Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2021 Vol 7 Iss 2

Journal of Montessori Research | Volume 9 | Issue 2 | Fall 2023

Contents
From the Editor i
Murray

Understanding Circle Time Practices in Montessori Early Childhood Settings 1

Koczela and Carver

Montessori’s Perspective on Citizenship Education: A View from the Netherlands 28

de Brouwer, Klaver, and van der Zee

Reframing and Recontextualizing Maria Montessori’s 1915 California Visit 44

Parham

Montessori Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Approaches: A Thematic Analysis
Examining Connections Between the Models 66
Phillips

Book Review: Powerful Literacy in the Montessori Classroom: Aligning Reading Research
and Practice
by Susan Zoll, Natasha Feinberg, and Laura Saylor 80
Feez

Rediscovering the Child: Review of Montessori Action Research Studies 2022-2023 85

Carver and Hassebroek
November 2023

From the Editor

The fall 2023 issue of the Journal of Montessori Research is now available. I am so pleased we have a full
issue including four research articles and two review articles. One of the review articles, “Rediscovering the
Child,” represents a new annual feature highlighting recent action research projects completed by graduate
students in university-based teacher preparation programs. While authors will rotate for this recurring review
article series, I wish to thank Kateri Carver of University of Wisconsin–River Falls and Sarah Hassebroek of
St. Catherine University for authoring this first installment.

The other review article provides Susan Feez’s (University of New England, Australia) thoughtful assessment
of the recently published book Powerful Literacy in the Montessori Classroom: Aligning Reading Research
and Practice by Susan Zoll, Natasha Feinberg, and Laura Saylor, with a foreword by Daniel Willingham.

The first two research articles in this issue will be of particular interest to Montessori educators because they
address important considerations for classroom practice. Andrea Koczela and Kateri Carver share the re-
sults of a study of Montessori teachers’ circle time practices and preferences while Jaap de Brouwer, Lida T.
Klaver, and Symen van der Zee synthesize Montessori’s writings on citizenship education.

For the third article, Joel Parham conducted an extensive analysis of primary source documents to reconsider
details and implications of Maria Montessori’s 1915 California visit. He argues that, while her eight months in
California did positively influence the growth of the Montessori movement, the impact on mainstream educa-
tion was limited and led to declining interest in Montessori education in the United States.

Finally, Bernadette Phillips demonstrates how the Montessori approach to dementia care is trauma-responsive,
although she suggests it could be strengthened by incorporating a greater understanding of the neurobiology
of trauma into training programs.

Sincerely,

Angela K. Murray, PhD

Editor, Journal of Montessori Research
Director, Center for Learner Agency Research and Action (CLARA)
Program Chair, AERA Montessori Education SIG
Ongoing American Montessori Society (AMS) financial support for the Journal of Montessori Research makes open access possible
without requiring authors to pay article processing charges.

i
ii Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2021 Vol 7 Iss 2
Understanding Circle Time
Practices in Montessori Early
Childhood Settings
Andrea Koczela and Kateri Carver, University of Wisconsin-River Falls

Keywords: circle time, line time, large group, whole group, Montessori education, Early Childhood education, literacy,
language development

Abstract: Circle time is commonplace in traditional preschools, yet there are few references to the practice in
Montessori’s writings or in major Montessori organizations’ teacher education standards. This article investigates
whether circle time is frequent in Montessori 3–6-year-old classrooms using data from a widely distributed Qualtrics
survey. The results, from 276 respondents spanning all 50 states, provide insight into the circle time practices of
United States-based preschool Montessori teachers, also known in Montessori classrooms as guides. We present novel
information regarding circle time duration and frequency, types of circle time activities, Montessori guides’ circle time
training and planning, whether children’s circle time attendance is free choice or compulsory, and the nature of circle
time in programs associated with Association Montessori Internationale versus American Montessori Society. Results
revealed that 92% of survey participants have circle time every day or most days; most participants hold circle time
for 20 minutes or less; the most common circle time events were show-and-tell, calendar work, vocabulary lessons,
Grace and Courtesy lessons, read aloud discussions, dancing and movement, snack time, general conversation, read
aloud (stories), and birthday celebrations. We found that many of the most frequent circle time activities do not align
with children’s preferences, teacher preferences, or Early Childhood best practices. Our work invites Montessorians to
engage in the work of reconstructing the traditional practice of circle time to better align with Montessori hallmarks of
choice, development of the will, and joyfulness.

