8 ms·

I think it's usage as real geometry learning tool is very limited. You can even see in the video that the children are wondering what the animation is after com

by jojoo 9y ago

I think it's usage as real geometry learning tool is very limited. You can even see in the video that the children are wondering what the animation is after completing the puzzles. Fortunately the educator sees this explains it to the boys. This is not surprising as Maria Montessoris understanding of geometry and pre-numeric Math is nowadays considered to be quite poor. The usage as a stop-go animation machine seems to be fun, they seem to enjoy it. I've worked with children almost twice as old and they were quite confused about the concept of how to create a stop-go animation, so i'd like to have a similar machine in my school.

learn1ng2learn 9y ago
> This is not surprising as Maria Montessoris understanding of geometry and pre-numeric Math is nowadays considered to be quite poor. Could you elaborate on this? Or point to any references? Thanks
- dyarosla 9y ago
  I second this ask: the parent's claim is new to me.
- jojoo 9y ago
  Keep in mind that Montessoris theory is ~100 years old; it kept up very well but there are shortcomings; IMO especially in the realm of pre-numeric mathematics. The base of the critique is that Montessori does not provide a conclusive, foundational Layer of (Pre-)Mathematics - a model of more or less depending sub-skills - which would enable A) Educators to better understand their pupils or what they need to further their skills[1] B) enable the invention of new Material. She basically states that children need Material X, Y and Z, but not how and why the work with the material enables them to start using math. [1] = Which is very important for pupils with different learning paths and/or disabilities.
  - Nycto 9y ago
    Is there anything you would recommend instead? Or any resources you have on hand to get more information?
    - jojoo 9y ago
      You mean of the critique of Maria Montessoris education in general? Then i'd refer you the 1914s Text from Kilpatrick (From the same time than Montessori, a progressive Educator himself) https://archive.org/details/montessorisystem00kilprich https://archive.org/details/montessorisystem00kilprich I just chuckeled as i re-read his accounts of her arithmetics material: "On the whole, the arithmetic work seemed good, but not remarkable; probably not equal to the better work done in this country. In particular there is very slight effort to connect arithmetic with the immediate life of the child. Certainly, in the teaching of this subject, there is for us no funda- mental suggestion. " Mind you, that's from 1914. Pedagogics have improved since then... Or do you mean a better understanding how pre-numeric mathematic works? Most efforts are built around Piagets Teachings (Not very scientific as he "just" observed his own three children) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaget%27s_theory_of_cognitive_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaget%27s_theory_of_cognitive... One sample of such a adaptations for pre-numerics (not Geometry) are the works of Carin de Vries (sadly only in German): http://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/1014/1/vridia10.pdf http://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/1014/1/vridia10.pdf
      - mkempe 9y ago
        I call BS. Kilpatrick was a disciple of Dewey; both were known haters of Maria Montessori and her work, and never gave any specific criticism of her system, just appeals to their own authority; they basically rejected her purpose in education (developing the faculty of reason, learning writing, reading, arithmetics, and geometry) because of their progressive-education, anti-reason dogma. There isn't much difference between the insights of Montessori and Piaget. Piaget worked with Montessori early in his career. The experimental nursery school in Geneva, La Maison des Petits, where Piaget carried out his first studies of children in the 1920s, was a modified Montessori institution, and Piaget was the head of the Swiss Montessori Society for many years. Jean Piaget was a great scientist who conducted systematic experiments with countless children. Your claim that he only observed his own 3 children is a lie. Scientists at the University of Geneva to this day carry on with his research and experiments. That last reference you provide is some obscure German PhD thesis which does not reference Montessori's work at all; it has a major focus on teaching mentally retarded children, as well as teaching mathematics out of books to children older than the ones that go to Montessori schools (commonly age 3-6).
mkempe 9y ago
On the contrary, Montessori's work has been validated and reinforced by research and scientific insights in recent decades. [1] If you truly seek to understand the Montessori teaching method and materials, you should look into her writings, including the teacher's guides. She experimented and developed these materials and methods over decades. Her purpose was to teach children mastery of their mind and hands, our two unique tools of survival. [1] "Montessori: The Science behind the Genius" http://www.montessori-science.org/montessori_science_genius.htm http://www.montessori-science.org/montessori_science_genius....
- jojoo 9y ago
  > If you truly seek to understand the Montessori teaching method and materials, you should look into her writings, including the teacher's guides. I have both German Mathematics Teachers Manuals right here. I work with her material nearly every day. My point is that there are better sources to base a mathematics game upon, not that her didactics are inferior (compared to what). Still if i could choose if my son should go to a "normal" Teacher or a Teacher with a Montessori training i'd choose the latter.

