Abstract/Notes: Mlearning is learning through digital mobile environments, making it possible to acquire, interrelate and share new knowledge through mobile devices. There is a consensus on the growth of the use of these devices for different educational actions. According to Sarrab, Elgamel & Aldabbas (2012), there are different recreational and pedagogical uses based on mlearning. According to De Araújo Junior et al (2019), these uses are based on the possibility of combining more than one methodology and learning strategies in line with students’ learning characteristics and needs. To this end, mlearning seeks to integrate learning theories, especially constructivist and behavioral theories to also create collaborative working environments (Crompton, Burke & Gregory, 2017). The greatest advantage of mlearning is the possibility of it being applied pedagogically beyond the school environment, with the participation of families and with various proposals for interaction between teacher-student, student-student, and teacher-student-families. This whole range of possibilities has created a new field of study. By overcoming the design approach on mlearning environments and their different effects (Devinder Singh & Zaitun, 2006), a new line of research is becoming relevant: the role of teachers and their training in the use of this technology. Sanchez-Prieto & Hernández García (2019) point out that despite its advantages, the number of teachers using this technology is still very limited. A bibliographic review of 7 scientific articles related to the use of mlearning in primary classes within different educational contexts identified that teachers still lack, not only technical and/or pedagogical but also comprehensive training, making it difficult for them to become familiar with this technology and applying it as another teaching tool in their primary classes. Considering the needs found regarding digital teacher competence, the basis of digital interaction between teacher-student-families and the assessment, selection, and design of didactic contents, this study is an integral part of the Koulu I +D project (Mobile learning in primary education) number ID19-XX-003, aims to present a proposal for teacher training taught within an online learning environment. It does so regarding the basis, application and use of mlearning in primary classes based on the principles of Montessori education: personal choice of the student, collaborative learning, self-direction, the teacher as a guide and learning by discovery. To this end, the training model is based on these points to guide the work using mlearning by considering the characteristics and needs of primary education, regardless of the tool’s typology. The training proposal is based on providing the necessary teaching knowledge to conduct the pedagogical work at the comprehension, application and assessment levels of mlearning in primary classes. The training was designed as an online format to overcome the first barrier for some teachers: the use of technology. The defined points of training to meet the demands of the application in primary classes are: Digital teacher competence, Montessori and Mlearning Pedagogy, Pedagogical tools and the possibilities of primary education and mlearning Assessment in primary education.

Language: English

Pages: 7979-7983

DOI: 10.21125/edulearn.2020.2004

ISBN: 978-84-09-17979-4

Abstract/Notes: Today, with the implementation of quality education, humanistic culture is integrated into preschool education. Under different backgrounds, the integration of humanistic thought in preschool education can help children grow up and receive a better education. Montessori's teaching thought has exerted a vital influence on the early childhood education system in China and is highly praised by many early childhood educators, which is of great practical significance to the development of children. Based on this, this article takes Montessori's education idea as the main starting point, carries on the elaboration from the thought outline and the core goal two aspects, analyzes the current country's preschool education situation, and inquires into its existence the question. Finally, from esteem heredity, enviromnent education, and sense organ education, this paper carries on a brief discussion of the practice of Montessori education through countermeasures, to further enrich the theoretical system of preschool education in China and make important contributions to the practical exploration of preschool education.

Language: English

DOI: 10.26855/er.2O23.09.034

ISSN: 2575-7946, 2575-7938

Abstract/Notes: For a century Montessori’s philosophy of education has been understood in separation from Dewey’s philosophy of education. According to Thayer-Bacon [1], a plausible explanation is that Kilpatrick, Dewey’s influential student, rejected Montessori’s system of education [2]. His main objection was that her educational system was founded on an outdated psychology. In contrast, this paper suggests, Montessori’s educational systems is founded on a psychology which, like Dewey’s, was markedly ahead of her time by putting purely embodied interactions with the environment as the foundation of human understanding. By comparing Montessori’s psychology [3; 4] to Dewey’s [5; 6] this paper shows their compatibility. The developed pragmatism of Sellars [5;6] and the interactivism of Bickhard [7] further enables us to explain how the prelinguistic human-environment interactions (or transactions), central to Dewey and Montessori, are pure processes [8]. The pure process ontology enables us to see how more complex processes emerge from simpler ones and how learning in the mere causal domain of bodily human-environment interactions can grow into the linguistic and conceptual domain of education. The ambition is to show that a flourishing interaction between Montessori and pragmatism is possible and preferable if we are to understand the proper role of the body in education. [1] Thayer-Bacon, Barbara (2012). Maria Montessori, John Dewey, and William H. Kilpatrick. Education and Culture, 28, 1, 3-20. [2] Kilpatrick, W. H. (1914). The Montessori system examined. Cambridge, Mass.; The Riverside Press [3] Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori method. NY: Frederick A. Stokes Company [4] Montessori. M. (1949). The absorbent mind. Adyar: The Theosophical Publishing House [5] Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. NY: The Macmillan Company [6] Dewey, J. (1925) Experience and nature. Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company [7] Sellars, W. (1960). Being and Being Known. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association, 34, 28-49. [8] Sellars, W. (1981). Foundations for a metaphysics of pure process: The Carus lectures of Wilfrid Sellars. The Monist 64 (1):3-90. [9] Bickhard, M. H. (2009). The interactivist model. Synthese, 166, 3, 547-591. [10] Seibt, Johanna (2016). How to Naturalize Intentionality and Sensory Consciousness within a Process Monism with Gradient Normativity—A Reading of Sellars. In James O'Shea (ed.), Sellars and His Legacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 186-222.