Journal of Montessori Research Understanding Circle Time Practices 1

Fall 2023, Volume 9, Issue 2
An Overview of Circle Time Examining Circle Time Literature
In this paper, we will evaluate many aspects of circle
Most preschoolers around the world participate in time, giving particular attention to the question of dura-
circle time (Leach & Lewis, 2013). They gather as a group tion: how much classroom time should be dedicated to
and engage in activities ranging from singing and stories the practice? Research indicates that lengthy circle gath-
to birthday celebrations and fingerplays. While these erings result in adverse outcomes. In a study of 122 four-
meetings are typically identified as circle time, they have and five-year-old children, the long duration of circle time
other names such as gathering time, community time, or (sometimes up to 30–40 minutes) was directly associated
line time. Many Montessorians adopt the phrase line time with negative reactions in children (Wiltz & Klein, 2001).
in reference to the colored tape (line) placed on the floor Another study (Bustamante et al., 2018) found that circle
in an elliptical shape where the children sit during large time engagement decreased if it lasted more than 20
group gatherings. The children also use this ellipse for minutes; at the beginning of circle time, child engagement
Walking on the Line activities, which will be discussed in was generally high, but it declined in all classrooms as
a subsequent section. time progressed. Half of the classrooms had significant
Friedrich Froebel, known as the “father of kinder- disengagement, with over 30% of students off-task.
garten,” proposed circle activities in his publication of Unsurprisingly, the same study noted that in class-
Pedagogics of the Kindergarten (as cited in Platz & Arella- rooms with lower rates of student engagement, teacher’s
no, 2011) to develop children’s sense of identity as indi- behavior management comments were twice as high. This
viduals and members of a community. Circle time theory finding is supported by other studies documenting high
grew through the humanist ideas of psychologists such as incidences of disruptive behavior during circle time, par-
Alfred Adler, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and William ticularly during more routine, structured activities (Qi &
Glasser in the middle of the twentieth century (Housego Kaiser, 2006). Researchers from the University of Illinois
& Burns, 1994). at Urbana-Champaign conducted 24 observations in eight
In current educational settings, circle time has grown different Head Start classrooms. They noted challenging
beyond the realms of philosophy into a practice that is behaviors during 30% of their observation intervals and
identified as “one of the most ordinary events in pre- specifically noted that “circle time, as a teacher-directed
school” (Kantor et al., 1989, p. 434) and widely imple- structured activity, can be a prime context for challenging
mented (Bustamante et al., 2018). Circle practices are behaviors” (Zaghlawan & Ostrosky, 2011, p. 8). Such
documented in countries throughout the world, including behavior issues can undermine the effectiveness of circle
the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Israel, Sweden, time and overall morale of the teacher and the students
Finland, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Italy, Portugal, (Bustamante et al., 2018). They are also associated with a
England, China, and Japan (Lang, 1998; Zhang & Quinn, 22% increase in the rate of negative interactions between
2018). teachers and students (Ling & Barnett, 2013).
Yet despite its widespread adoption, minimal Clearly it is vital to maximize student engagement,
research has been conducted on the efficacy and nature and circle time activities must be planned with care.
of circle time. The Elementary School Journal notes this While the components of circle time vary from school
as recently as 2018, stating “little research has examined to school and from teacher to teacher (Zhang & Quinn,
circle time, making it difficult to generalize about its 2018), researchers agree that the most common elements
routines and components” (Bustamante et al., 2018, p. of preschool circle times include greetings, calendar work,
612). Furthermore, scholarly support for the practice is weather discussions, classroom responsibility assign-
not overwhelming. A 2002 study published in Education- ments, attendance keeping, sharing time, read alouds,
al Psychology in Practice reviewed available literature on general conversation, songs/fingerplays, and closing
circle time efficacy and summarized it as “flimsy” and full activities (Bustamante et al., 2018; Harris & Fuqua, 2000;
of “assumption, anecdote and circular argument” (Lown, Wald et al., 1994).
2002, p. 95). Other scholars cite the paucity of research Of these activities, calendar work is one of circle
about circle time and its effects (Leach & Lewis, 2013). time’s most common events (Zhang & Quinn, 2018).
There is no clear consensus on the effectiveness of circle Bustamante et al. observed circle time calendar activ-
time, no strong understanding of what circle time entails, ities in 77% of the classrooms they studied (p. 621).
nor even a consistent definition of its purpose.

2 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

While specific teachers may approach calendar work & Ostrosky, 2011, p. 445), we should ask: Do children
differently, there is reason to reevaluate the suitability of engage in rich conversations with their teacher and peers?
calendar-based activities altogether. Child development Or do children simply present an object and answer per-
research shows that children in preschool and kindergar- functory questions? Does show-and-tell provide all chil-
ten settings have little understanding of time periods such dren with an opportunity to interact, or does it risk dis-
as weeks and months (Eliot, 2001). Three-year-olds often engagement as one child engages with the guide and the
have a sense of past and future events but have not yet others remain silent? The research on discussion-based
related these ideas to units of time (Beneke et al., 2008). activities points to the fact that a child’s engagement
In a series of four studies conducted on 261 children from depends upon a teacher’s finesse and execution.
3–10 years of age, researchers found that children were Just as the types of circle time activities vary from
unable to use a calendar to understand the relationship classroom to classroom, so too does the quality of these
between past and future events until somewhere between activities. Further research is needed to determine
ages 7 and 10 (Friedman, 2000). This inability is rooted in whether the criticisms of circle time are due to
children’s brain development and their sense of chronolo- widespread practices or to imperfect implementation
gy rather than lack of education. in a handful of settings. After observing numerous
Reading books to children is a quintessential literacy nonoptimal circle times, one study directly advocates
activity and a common circle time event. Yet even this improved professional development and teacher training
practice must be optimized to meet children’s literacy for circle time (Bustamante et al., 2018, p. 628). Other
needs by including activities such as dialogical reading, researchers support this notion, finding that positive
rhyming, and poetry. Researchers have found that chil- outcomes in circle time were directly linked to a teacher’s
dren learn best when they engage deeply with the text— circle time experience and training (Canney & Byrne,
apart from pictures—and mentally manipulate the words 2006). Finally, Ling and Barnett (2013) discovered that
to develop abstract thought (Healy, 1994). Dialogic read- training teachers in intervention strategies decreased
ing, in which a child and adult have a prolonged discus- negative behaviors at circle time and increased student
sion about a book, enhances this intellectual process and engagement (p. 190–191). A teacher’s training and circle
develops the child’s literacy skills (Eliot, 2001). Research time preparation may be a critical factor in whether this
indicates that adults should clearly explain new vocabu- activity is a source of joy and learning for students or a
lary to children as well as initiate discussions about the cause of disengagement and challenging behaviors.
words (Wasik et al., 2016). Nursery rhymes and poetry
may be especially valuable as they provide opportuni- Circle Time and Montessori Practice
ties for dialogic reading while also teaching rhythm and Given the consistency of circle time in preschools
patterning. Indeed, rhyming aptitude is associated with worldwide, one might expect that it would also be a part
early reading as well as numeracy skills (Bettmann, 2016; of Montessori programs. However, well-regarded authors
Healy, 1994; Majsterek et al., 2000). on Montessori’s pedagogy and her legacy are largely silent
Although listed as a typical circle time activity, few on the subject. A clear reference to circle time does not
researchers specifically investigated show-and-tell activi- seem to exist in Montessori’s writings, lectures, or class-
ties. Yet Bustamante et al. (2018) named a similar activity, room photographs.
sharing time, as one of the most “promising” activities in In a review of Montessori’s writings and lectures,
circle time because of the potential for open-ended ques- circle time-like gatherings do not appear except in lessons
tions and “back-and-forth exchanges between teachers such as Walking on the Line or the Silence Game. Platz
and children” (p. 626). Arguably, show-and-tell shares the and Arellano (2011) analyzed the work of distinguished
same potential for dynamic language engagement; the child development theorists ranging from the 18th to
benefits of rich language interactions are well document- 20th centuries and found that circle-like activities only ex-
ed (Eliot, 2001; Healy, 1994). isted in the ideas of Locke, Rousseau, and Froebel but not
The appropriateness of show-and-tell for 3–6-year- Montessori. Similarly, researchers Lillard and McHugh
olds may hinge on the quality of language interactions (2019) examined Montessori’s extensive writings, lec-
during this activity. Since some researchers found that tures, and records to define authentic Montessori practice
circle-based discussion time was actually the source of at the time of Montessori’s death. In their synopsis, they
“a high incidence of challenging behaviors” (Zaghlawan make no mention of circle time or other large group gath-

