Ever thought about education that revolves entirely around your child? Picture this: a child-centric approach that assesses their readiness and interests in the present moment. Intrigued?
Isn’t an assessment-centric approach, where the child solely adheres to the teacher’s guidance with a primary focus on assessments, limiting their full potential?
Individualised learning allows children to learn at their own pace and gives them the time required to master essential tasks. Don’t you believe that all children have the potential to learn everything if provided with the appropriate methods and sufficient time?
Children are compelled to keep pace with their entire class, even if they require a bit more time to comprehend and ultimately master the lesson. Is it equitable for a child to be compelled to move forward, even when they haven’t fully grasped a lesson that serves as a foundation for future learning? Why should a child experience a sense of falling behind? Conversely, why should a child who learns quickly not be presented with more advanced lessons?
The Montessori materials have been meticulously designed and have demonstrated their effectiveness over decades, with children consistently surpassing average benchmarks. These materials empower children to manipulate them, fulfill their intended purpose, and boost confidence by enabling self-correction, minimizing unnecessary and untimely intervention from adults. Do you not agree that children comprehend and engage more effectively with concepts when they can actively work with their hands?
There’s minimal utilization of hands-on materials, with a rapid transition to paper and pen. Teachers must construct the lessons, and with such dependence on individual teacher-led instruction, do you believe it’s possible for the teacher to cater to the needs of every child? Is there enough time for a comprehensive lesson plan that effectively serves each and every student?
Children thrive when they have the freedom to choose what tasks to work on, decide when to engage in activities, and determine the duration of their work. Considering that children inherently possess a natural curiosity for learning, do you think it’s the “what, when, and how” aspects that distinguish individual learning experiences?
Children’s limited options result in a diminishing interest in learning, turning it into a task rather than the joyful experience it should be, in alignment with their natural tendencies. How does this lack of choice impact their enthusiasm for education in your view?
The aim is to cultivate self-discipline in children. This is achieved and evidenced in those who sustain a passion for learning, develop concentration, and have a range of choices to fulfill their needs and potential. They acquire a sense of respect through the carefully maintained and well-balanced boundaries. Do you not believe that building self-discipline in children should be our central focus?
Children are instructed to learn through compliance and obedience, having minimal freedom and being obligated to follow instructions regardless of their preferences. This approach lacks the cultivation of a love for learning, a natural human tendency. Why do you believe children lose their curiosity about the world in such a setting?
The Montessori System is intentionally non-competitive. Each activity is singular on the shelf, eliminating comparisons, and guides are consistently encouraged to employ non-competitive language. Isn’t it preferable for children to learn to compete with themselves rather than with others? Won’t this foster genuine confidence in each and every child?
The system is crafted with a competitive framework. While this approach may motivate those at the top of the class, what about the others? Doesn’t it diminish their motivation, leading to a sense of resignation knowing they can never reach those levels? How can this be considered a healthy approach? Doesn’t it foster unfair competition? Doesn’t it erode the child’s confidence, going against the very essence of what a school should be fostering?
As human beings, our learning doesn’t follow a linear path but rather curves. Children have the chance to teach and assist younger peers, reinforcing what they’ve learned in the process. They revisit previous work as new connections are made in their minds. Younger individuals benefit from observing older ones, facilitating their learning. Consider two siblings—the younger one often learns slightly ahead of the older one. Why do you think that is?
Children are grouped by age, and assumptions are made about what they should be learning and when. Unless under exceptional circumstances, they aren’t granted the flexibility to advance or revisit material based on their individual readiness. It essentially functions as a collective group with numerous assumptions.