETSINOR (Early Childhood), Midwest Montessori Teacher Training Center, Libertyville, IL ELISABETH ROSOFF (Infant & Toddler), West Side Montessori School, New York, NY LISA SCHAD (Elementary I-II), Montessori Elementary Teacher Training Collaborative, Arlington TAYLOR WEBB (Early Childhood), Hope Montessori Educational Institute, Lake St. Louis, MO *Scholarship awarded is from the Zell Family Scholarship Fund. **Scholarship partially funded by the Joanne P. Hammes Scholarship Fund.

Language: English

ISSN: 1054-0040

Doctoral Dissertation

Möjligheter och begränsningar: Om lärares arbete med montessoripedagogiken i praktiken [Opportunities and limitations: About teachers' work with Montessori pedagogy in practice]

Available from: DiVA Portal

See More

Abstract/Notes: This study examines processes connected to teacher’s transformation of the Montessori theory and it's described application to a daily practice. The aim is to create knowledge about what constitutes possibilities and limitations for teachers in their daily work with Montessori education. This does not only refer to what constitutes opportunities and limitations in teachers' everyday work with teaching, but also to what constitutes opportunities and limitations for teachers to learn at work. The theoretical framework is based on action theory and theories on adult learning and connects to a tradition called workplace-learning in which learning is considered to take place in, but also between, individuals. This approach indicates that the contextual conditions which the teachers were imbedded in are important to identify. The study was conducted in four different Montessori-environments and involved nine Montessori teachers. The methods used were participant observation, interviews, informal conversations and review of teacher produced material and documents. Possibilities and limitations in teachers work were related to if they had access to Montessori materials or not. In work with Montessori materials teachers identified the children's abilities to a greater extent than they did when other materials were in use. This identification directed their interventions. When the teachers did not have access to Montessori material their method often appeared to be the same as “individual work” with the provided material. Furthermore, interventions of the teacher were then significantly often procedural rather than content-related, although the teachers clearly expressed that they wanted to go into a dialogue with children about the treated subject area. The survey therefore contradicts with the opinion that Montessori-teachers withdraw in favor of Montessori materials that sometimes has been brought up by interpreters of the pedagogy. Rather, teachers stepped back when other materials were in use. The study also shows how a prerequisite for a collective development-oriented learning among the teachers was dependent on whether teachers made their own private understanding of the pedagogy available to each other. At times, however, teachers took the use of the materials for granted. Some of the teachers also deliberately refrained from making their personal understanding available to others due to the fact that they then could be seen as a less competent Montessori-teacher. This maintaining of a “false” collective understanding is seen as an expression of an institutionalization of teaching practice which was maintained by sanctions from the environment if the individual didn´t recognize the institutionalization in question. Since teacher’s “space for action” in this way was limited, the institution created conditions that prevented a possible development of the working methods in use. In those cases when conditions for a collective development-oriented learning were more favorable, it was clear that the teachers did not perceive Montessori education as a given method but rather saw it as a "model" for teaching in which the teachers had to interpret and define their own method from. The teachers thus came to take advantage of a potential “space for action” which was not noticed when the pedagogy was seen as a method.

Language: Swedish

Published: Stockholm, Sweden, 2016

Book

Hundert Jahre Montessori-Pädagogik, 1907-2007: Eine Chronik der Montessori-Pädagogik in der Schweiz [One Hundred Years of Montessori Education, 1907-2007: A Chronicle of Montessori Education in Switzerland]

Europe, Montessori method of education, Montessori movement, Montessori schools, Switzerland, Western Europe

See More

Abstract/Notes: Harold Baumann ordnet die schweizerische Montessori-Pädagogik in die internationale Reformpädagogik ein, skizziert ihre Anfänge im Kanton Tessin, zeigt die Auswirkungen und Einflüsse der Montessori-Bestrebungen in vielen Schweizer Kantonen, u.a. anhand der staatlichen Montessori-Kindergärten im Kanton Wallis. Zudem erläutert er den heutigen Stand der Montessori-Pädagogik in der Schweiz. Harold Baumann ergänzt seine Recherchen durch Beiträge, die ihm von Zeitzeugen überreicht wurden. [Harold Baumann classifies the Swiss Montessori pedagogy in the international reform pedagogy, outlines its beginnings in the canton of Ticino, shows the effects and influences of the Montessori endeavors in many Swiss cantons, e.g. with the help of the state Montessori kindergartens in the canton of Valais. He also explains the current state of Montessori education in Switzerland. Harold Baumann supplements his research with contributions that were presented to him by contemporary witnesses.]

Language: German

Published: Bern, Switzerland: Haupt Verlag, 2007

Edition: 1st edition

ISBN: 978-3-258-07092-6

Advanced Search