Understanding Circle Time Practices 3

Figure 1 In some cases that Montessori herself recounts, the whole
Walking on the Line class comes together for the lesson. In others, “silence” is
written on a chalkboard and the children can participate
spontaneously. Reviewing Montessori’s descriptions of
organized versions of the Silence Game gives us insight
into how she approached large group lessons; she made
several invitations and ensured that each child was asked
individually (Montessori, 1998, p. 78). Montessori
emphasizes that a child’s participation in making silence
comes from their own will and is not forced on them
by another (Standing, 1998, p. 227). The success of the
Silence Game depends upon the active choice of all
participants.
The question of choice and voluntary participation,
while important in Montessori theory, does not appear in
existing circle time research. This gap is understandable as
in traditional school settings, children’s circle time atten-
dance seems mandatory (Kantor et al., 1989, p. 435). Re-
searchers Zaghlawan and Ostrosky (2011) do not directly
address the issue, but list roll call as a common circle time
activity (p. 443). Another study made a passing comment
An early image of Montessori students walking on the line. that every teacher worked with their whole group during
Reproduced with permission of VS America, Inc. circle time gatherings (Bustamante et al., 2018). These
(https://vsamerica.com). studies indicate that in traditional preschools, a child’s
erings except as something inexperienced teachers may participation in circle time is not a matter of choice. Yet as
adopt if they do not understand the natural work cycle of previously discussed, Montessori (1998) herself prior-
a child (p. 8). itized personal, authentic invitations for every child in
Montessori presents the activity of Walking on the large group gatherings (p. 78).
Line as framed within the Practical Life exercises specif- Leading Montessori organizations do not include
ically related to control of movement, which develops circle time in their lists of essential practices. The Nation-
coordination, cross lateral movement, and equilibrium al Center for Montessori in the Public Sector makes no
(Montessori, 1914, p. 20; 1967, p. 89). She observed the mention of circle time (or its synonyms) in its “Essential
children’s desire to walk on narrow ledges and responded Elements for Montessori in the Public Sector” document,
by creating Walking on the Line activities (as depicted its “Essential Elements Rubric,” (2019b) or its “Essential
in Figure 1), which increase in difficulty as a child gains Elements Guidelines” (National Center for Montessori
mastery over fine and gross motor skills. in the Public Sector, 2019a). Similarly, the Montessori
Montessori does make one reference to circle-like ac- Accreditation Council for Teacher Education (MACTE;
tivities if a teacher, also known in Montessori classrooms 2019) does not include circle time in its description
as a guide, is establishing a class with new students. She of Early Childhood academic requirements or teacher
writes that at the very outset of this process—the “collec- education (p. 22). There is, however, a reference to line
tive stage of the class”—a teacher may tell stories or sing activities in the American Montessori Society (AMS)
songs with the group (Montessori, 1998, p. 182). How- Teacher Education Program (TEP) Handbook. The refer-
ever, the conditional nature of this approval implies that ence (6.2.5.11) to line activities does not appear under a
these actions are not otherwise ideal. Montessori makes it course component identified as “Core” or “Foundational,”
very clear that these are transitional activities before “the but rather under the “Other” category and within the con-
school begins to function” (p. 182). tent of “Art, Music, Movement Curriculum” (American
A classic Montessori lesson, the Silence Game, does Montessori Society, 2018, p. 101). Line activities, which
have elements akin to circle time. The entire class partic- may be broadly interpreted to mean lessons such as Walk-
ipates, and it generally occurs at the teacher’s invitation. ing on the Line or circle gatherings, have no minimum

