Somewhere along the way, some talented spin doctors convinced us all that desks in rows, subject-specific textbooks that fail to make connections between academic disciplines, large numbers of children in age-specific groups, highly defined short time periods for subject-matter study, rote learning, and adult-centered teaching constitute “traditional” education. I object, vigorously and vociferously. If adult-centered, textbook-oriented, rote learning is “traditional”, where does that leave child-centered learning-by-doing? What does that make the Montessori approach? “Alternative?” “Non-traditional?” I object, vigorously and vociferously. I suggest that the “alternative” mantle, which has been placed on our shoulders, does not fit, and I reject the “non-traditional” label.
Instead, I embrace the adjectives “timeless” and “classical,” and I urge Montessori parents and educators to do the same. To do anything less unfairly marginalizes the Montessori movement and diminishes its importance in a timeless educational continuum. Why? Because the philosophy and concept at the heart of the Montessori methodology and approach are as old as the Chinese, as classical as the Greeks, and as timeless as Socrates and Plato. They are shaped by Comenius and honed by Pestalozzi. They are ageless, they are time-tested, and they are proven. And, inasmuch as Montessori is in the tradition of the great educators of the world, Montessori is traditional.
At least until the graduate level must concern itself. In his book The End of Education, in which he seriously questions the current course of education in the United States, Neil Postman writes, “Our genius lies in our capacity to make meaning through the creation of narratives that give point to our labors, exalt our history, elucidate the present, and give direction to our future.” In one sentence he has defined the heart of Montessori education.
“Without a narrative, life has no meaning. Without meaning, learning has no purpose. Without a purpose, schools are houses of detention, not attention, ” Postman continues. More often than not, he argues, that is what our schools have become: houses of detention, where we avoid profound truths, where we sidestep moral instruction, and where the “means ” somehow become disconnected from the “ends ” of education. It is with the end of education- “a transcendent and honorable purpose ” that allows children to prepare for life (and not just to prepare to make a living) — that Montessori education has always concerned itself, and it is that premise, and the carefully devised curriculum and materials that result, which makes Montessori enduring and successful.
If “traditional ” does not feel quite right, use “timeless ” and “classical. ” There is no question that Montessori is most certainly those. And when you refer to commonly accepted teacher-centered, textbook-oriented methodologies, refer to them as “conventional ” not “traditional. ” The roots of the time-honored moniker “traditional ” belong just as well with our Montessori schools
