100 years have passed since
Conventional educational methods place a lot of emphasis on instruction and ignore, to some degree, the ability of the student to grasp whatever is being imparted. The grade-system as also the marks system further places a lot of stress on performance in periodic tests rather than on overall development. These tests, while evaluative of performance to some degree, cannot be seen as the be-all, end-all of educational quantitative analysis. This may seem as a biased statement coming from me, considering that I rarely if ever secured ‘superlative’ grades in school or college.
The Montessori Method on the other hand states that children are its focus, its centre and all that it is bothered about. This focus is exemplified in its taking as the basis of ongoing curriculum development the child’s behavioural patterns and response to the current environment. Children are not viewed as inept creatures, incompetent of taking decisions for themselves; rather the Method encourages them to make maximal decisions. The very fact that the Method recognizes that children learn through discovery is a major indicator of this approach.
Basically the Method is, and I quote, built upon the idea that children develop and think differently to adults; that they are not merely “adults in small bodies”. While measurement of achievement is a must if one is evaluate the benefits of any educational process, the Montessori method has persistently refused to use grades or tests to measure the same stating them as ‘negative’ competition that could potentially damage the ‘inner’ growth of the children.
Education as such cannot be a one-size fits all method. Every individual has different potential, different capabilities and different talents. While the conventional method suggests that the needs of the larger group have primacy over a particular individual’s needs, the Montessori Method accentuates the individuality of each child. This ensures that each child feels involved and continues to enjoy learning as is natural to his/her age.
Literacy levels may be rising, but functional illiteracy levels also are rising. People may be becoming graduates, but their ability to deal with practical life skills such as domestic tasks and manners are sadly deplorable.
Having said all this, I am of the opinion that while our conventional systems may have worked so far well enough, this method merits a look-over. Who is to say, this may the key to our dawn, to our future?
Reference:
3 comments:
It is really nice to know that there exists a method wherein people try to concentrate on the individual abilities of the children and not by the grades that they score!Certainly the child needs to be subject to an environment where there is healthy competition and they should be indulged in activities which help them bring out their hidden talents!Just the routine exams won't help and they will be restricted to just the normal engineer and doctor degree!
Reddy,
I couldn't have expected anyone else I know to come up with a post like this from out of the blue.
It's weel read people like you who are capable of such surprises.
The subject is extremely fascinating even though fuzzy. I tried to piece together what the "Montesorri way" is all about though only through the references you've given. To be frank I am fascinated by a methodology by a form of learning that imparts kids with more than just science-math skills. Some of her ideas esp. recongnizing sensitive periods of children and using innovative teaching aids are truly revolutionary.
However, despite all her efforts, the current state of the Montessori way underlines the need for succession planning and documented principles on methodology.
Sure her methods may have been great. But no one has a clear idea of what exactly the "way" involves.
Its one of those intangibles who's results are easy to monitor but the process itself is way to hazy. For anything to move from a niche to mass consumption, it has to repeatable. To be repeatable, it must be clearly defined.
Correct me if I am wrong, I don't think that is the case here.
Systems are prone to be reluctant to change in their inherent rigidity. Being a flexible method allows Montessori to experiment with techniques, which in turn make it more adept at dealing with changes in the context in which it may be expected to operate.
True, Montessori does not have a strictly regimented pattern, or a methodology document, but it must be understood that no true educative process can survive with such a definition. It must evolve, in order to deal with the changing needs of the times and of those who would be expected to take benefit from its tools and techniques. It is my belief that Montessori manages to do that, to a much better extent than the rest.
I do not say that Montessori is infallible or the method is flawless. I only seek to submit that of all the systems, to my mind, this is the best that we have.
Post a Comment