4 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

required hours and the extent of their inclusion is left to its features and characteristics? Finally, is there a differ-
the discretion of the TEP. ence in circle time practice between schools associated
Neither the U.S. branch of Association Montessori with AMI and AMS?
Internationale (AMI/USA) nor AMS mention circle Our research documents circle time practices in
time or its synonyms on their websites when describing U.S. Montessori schools with data gathered from Mon-
school standards (American Montessori Society, n.d.; tessori teachers on the following four areas: circle time
Association Montessori Internationale, n.d.). AMI/USA duration and frequency, types of circle time activities,
recognition and AMS accreditation requirements seem to the Montessori guide’s circle time training and planning,
suggest that while circle time is not prohibited, neither is and the children’s attendance and option to participate.
it a fundamental part of the method. We report on this data generally, and we analyze it across
The absence of circle time in Montessori writings, our two largest participant groups: respondents teaching
TEP standards, school recognition (AMI), and accredita- at AMI-associated schools and respondents teaching at
tion (AMS) criteria is itself a statement: circle time is, at AMS-associated schools.
best, unimportant and, at worst, irrelevant in Montessori
preschool (3–6-year-old) classrooms. A clear contrast Study Design
exists between theoretical Montessori practice, where
circle time is hardly featured, and traditional education, This article builds upon an internal review board-ap-
where researchers agree that circle time is a fixture of proved graduate research project conducted in 2021 and
preschool. However, we know anecdotally that circle time provides stronger analysis and clarity to the initial find-
occurs in many Montessori preschool classrooms despite ings. We distributed a 30-question survey (see Appendix
its absence in the Montessori canon. How can we under- A) to Montessori guides across the United States (Kocze-
stand this disconnect? la, 2021). The survey instrument utilized the term “circle
Researchers have noted that Nancy McCormick time” rather than the common Montessori alternative
Rambusch founded AMS to integrate traditional Montes- “line time” to be more consistent with existing scholarly
sori philosophy with the educational culture of the United literature.
States (Daoust, 2004, p. 28; Lillard, 2012). Indeed, Lillard Initially, we sought survey participants through social
observed that the AMS’s willingness to adapt may be what media invitations. Yet a low response rate—measured by
has allowed it to thrive while the number of “strict and low social media engagement and fewer than a dozen sur-
traditional program(s)” is more limited (Lillard, 2012, p. vey responses—necessitated a new circulation strategy.
381). Although little research examines the differences AMI/USA and AMS are the two most widespread accred-
between AMI and AMS schools, some researchers have itation/recognition organizations in our home base, the
noted differences between traditional and contemporary Upper Midwest, and their public email databases seemed
Montessori programs (Daoust, 2004) and high-fidelity like the logical next step for survey distribution. We
and supplemented Montessori programs (Lillard, 2012). emailed our survey invitation (Appendix B) to all listed
The traditional and high-fidelity programs (often more schools but noticed that certain states were unrepresented
associated with AMI) were less likely to adopt outside or underrepresented in the directories. Hoping to gain
educational ideas and practices. The contemporary and nationwide participation, we vetted Montessori schools in
supplemented programs (often more associated with these states and sent survey invitations directly to schools
AMS) were more likely to incorporate non-Montessori that met baseline criteria (a trained Montessori guide, use
materials and approaches. Considering the ubiquity of of a broad range of Montessori materials, mixed age class-
circle time in conventional preschools and kindergartens, rooms, and an extended morning work cycle). In total, we
is it possible that some Montessori schools have sought sent 806 email invitations. The schools that accepted our
cultural relevance by incorporating circle time as an edu- invitation distributed the survey among their teachers.
cational norm? While 324 individuals began the survey, our partic-
To date, circle time research specifically in a Montes- ipant group includes only the 276 who completed the
sori context is lacking. This void prompts the following entire question set. Our survey participants represent
questions: Are Montessori schools an exception in circle all 50 states as well as the District of Columbia. Most
time practices, or do they hold circle time gatherings? If participants (85%) worked in a private or independent/
circle time does exist in Montessori classrooms, what are nonprofit school setting, and the majority were either

Understanding Circle Time Practices 5

lead classroom guides or co-leads (84%). All participants tion: ranging from participants’ teacher education experi-
agreed that they were “a current or former Montessori ences to their circle time planning approaches. Fourth, we
lead, co-lead, intern, or student teacher in a 3–6-year-old review the question of attendance: who joins circle time
classroom” (Appendix A). In addition, we asked a total and for how long.
of seven demographic questions about the participants In testing for statistical significance, we chose to run
and their schools. We inquired about participants’ years Fisher’s exact test instead of Pearson’s Chi-Square because
of experience, the number of children in their classroom, many cells had expected values less than five and our
the ages of children in their classroom, and the AMI or overall sample size was small. We also report Cramer’s V
AMS association of their school. Survey question four for effect size, although we acknowledge that the results
asked, “What best describes your Montessori program?” of these effect sizes may be somewhat inflated due to the
Possible answers were: AMI; AMS; A mix of AMI and nature of our data set.
AMS; Neither AMI nor AMS; Other; Prefer not to
answer (Appendix A). This was the only survey question Circle Time Scheduling
asking about AMI or AMS association. We asked a variety The study begins with an investigation of our primary
of demographic questions hoping to find patterns in our inquiry: How frequently does circle time occur in Mon-
survey results. We did not specifically intend to study tessori Early Childhood programs? Next, we explore the
AMI/AMS associations, and thus did not inquire about a logistics of circle time in greater detail: How long does it
participant’s Montessori credential or diploma. typically last?
Ninety-five percent of respondents perceive their Figure 2 presents an overview of circle time frequen-
school as associated with AMI, AMS, or a mixture of the cy (“How often does your classroom have circle time?”)
two. This article uses the term perceived association to refer for all participants and groups the responses by AMI and
to the participants’ perception of their school’s leaning AMS associations. It is clear from our results that circle
even though the school may or may not actually hold time is commonplace in Montessori 3–6-year-old class-
school recognition with AMI or accreditation with AMS. rooms. Three fourths of participants report having circle
For example, a participant who reports their school is best time every day in their classrooms and almost all report
described as AMI can mean either (a) their school is a having circle time either every day or most days. Only a
recognized AMI school, or (b) most of the teachers have small fraction of respondents never has circle time.
AMI diplomas. Likewise for participants who report that When we review survey responses according to AMI
their school is best described as AMS or a mix of AMS and AMS school associations, it is apparent that the fre-
and AMI. The survey did not inquire about the partic- quency of circle time is somewhat lower in AMI settings,
ipants’ individual Montessori credential, diploma, or yet it is still very common. More than half of AMI-asso-
teacher education program; instead, it asked about only ciated respondents have circle time every day (although
the association of the school as perceived by the partici- higher for AMS-associated respondents), and over three
pant. fourths of AMI-associated respondents have circle time
In looking for patterns in the data, many of the differ- every day or most days (versus almost all AMS-associated
ences between AMI-associated schools and AMS-asso- respondents). Therefore, while circle time is not quite as
ciated schools were statistically significant and therefore regular among AMI-associated participants, it still occurs
merited attention. We chose to broaden our results sec- every day or most days for a large majority. Fisher’s exact
tion to share and analyze these outcomes while acknowl- test found that our results are statistically significant, p <
edging that it would have been helpful to seek participants .001, Cramer’s V = .53, suggesting a large effect (Kotrlik
from other TEP affiliations, and additional research with et al., 2011).
this as a primary question is needed. In Figure 3, we share all responses related to circle
time duration (“On average, how long does circle time
Results generally last?”). This chart illustrates the results for all
participants and breaks them out according to AMI and
We present our data in four sections. First, we explore AMS associations. In Figure 4, we correlate responses to
our results pertaining to time: the frequency and duration participants’ years of teaching experience, showing that
of circle time. Second, we share the most common and more experienced guides have shorter circle times.
popular circle time activities. Third, we discuss prepara-