by jojoo 9y ago

learn1ng2learn 9y ago

> This is not surprising as Maria Montessoris understanding of geometry and pre-numeric Math is nowadays considered to be quite poor. Could you elaborate on this? Or point to any references? Thanks

dyarosla 9y ago
I second this ask: the parent's claim is new to me.
jojoo 9y ago
Keep in mind that Montessoris theory is ~100 years old; it kept up very well but there are shortcomings; IMO especially in the realm of pre-numeric mathematics. The base of the critique is that Montessori does not provide a conclusive, foundational Layer of (Pre-)Mathematics - a model of more or less depending sub-skills - which would enable A) Educators to better understand their pupils or what they need to further their skills[1] B) enable the invention of new Material. She basically states that children need Material X, Y and Z, but not how and why the work with the material enables them to start using math. [1] = Which is very important for pupils with different learning paths and/or disabilities.
- Nycto 9y ago
  Is there anything you would recommend instead? Or any resources you have on hand to get more information?
  - jojoo 9y ago
    You mean of the critique of Maria Montessoris education in general? Then i'd refer you the 1914s Text from Kilpatrick (From the same time than Montessori, a progressive Educator himself) https://archive.org/details/montessorisystem00kilprich https://archive.org/details/montessorisystem00kilprich I just chuckeled as i re-read his accounts of her arithmetics material: "On the whole, the arithmetic work seemed good, but not remarkable; probably not equal to the better work done in this country. In particular there is very slight effort to connect arithmetic with the immediate life of the child. Certainly, in the teaching of this subject, there is for us no funda- mental suggestion. " Mind you, that's from 1914. Pedagogics have improved since then... Or do you mean a better understanding how pre-numeric mathematic works? Most efforts are built around Piagets Teachings (Not very scientific as he "just" observed his own three children) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaget%27s_theory_of_cognitive_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaget%27s_theory_of_cognitive... One sample of such a adaptations for pre-numerics (not Geometry) are the works of Carin de Vries (sadly only in German): http://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/1014/1/vridia10.pdf http://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/1014/1/vridia10.pdf
    - mkempe 9y ago
      I call BS. Kilpatrick was a disciple of Dewey; both were known haters of Maria Montessori and her work, and never gave any specific criticism of her system, just appeals to their own authority; they basically rejected her purpose in education (developing the faculty of reason, learning writing, reading, arithmetics, and geometry) because of their progressive-education, anti-reason dogma. There isn't much difference between the insights of Montessori and Piaget. Piaget worked with Montessori early in his career. The experimental nursery school in Geneva, La Maison des Petits, where Piaget carried out his first studies of children in the 1920s, was a modified Montessori institution, and Piaget was the head of the Swiss Montessori Society for many years. Jean Piaget was a great scientist who conducted systematic experiments with countless children. Your claim that he only observed his own 3 children is a lie. Scientists at the University of Geneva to this day carry on with his research and experiments. That last reference you provide is some obscure German PhD thesis which does not reference Montessori's work at all; it has a major focus on teaching mentally retarded children, as well as teaching mathematics out of books to children older than the ones that go to Montessori schools (commonly age 3-6).

mkempe 9y ago

On the contrary, Montessori's work has been validated and reinforced by research and scientific insights in recent decades. [1] If you truly seek to understand the Montessori teaching method and materials, you should look into her writings, including the teacher's guides. She experimented and developed these materials and methods over decades. Her purpose was to teach children mastery of their mind and hands, our two unique tools of survival. [1] "Montessori: The Science behind the Genius" http://www.montessori-science.org/montessori_science_genius.htm http://www.montessori-science.org/montessori_science_genius....

jojoo 9y ago
> If you truly seek to understand the Montessori teaching method and materials, you should look into her writings, including the teacher's guides. I have both German Mathematics Teachers Manuals right here. I work with her material nearly every day. My point is that there are better sources to base a mathematics game upon, not that her didactics are inferior (compared to what). Still if i could choose if my son should go to a "normal" Teacher or a Teacher with a Montessori training i'd choose the latter.