Language: English

Published: Dunedin, New Zealand: Wickliffe Limited, 2015

Abstract/Notes: COVID–19 has forced preschools to resort to online education. While traditional schools have got adjusted to online teaching quickly, Montessori schools could not turn to online easily. Montessori education is considered to be impossible to offer through online mode to children at home, due to the lack of the prepared classroom, didactic materials and trained parents who could support children’s development. The current research presents an action research with an aim to convert Montessori education to online mode and develop a model for offering Montessori education online to the children between 2½ and 5 ½ years of age providing activity to the hands and senses and discusses the limitations and implications.

Language: English

Abstract/Notes: Play and work are, besides science, two basic forms of human activity. Play is not only the basic form of the activity of a small child, but also the organization of the educational process in a kindergarten. Therefore, the purpose of the article is to answer the question of why Maria Montessori calls a child’s activity work and not play. The explanation of this issue is carried out in two stages. The first is a literature review, on the basis of which the most important issues of the contemporary understanding of the concept of play and work are formulated. The second is an analysis of M. Montessori’s views and comparing them with the assumptions about play and work. The work of a child according to M. Montessori leads to their independence, allowing them to build relationships with others and discover the meaning of their actions, as well as objects in their immediate vicinity. The intention of M. Montessori was to appreciate the child’s actions, which promote holistic and integral development. Her views can be considered as convergent with contemporary concepts in primary education, focusing on subjectivity. She created a well-prepared environment for the child to be able to choose their own activity, termed as work. / Zabawa i praca są, obok nauki, dwiema podstawowymi formami działalności ludzkiej. Zabawa jest nie tylko podstawową formą aktywności małego dziecka, ale też organizacji procesu wychowawczego w przedszkolu. Dlatego celem artykułu jest udzielenie odpowiedzi na pytanie, dlaczego Maria Montessori nazywa działalność dziecka pracą, a nie zabawą. Wyjaśnienie tego zagadnienia jest realizowane w dwóch etapach. Pierwszy to przegląd literatury, na podstawie której sformułowano najważniejsze kwestie współczesnego rozumienia pojęć zabawy i pracy. Drugi to analiza poglądów M. Montessori i porównanie ich z założeniami dotyczącymi zabawy i pracy. Praca dziecka według M. Montessori prowadzi do jego samodzielności, pozwala na budowanie więzi z innymi oraz na odkrywanie i nadawanie sensu swojemu działaniu, jak i przedmiotom znajdującym się w najbliższym otoczeniu. Intencją M. Montessori było dowartościowanie działania dziecka, które sprzyja holistycznemu i integralnemu rozwojowi. Jej poglądy można uznać za zbieżne ze współczesnymi koncepcjami edukacji dziecka, stawiającymi na podmiotowość. Włoszka tworzy odpowiednio przygotowane otoczenie do tego, by dziecko mogło dokonywać wyboru własnej aktywności, która została nazwana pracą.

Language: Polish

DOI: 10.14632/eetp.2017.13.47.69

ISSN: 1896-2327, 2353-7787

Language: English

ISSN: 1054-0040

Language: English

ISSN: 0889-5643

Language: English

Language: English

Language: English

ISSN: 1071-6246

Abstract/Notes: The purpose of this study was (1) to investigate the degree of agreement between AMI trained Montessori teachers' knowledge and attitudes and Montessori's recommendations for guiding the process of normalization among young children and (2) to discover the reasons for differences from those recommendations. Normalization is the central process in the Montessori method. Except for a study by this investigator (Zener, 1993) guiding the process of normalization had not been researched since Montessori's work some forty-five to eighty-five years ago. Therefore, this investigation also provided current teacher experiences of guiding the process of normalization. One hundred sixty five Montessori teachers attending various regional and national conferences were surveyed with knowledge and attitude scales. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10% of the participants. Mean scale scores from 4.0 to 5.0 on a five degree Likert scale and a SD less than 1.0 were projected as satisfactory levels of agreement with Montessori's recommendations. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the scales, and content analysis was used to analyze the interviews. T-tests and ANOVAS indicated that demographic variables were not significant to the results. The study concluded that AMI trained Montessori teachers reflected a satisfactory degree of agreement with the recommended knowledge and attitudes (M = 4.25, SD =.31 and M = 4.50, SD =.34 respectively). Knowledge and attitude correlated (p $<$.01). Reasons for differences among teachers' knowledge and attitudes about guiding the process included using other aspects of Montessori theory, disagreement with Montessori, difficulty in carrying out the theory in practice, misinterpretations of scale items, and misunderstandings about Montessori's recommendations for guiding the process of normalization. Implications for children, teachers, parents, school administration, and teacher education included validation of teachers for the high level of consistency in their reflections on guiding the process of normalization. Recommendations for future research included developing a more complete theoretical understanding of the process of normalization, particularly the importance of respecting children's spans of concentration.

Language: English

Published: College Park, Maryland, 1994

Language: German

Published: München: Kindler, 1978

ISBN: 3-463-00716-9