6 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 Figure 2
Circle Time Frequency

Figure 3
Circle Time Duration

Understanding Circle Time Practices 7

 Figure 4
Circle Time Duration by Teaching Experience

Participants were able to report their typical circle a list of activities and asked participants whether these
time duration by choosing one of six responses ranging activities usually, sometimes, or never occurred during
from less than five minutes to up to 30 minutes. Figure circle time. Figure 5 shows our results.
3 illustrates that a large majority of participants held The most frequently occurring circle time activities,
circle time for 20 minutes or less. Only a small number of according to survey responses, received the same or
respondents held circle time for 25 minutes or 26 to 30 nearly the same number of results. They are: show-and-
minutes. The largest segment of respondents has circle tell (196 responses), discussion of day/month/season
time lasting between 11–15 minutes, corresponding to (calendar work; 196 responses), vocabulary lessons
the recommendations of Bustamante et al. (2018), who (194 responses), and Grace and Courtesy lessons (194
advocated decreasing the length of circle time gatherings responses).
from their study’s average time of 20 minutes. Interesting- According to survey participants’ perceptions (see
ly, the composition of the 11–15-minute group included Figure 6), children most enjoy the following circle time
the participants with the most teaching experience, activities: singing, read aloud (stories), dancing and
suggesting an area for further research regarding teacher movement, music/rhythm work, and birthday celebra-
experience and circle time practices. tions. This list is closely aligned to the participants’ most
enjoyed activities (see Figure 6): singing, read aloud (sto-
Circle Time Activities ries), general conversation, dancing and movement, and
In this section, we detail the frequency of specific music/rhythm work. These preferences are nearly identi-
circle time activities and then discuss the most popular cal in content and order, apart from birthday celebrations
circle time activities for children and survey partici- and general conversation. Curiously, they do not match
pants. Questions 15 through 17 of our survey provided the most frequent circle time activities (see Figure 5).

8 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Figure 5
Frequency of Top Ten Circle Time Activities

Figure 6
Children’s Ten Most Preferred Circle Time Activities with Participant Preferences

Understanding Circle Time Practices 9

Figure 7
Participants’ Assessment of Their Circle Time Training

Circle Time Training and Preparation AMI-associated participants felt their TEP had never
Our third data section investigates aspects of circle prepared them for circle time versus AMS-associated
time preparation. First, we explore whether participants participants. Fisher’s exact test found that our results are
feel prepared for circle time by their TEP. Then, we statistically significant, p = .01, Cramer’s V = .20, suggest-
examine how often participants themselves prepare for ing a small effect (Kotrlik et al., 2011).
circle time. Figure 8 illustrates all participant responses to the
Figure 7 provides an overview of all participant question “How often do you prepare for circle time?” as
responses to the question, “Do you feel that your train- well as participant responses by AMI or AMS school as-
ing/teacher education program prepared you for circle sociation. Again, we emphasize that survey respondents’
time?” It also compares participant responses based on association refers to their current workplace and not their
their AMI or AMS perceived school association. We are teacher training.
including this comparison because the results demon- The largest segment of participants reported that they
strated significant differences. A slight majority of re- do not actively prepare for circle time and instead follow
spondents felt that their TEP always or usually prepared their inspiration. A nearly equal number responded
them for circle time. A large segment felt that their TEP that they prepare for circle time daily. Smaller groups of
prepared them sometimes. Only a small group never felt respondents prepare every few days or once a week. Ac-
prepared by their TEP. However, these numbers took cording to our data, children almost never lead circle time
on new significance when we analyzed responses by the in these Early Childhood classrooms. Our results become
participants’ school association. Over half of AMS-as- more interesting when we review participants’ approach-
sociated respondents always or usually felt their TEP es to circle time preparation according to their per-
had prepared them for circle time versus about a third ceived AMI or AMS association. Almost twice as many
of AMI-associated respondents. Over twice as many AMS-associated respondents prepare every day versus

10 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Figure 8
Frequency of Circle Time Preparation

AMI-associated respondents. Twice as many AMI-asso- than a third of AMI-associated respondents require that
ciated participants do not actively prepare for circle time children attend circle time (again, except when there are
versus AMS-associated participants. Fisher’s exact test behavioral issues) and instead, most allow children to
found that our results are statistically significant, p < .001, choose whether to attend. Fisher’s exact test found that
Cramer’s V = .37, suggesting a medium effect (Kotrlik et our results are statistically significant, p < .001, Cramer’s
al., 2011). V = .49, suggesting a medium to large effect (Kotrlik et al.,
2011).
Circle Time Attendance and Choice Next, we explore whether children must remain at
Our final results section investigates questions of circle time or are free to leave. We see in Figure 10 that
freedom and obligation as they relate to circle time. We all or most participants say children stay for the duration
discuss whether children must attend circle time, how of circle time and only about one quarter of participants
long they must stay, whether they are eager to attend, and say that children may choose to leave circle time before it
whether guides are required to have circle time gatherings ends. Yet when we correlate responses based on respon-
in their classrooms. dents’ perceived school association, we see a substan-
More than half of participants require that children tial difference. Half of AMI-associated participants say
attend circle time except when children have behavior is- children must stay at the circle for its duration (unless
sues or special needs (see Figure 9). Children may choose there are behavior issues) while over three fourths of
whether to attend the circle times in about a third of AMS-associated participants say children must stay at the
respondents’ classrooms. However, we see a large shift in circle (unless there are behavior issues). Fisher’s exact test
these percentages when we view the data by participants’ found that our results are statistically significant, p = .008,
school association. AMS-associated respondents require Cramer’s V = .46, suggesting a medium effect (Kotrlik et
that children attend circle time almost three fourths of al., 2011).
the time (except when there are behavioral issues); less