Language: English

Published: Copenhagen, Denmark: International Network of Philosophers of Education, 2022

Abstract/Notes: Montessori system its impact can easily be seen in the field of pre-primary education in the European countries, U.S.A., India, China, Japan, African countries, Latin American countries and all through the world, This system has encouraged lovers of education to discover new methods of teaching young children. This system emphasized the necessity of study of children in order to educate them properly. As a result, education became child-centered. The construction of curriculum became oriented to the actual needs of life. It was considered necessary to provide a good environment in the school. The aims of education became oriented to individual development of each child. Hence emphasis was laid on the development of personality of each child. Proper training of teachers was considered necessary.

Language: English

ISSN: 2277-7377

Language: English

Language: English

Published: Bombay, India: Orient Longmans, 1955

Abstract/Notes: Review of "Comprehensive Peace Education: Educating for Global Responsibility" by Betty Reardon

Language: English

ISSN: 1071-6246

Abstract/Notes: The aim of this paper is to study and analyze Montessori's educational ideas and their implications for family education. Through the study of representative works such as The Complete Montessori Book of Early Education, The Montessori Handbook of Sensitive Periods for Children, The Montessori Family Program, The Montessori Method of Early Education, The Secret of Childhood and The Absorbent Mind, we have come to the following conclusions. Firstly, Montessori's educational philosophy emphasizes the creation of a home environment that matches the child. This includes providing an orderly, quiet, warm and inspiring environment, and parents should be supporters and observers of children's development, respecting their individual interests and needs. Secondly, Montessori emphasized grasping the child's sensitive periods. She observed that children are more sensitive to certain experiences and skills at certain ages and learn best during this period. Finally, Montessori's educational ideas provide theoretical and practical implications for preschool education. She emphasizes the development of children's self-discipline, self-confidence, independent thinking and problem-solving skills. Encouraging children to actively participate in daily life activities, developing good social skills and emotional development, and providing appropriate learning experiences lay a solid foundation for children's preschool education. In summary, Montessori's educational ideas give important insights in the area of family education. Creating a family environment adapted to children, grasping sensitive periods, and developing various abilities are insights that provide theoretical and practical implications for preschool education.

Language: English

DOI: 10.23977/appep.2023.040801

ISSN: 2523-5842

Language: English

ISSN: 1071-6246

Abstract/Notes: The following article looks at the role movement and sensorial stimuli do play in the educational approaches of Dr. Maria Montessori and Dr. Emmi Pikler as well as the Sensorial Integration and Psychomotor Therapy. The author of this paper has been studying, applying, and teaching all four approaches for many years and used her expertise in all four approaches to look at whether independent scientific research proves the effectiveness of movement and sensorial stimuli for reaching therapeutical as well as educational goals and to also provide scientific evidence for the fact that all four approaches focus on the role of these two factors, which means that this is a comparative study utilizing existing research papers. The methods of applying movement and sensorial stimuli in the four approaches mentioned above are being compared and linked to recent scientific findings concerning the role of movement and sensorial stimuli for the efficacy of education and therapy. This article compares the four approaches based on scientific research on the various methods as well as independent research which looks and the impact of movement and sensorial stimuli as well as a method of application and its effectiveness. It has been found that sensorial stimulation and movement are closely connected and that these play a major role in all four approaches although the methods of application are quite different. One example might be that the Montessori method purposefully teaches specific movements in specific ways while only Sensory integration therapy also utilizes passive movement as a sensorial stimulation. All four approaches rely on the self-motivation of the child and do not apply any kind of pressure.

Language: English

DOI: 10.35923/JES.2021.2.02

ISSN: 2457-8673