Role of University-Based Teacher Education Programs as Part of the Whole, The

Montessori Life, Winter 2004 by Bogart, Louise

Few who have been intimately involved with university-based Montessori teacher education programs would refute the premise that establishing and maintaining such programs presents many challenges. At the same time, there would be strong agreement that university-based programs provide many benefits to the Montessori community as a whole.

Within the university education community, there are the inevitable political issues of pedagogical dominance and relevance. Montessori often is not a valued philosophy or pedagogy because it is considered not relevant to current trends and best practice. In this way, university educators bear little difference from the general public in that statements are often made from ignorance rather than from considered study. Clearly those educators without Montessori credentials can feel threatened by the presence of a Montessori program: first, because they cannot teach those courses, which limits their flexibility and therefore their ability to contribute; secondly, they witness the enormous amount of resources allocated to a nationally accredited Montessori program, which they may see as limiting resources for their programs. Under these conditions, internal tensions are inevitable.

External tensions are provoked by the issues of state licensure policy and accreditation demands, by both regional accreditation agencies and the Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Education (MACTE). Each state has different requirements for a teaching license, so the stresses vary according to state. Regional accreditation can exacerbate the faculty tensions and there is the added component of the reviewers not understanding Montessori. When MACTE reviews occur, the team understands Montessori but not necessarily the university setting. Therefore, self-studies and accreditation visits can add to tensions.

Yet the challenges of operating Montessori programs within a university setting are balanced by the benefits provided to the Montessori movement. Universities can do things that are difficult or impossible for freestanding programs to accomplish. First and foremost, university-based Montessori programs are able to bring Montessori education into the general education dialogue. Second, university-based programs have the ability to ensure that Montessori is seen as a pedagogy that follows current trends and bestpractice. Third, university-based program faculty are expected to tie Montessori practice to state and national standards. This information, when shared with the larger Montessori community, provides everyone with tools to demonstrate Montessori as a pedagogy relevant to education in the 21st century.

Wider Education Dialogue

Some of the major issues that comprise the wider education dialogue are learning styles and learning theory, authentic assessment, differentiated learning, and educating students with special needs. All of these issues are dealt with amply in Montessori pedagogy, although it is her work with special needs children that is most widely known in the university community. Montessori faculty are in a position to add Montessori's insights, philosophy, and pedagogy to the dialogue.

Montessori pedagogy includes learning strategies that address different learning styles. For example, the points of interest speak to different styles. Also, allowing children the choice to work at a table or on the floor, alone or with a partner are ways of addressing different learning styles. And providing for children to choose their work and to work at their own pace is what differentiated learning calls for. Montessorians always have used authentic assessment by providing a variety of ways for children to demonstrate their learning and by assessing in a manner that is consistent with the way in which the children learned.

The dialog is not all one-way. Montessori pedagogy also benefits from the interchange based on the latest research. Because Montessori was a scientist who made many changes to her methods over the years, incorporating the latest brain and learning research seems consistent with her own practice. Much of the research provides evidence that supports Montessori's observations. A great deal more is known today than in Montessori's time about how the brain works to enable learning. This new information can continue to inform the teaching and practice of Montessori educators. By encouraging the dialog to go both ways, university-based Montessori faculty are in a position to help Montessori educators continually examine current practice.

This two-way dialog also provides opportunity to learn the terms, concepts, and theories in current education parlance. For example, understanding the terms constructivism and scaffolding add to our ability to demonstrate that Montessori follows current trends and best practice in education. Constructivist learning theory, which is based on Piaget's work (Wadsworth, 1996), states that children create their own understanding through their experiences. While that is not a new thought to Montessori educators, Constructivist theory would add that it is important for children to talk about the way they are thinking, with each other and with educators. In this dialog, children are able to clarify their own thinking and to learn about how others are thinking, thus expanding their own repertoire of perspectives and strategies. Montessori educators would do well to ask whether the full potential of the materials is realized if this type of dialog is not incorporated into current practice.