Understanding Circle Time Practices 11

Figure 9
Children’s Circle Time Attendance

Figure 10
Duration of Children’s Attendance

12 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Figure 11
Children’s Willingness to Join Circle Time

In evaluating questions of freedom and choice, ticipants across all perceived associations are not required
Figure 11 provides an important perspective. Almost all to have circle time during the school day, we see that there
participants across both AMI and AMS school associ- is a significant element of obligation (perceived or other-
ations report children are eager to attend circle time or wise) for AMS-associated survey participants; over half
at least participate willingly. Only a tiny percentage of of AMS-associated respondents answered that they are
participants perceive that children avoid circle time or are always, usually, or sometimes required to offer circle time.
reluctant to join. Fisher’s exact test found that our results are statistically
Finally, we report on whether guides are required to significant, p < .001, Cramer’s V = .22, suggesting a small
include circle time in the school day. Figure 12 demon- effect (Kotrlik et al., 2011).
strates that for half of survey participants, circle time is
never a school requirement. Yet there does appear to be Discussion
some level of obligation for others: one third answered
that circle time is always or usually required, and a smaller The primary goal of our research was to determine
segment responded that it is sometimes required. This the nature and frequency of circle time gatherings in
picture becomes clearer when we review the matter by Montessori environments. Our results reveal that circle
AMI/AMS association. A small fraction of AMI-associat- time is widespread in Montessori classrooms. We identi-
ed participants is always or usually required to offer circle fied several other trends in U.S. Montessori practice: most
time versus almost half of AMS-associated participants. participants hold circle time as the last event of the morn-
Over three fourths of AMI-associated participants are ing; most participants require that children attend circle
never required to offer circle time versus over a third of time; most children attend circle time for its duration;
AMS-associated participants. While the majority of par- most participants hold circle time for 20 minutes or less;

Understanding Circle Time Practices 13

 Figure 12
Participants’ Obligation to Offer Circle Time

half of participants feel that their TEP prepared them for shorter among AMI-associated respondents. Interestingly,
circle time. Finally, we found differences in AMI- and participants with the most teaching experience (regard-
AMS-associated schools with AMS-associated schools less of perceived AMI or AMS association) tend to have
demonstrating more support for circle time activities as a shorter circle time durations, which may reflect increased
regular part of their day. awareness of children’s needs in light of higher incidents
of behavior issues and student disengagement during long
Circle Time Scheduling circle times. The role of teacher experience in circle time
Research demonstrates the risks of lengthy circle practices remains a fertile area for further research.
time gatherings and points to resulting student disen-
gagement and challenging classroom behavior with one Circle Time Activities
study suggesting that it may be ideal to limit circle time Among our survey participants, calendar work and
to 20 minutes or less (Bustamante et al., 2018). Our show-and-tell are the two most common circle time
results indicate that the majority of survey participants activities, but there is ample evidence that calendar work
align with current best practice, holding circle time for may be inappropriate until after kindergarten (Beneke et
20 minutes or less regardless of AMI or AMS school al., 2008; Eliot, 2001; Friedman, 2000). The frequency
association. Even so, circle time duration tends to be of calendar activities among our survey participants, de-

14 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 Montessori describes as requiring whole-group partic-
spite the evidence contrary to its use, leads us to wonder
ipation, is not prioritized. Given participants’ misalign-
whether increased TEP circle time instruction would help
ment with children’s preferences, their own preferences,
Montessori guides design and plan their lessons to most
and Montessori’s writings on whole-group gatherings,
benefit children’s development.
we wonder how they do select circle time activities. Do
Although show-and-tell tied as the most frequent
survey participants choose activities as the result of a con-
circle time activity for our survey participants, there
scious choice, TEP training, or conflicting expectations of
were few specific references to show-and-tell in the work
what circle time entails?
of other researchers. Montessori makes no reference to
show-and-tell in her writings and lectures, though she
Circle Time Training and Preparation
does share at least one account of bringing a sleeping baby
Considering that the various Montessori organi-
to class when she describes the Silence Game. Our survey
zations barely reference circle time in their criteria, it is
gives little insight into how participants run show-and-tell
noteworthy that many respondents reported circle time
during circle time and whether the activity leads to high
training in their TEP. Still, our data indicate that the arena
quality language interactions with the entire group. We
of teacher education has significant potential for growth
know that discussion-based activities have potential for
or reevaluation. Many participants indicate that they
value or risk depending on implementation (Bustaman-
could have been better prepared by their TEP for circle
te et al., 2018; Zaghlawan & Ostrosky, 2011). Further
time gatherings.
research is needed to determine whether show-and-tell
We do not know in what ways survey participants
is a valuable part of the school day and a justification of
could have been more prepared for circle time, but we
circle time.
do know that many reported a lack of teacher education
Although our results suggest that calendar work
on this topic. For the Montessori guides who received
and show-and-tell were the most common circle time
no circle time training, yet offer it in their classrooms, we
activities, our results also show that they were not per-
wonder when and why they began to practice circle time.
ceived by the guide as the children’s favorites. In fact, our
Was it a result of children’s needs, school norms, or parent
survey responses indicate that the circle time activities
pressure? For other guides who felt sometimes prepared,
which inspire the most interest in children (according to
we wonder what additional training would have been
participants’ perceptions) are often not the most frequent
beneficial: perhaps more circle time presentations, more
events of circle time. Only one of the children’s preferred
education about current research, more practice time,
five activities (dance and movement) mapped to the five
more opportunity to observe circle times, or more litera-
most frequent circle time events. Two favorites of the chil-
cy and music/movement training? Follow-up research is
dren, singing and music/rhythm work, were not among
needed to provide a clearer picture.
the 10 most frequent activities. It is curious that survey
Still, considering how much time is spent each week
participants note this interest yet choose to include other
during circle time in most Early Childhood Montessori
activities more often during circle time. Notably, four of
classrooms (often an average of 75–100 minutes per
the five most popular circle time practices for children
week), it seems appropriate for TEPs to give circle time
match four of the five most popular for guides. Yet again,
training serious consideration. Even Montessori recog-
these same activities are largely absent in the reported
nized that there were moments in a classroom, though un-
activity frequency. The data also reveal that not only do
usual, when it is appropriate to sing songs or read stories
the guides avoid the children’s favorites, but they choose
as a group (Montessori, 1998). It seems reasonable to
activities that they would prefer to avoid themselves. We
equip guides of 3–6-year-old children with the skills they
must ask: Is there such strong pressure from schools, par-
need to conduct engaging and educational read alouds
ents, or educational norms that guides disregard children’s
or developmentally appropriate music and movement
favorite activities, and their own, in order to accommo-
sessions. Further, Montessori guides must be able to
date ones viewed to be necessary, such as show-and-tell or
give parents and administrators rationales for excluding
the ubiquitous calendar work?
unnecessary or detrimental large group activities.
The Silence Game is also absent among the most
It is likely that there is a connection between partic-
common circle time activities. While it still occurs for
ipants’ TEP and their approaches to circle time prepara-
most participants, 10 other activities are more frequent.
tion. The fact that a significant portion of teachers do not
It is surprising that the Silence Game, the one lesson that
actively plan for this part of the day may reflect inade-

