From my first observation in a Montessori classroom, I recognized how consistent it was with much about my field of special education. Up to that point, I had worked in a variety of settings from a public-school program to an in-patient psychiatric unit and with children from four to seventeen years of age. It immediately struck me that a Montessori classroom would be the perfect environment for serving a range of diversity of learning and behaviors. My biggest revelation? This could be a system based on prevention rather than a response to an identified ‘disability,’ the predominant model of special education at that time.
I made it my mission to create a school that would include all kinds of children with the specific goal of preventing the heartache I had seen in so many students and their families when a ‘disorder’ was diagnosed and sometimes not until the teenage years. My hypothesis was that prevention vs. response could be a model to minimize difficulties and maximize each child’s strengths.
My year-long project during my Montessori training was “Starting a School.” With the support and advice of my program director and mentor, Ceres York, this goal was realized with the founding of my first school two months after earning my credential.
Turns out I was not unique in my thinking that an Inclusion Model based on Prevention vs. Response could be the very best way to benefit all students. Many in the field of special education were looking at ways to support students with challenges in behavior and learning. From the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) in 2004, specifically mandating the right to “inclusive education” to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2015 mandating Multi-Tiered Systems of Support in every state, universities, research centers, and agencies of the federal and state governments have created a rich base of research guiding our understanding of this concept of inclusion using a Prevention vs. Response model.
As we in the Montessori community embrace diversity, equity, and inclusion, we must explore how we serve and support a growing population of children who perceive, learn, and behave with a wide range of neurodiversity.
These numbers, though just estimates are staggering. Regardless of our setting, be it public or independent, a large school or small, we cannot ignore the rates, or more importantly, the need.
Based on her observations and work with students who, today, might be classified as having ‘special needs,’ Dr. Montessori ‘discovered’ a system of education to benefit all students. Our roots are special education. Today’s child asks us to reframe our thinking—to innovate from our Montessori philosophical and pedagogical foundation to serve the child before us and “see the child not yet there.” (Montessori. The Absorbent Mind).
Creating an Inclusive Classroom?
It is tempting, especially when we feel less than confident on a topic, to identify labels as we seek to gain understanding. I imagine a ‘work’ something like three-part cards with a label for a disability, and its matching definition, but unlike three-part cards such as the parts of the bird, with its generic drawing, there is no such generic child. And there is not even agreement among special educators, psychologists, and other professionals about ‘labels’ and the characteristics of children who learn or behave in unique and
diverse ways.
A diagnostic category can give us a very broad, overall view of characteristics that might be common to a group but doesn’t really give us specific information to support that student who enters our school and our classroom every day. A label doesn’t account for whatever training, experience, and bias a professional might have in making a diagnosis. In a medical model, identifying the disease often leads to a clear treatment. But children are complex beings, and rarely does a child have one isolated ‘disorder’ that leads to a prescription, or ‘cure.’
So where do we begin to understand, to support, and to plan for that child? As Montessorians, we are familiar with the importance of self-reflection. Our first observation must be ourselves. We need to take a deep, maybe uncomfortable, look at our assumptions, our beliefs, our values, and our biases. Challenging students challenge us. Are we willing to do what it takes to best serve a diverse population in our Montessori classrooms?
Making a Commitment to a Prevention vs. Response
As school leaders, we have the crucial role of moving beyond our personal reflection to objectively look at our school system, our structure, our staff, and our culture. Are we willing to do what it takes to implement best practices for today’s’ children while staying true to our foundations as Montessorians? Are we ready to make a commitment to providing an inclusive education that supports the needs of the children before us and their families?
A successful Prevention vs. Response framework takes commitment, creative thinking, and effective system and classroom strategies based on the belief and vision that best practice for inclusion is really the best practice for all. This means moving beyond those ideas that “If I spend my time with this one, I’m ignoring the others,” and moving from a “putting-out-fires” mindset to a “We can do this and build on the strengths we already have at our school.” Like that ability to “see the child who is not yet there,” we must believe that this effort will have its rewards as we serve our students, their families, our teachers, and our school.
To begin…
“Visionary leadership is the most powerful predictor of teacher attitude toward inclusion.” (Villa & Thousand. 2003). As school leaders, we communicate our vision, listen to our staff for their input, their ideas, and their knowledge and experience, and collaborate to clarify just what this vision is going to look like, and what we need to get there. We know that change is going to be complex; it’s going to take patience and a willingness to learn, to develop skills, and to innovate where needed. But with a shared vision, we and our staff can begin to develop a plan.
We start where we are: maybe it’s the need for professional development and consultation; maybe it’s a ‘search’ for information on Inclusive Education or Multi-Tiered Systems of Support and the practices within each tier; maybe it’s building collaborative teams of staff and giving them time to work together to become the ‘problem-solvers,’ with each team, then sharing what they have learned with the others. Maybe a good start is to observe in each classroom to develop a sense of strengths and challenges each teaching team of adults (be it a lead and assistant, co-teaching team, or a team with support staff) has and share your observations and let the teams share theirs. Encourage peer observations. The point is to start small. Maybe its just a look at the physical environment, a practice in Tier One of a MTSS, and how it can be more responsive to all the students (with the numbers of children with over-reactive sensory systems this means paring down and minimizing visual and auditory ‘clutter’). Maybe its providing support for a whole school positive management strategy, a Tier Two practice in MTSS. Whatever it is, as leaders we are the models for learning, listening, and growing together. We are the guides for opening our minds to new possibilities and opportunities. With these new opportunities, we are opening our hearts to our children, our families, and to our lives as Montessorians. ′
ML / Feb 2019 / Pg 22