Understanding Circle Time Practices 15

quate teacher education. While there is evidence that perhaps from peers, parents, administration, or societal
poorly run circle time gatherings contribute to behavioral expectations. The question remains: Is circle time, so
problems or student disengagement, teacher training and universal in preschools around the world, a practice freely
experience have been shown to lead to positive outcomes. chosen in Montessori classrooms?
The decision to include circle time during the school day
should be an active choice by guides who are trained and Study Limitations
prepared to make the most of these gatherings. Current
research suggests that circle time should be treated with Despite the important contribution this study makes
as much planning and care as other classroom instruction. in understanding circle time practices in Montessori
In a Montessori setting, this would place circle time plan- schools, we acknowledge limitations. In our attempt
ning on par with observation, lesson planning, prepara- to broaden the scope of our research and include more
tion of the environment, and record keeping. participants, we directly searched for Montessori schools
in geographical areas that were not represented or were
Circle Time Attendance and Choice underrepresented in the AMI and AMS databases. Our
Freedom and choice are essential elements of Mon- process was necessarily subjective as we reviewed school
tessori practice, but our data reveal that in most partic- websites to ascertain adherence to core Montessori
ipants’ classrooms, circle time attendance is required. principles (e.g., a trained Montessori guide, use of a broad
AMS-associated respondents are more likely to require range of Montessori materials, mixed age classrooms,
children to attend circle time compared to AMI-associ- and an extended morning work cycle). We trusted that
ated participants who are more likely to make circle time the school websites were accurate and updated while also
optional for children. A similar pattern exists in how long using our judgement to determine if school images were
children are required to remain at circle time. AMS-asso- authentic or stock photos.
ciated participants are more likely to require children to The social media participants also raise potential
remain at the circle for most of the time (barring behav- issues because they represent a convenience sample of
ioral difficulties) compared to AMI-associated partici- teachers self-identified as a current or former Montessori
pants. Thus, AMS-associated participants are more likely lead, co-lead, intern, or student teacher in a 3–6-year-old
to treat circle time as a large group gathering in which all classroom. Furthermore, it would have strengthened our
or most children join for the duration, while AMI-asso- research to reach out to other TEP affiliations. In retro-
ciated participants are more likely to treat circle time as spect, we could have reduced ambiguity by providing a
an optional gathering that children can join at will, akin more specific definition of what we meant by the role of
to Montessori’s invitations to the large group versions of “former Montessori lead.”
the Silence Game. It is important to note that children Finally, our survey focuses disproportionately on pri-
seem to join circle gatherings willingly or even eagerly, vate and independent schools (85% of participants) with
suggesting that most children would choose to attend only 11% of participants representing public or charter
circle time even when it is optional. Children’s strong schools. A recently published Montessori census article
interest in circle time may reflect an inner need that is not reports a total of 2,728 Montessori schools in the United
otherwise being met. These questions arise: Do Montes- States with 579, or 21%, being publicly funded (Debs et
sori guides, through careful observation, recognize circle al., 2022). While we invited public and charter Montes-
time as essential to children’s development? Is the method sori schools to participate in the survey, many refused. We
of direct invitation and free choice—as in Montessori discovered during the course of our research that some
herself inviting children to the Silence Game—ineffective public school districts require all research surveys, regard-
in some settings? How can we offer circle time while still less of IRB approval, to go through their internal review
supporting a child’s development of free will? process before employees can participate.
The question of freedom also applies to Montessori
guides. Few participants were required to offer circle time Furthering the Study
except for about half of those at perceived AMS-asso-
ciated schools (our largest participant group). Perhaps The scarcity of circle time research, particularly with-
some teachers may not be formally required to have circle in a Montessori context, necessitates increased scholarly
time but still face pressure to include it during the day— research. Moreover, the universality of circle time in all

16 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

preschool settings underscores the importance of defining in Montessori 3–6-year-old classrooms. There are clear
circle time best practices. While there are many promising risks to casual circle time practices that may be miti-
areas for future research, we consider four areas deserving gated through careful TEP preparation and intentional
of particular attention. First, how does circle time impact classroom planning. Montessorians have every reason
the Montessori morning work cycle? We know anecdot- to heed circle time research in traditional education that
ally that some Montessori programs struggle to achieve documents disengagement and concomitant misbehavior
an uninterrupted three-hour period of work. If, as we now resulting from lengthy gathering times, developmentally
know, many Montessori preschools include circle time, inappropriate activities such as calendar work, and oblig-
does this gathering affect the amount of time available for atory attendance. Let us listen to the 45% of respondents
children to complete their morning work cycle? who felt underprepared to lead circle time. Strengthened
Second, it would be helpful to examine the commu- TEP circle time content may help Montessori guides
nity meeting practices of Montessori elementary pro- comprehend both the risks and potential of circle time
grams in relation to their preschool counterparts. What gatherings and understand how to utilize this time effec-
continuity, if any, exists between community meetings at tively, if at all.
different grade levels and how can guides prepare 5- and Finally, how can we reevaluate circle time in light of
6-year-olds to be active participants and future leaders of Montessori’s constant refrain of “follow the child?” Have
elementary large group gatherings? Montessorians absorbed the practice of circle time with
Third, what is the role of Montessori guides in circle sufficient reflection on its form and content while also
time gatherings? How does teacher experience affect considering Montessori philosophy and the needs of
Montessori circle time practices? Do guides observe the child? We believe that circle time can adhere to the
sufficiently during circle time to adjust their practices Montessori tenets of choice and the development of the
according to the needs of the children? Are children able will and, at the same time, provide rich opportunities for
to voice their preferences and develop their wills? Why, joyful expression and instruction. Yet constructing circle
as we discovered in our results, do guides include circle time gatherings that epitomize the best Montessori and
time activities that are not preferred by the children or Early Childhood practices requires intentional thought,
themselves? constant observation, and ongoing education. We hope
Fourth, to what extent do circle time gatherings to join a larger conversation about how Montessorians
contribute to the classroom community and interpersonal might reimagine circle time so that it supports, empowers,
skills of children? In an increasingly remote, screen-cen- and delights its child participants.
tric world, what role does circle time play in fostering a
sense of belonging in young children and how can it teach Author Information
them vital interpersonal skills such as patience, active
listening, grace and courtesy, and respect? †Corresponding author
Andrea Koczela† is a graduate of the University of
Conclusion Wisconsin-River Falls and is the founder of St. Rose
Montessori School. She can be reached at aekoczela@
This study provides many insights. We know, based gmail.com.
on nearly 300 responses, that circle time is common- Kateri Carver, PhD, is an assistant professor and
place in Montessori classrooms. We also know that the teaches in and directs both the combined MSE & Mon-
nature of circle time differs between AMI- and AMS-as- tessori Teacher Education program and the EdD in Mon-
sociated settings; it is more often optional in the former tessori Studies at University of Wisconsin-River Falls.
versus obligatory in the latter. We know that a substantial
number of participants felt that their training did not
always or usually prepare them for circle time. Finally, we
know that some circle time activities do not align with
research-based best practices or perceived child interest.
Let us return to our initial questions regarding the
effectiveness, purpose, and intentionality of circle time

Understanding Circle Time Practices 17

References Kantor, R., Elgas, P. M., & Fernie, D. E. (1989). First the
look and then the sound: Creating conversations at
American Montessori Society. (n.d.). 5 core components circle time. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4,
of Montessori education. Retrieved April 22, 2021, 433–448.
from https://amshq.org/About-Montessori/ Koczela, A. E. (2021). Circle time norms in Early Child-
What-Is-Montessori/Core-Components-of-Mon- hood Montessori programs: A survey of Montessori
tessori teachers across the United States [Graduate work,
American Montessori Society. (2018, July). Handbook for University of Wisconsin-River Falls]. http://digital.
Teacher Education Program affiliation. AMS Office of library.wisc.edu/1793/82427
Teacher Education. Kotrlik, J. W., Williams, H. A., & Jabor, M. K. (2011).
Association Montessori International. (n.d.). Standards Reporting and interpreting effect size in quanti-
for AMI Montessori classrooms. Retrieved April tative agricultural education research. Journal of
22, 2021, from https://amiusa.org/schools/stan- Agricultural Education, 52(1), 132–142. https://doi.
dards-for-ami-montessori-classrooms/ org/10.5032/jae.2011.01132
Beneke, S. J., Ostrosky, M. M., & Katz, L. G. (2008). Lang, P. (1998). Getting round to clarity: What do we
Calendar time for young children: Good intentions mean by circle time? Pastoral Care in Education,
gone awry. Young Children, 63(3), 12–16. 16(3), 3–10.
Bettmann, J. (2016). Building spoken language in the Leach, T., & Lewis, E. (2013). Children’s experiences
first plane. The NAMTA Journal, 41(1), 37–49. during circle-time: A call for research-informed de-
Bustamante, A., Hindman, A. H., Champagne, C., & bate. Pastoral Care in Education, 31(1), 43–52.
Wasik, B. (2018). Circle time revisited: How do Lillard, A. S. (2012). Preschool children’s development
preschool classrooms use this part of the day? The in classic Montessori, supplemented Montessori, and
Elementary School Journal, 118(4), 610–631. conventional programs. Journal of School Psychology,
Canney, C., & Byrne, A. (2006). Evaluating circle time as 50, 379–401.
a support to social skills development: Reflections Lillard, A. S., & McHugh, V. (2019). Authentic Montes-
on a journey in school-based research. British Journal sori: The dottoressa’s view at the end of her life part
of Special Education, 33(1), 19–24. I: The teacher and the child. Journal of Montessori
Daoust, C. J. (2004). An examination of implementation Research, 5(1), 1–18.
practices in Montessori education (Unpublished doc- Ling, S. M., & Barnett, D. W. (2013). Increasing pre-
toral dissertation). University of California, Berkeley. school student engagement during group learning
Debs, M., de Brouwer, J., Murray, A. K., Lawrence, L., activities using a group contingency. Topics in Early
Tyne, M., & von der Wehl, C. (2022). Global diffu- Childhood Special Education, 33(3), 186–196.
sion of Montessori schools: A report from the 2022 Lown, J. (2002). Circle time: The perceptions of teachers
Global Montessori Census. Journal of Montessori and pupils. Educational Psychology in Practice, 18(2),
Research, 8(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.17161/ 93–102.
jomr.v8i2.18675 Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Ed-
Eliot, L. (2001). Language and the developing brain. The ucation. (2019, June). MACTE guide to accred-
NAMTA Journal, 26(2), 8–60. itation. https://www.macte.org/wp-content/
Friedman, W. J. (2000). The development of children’s uploads/2019/06/2018-MACTE-Guide-to-Accred-
knowledge of the times of future events. Child Devel- itation.pdf
opment, 71(4), 913–932. Majsterek, D. J., Shorr, D. N., & Erion, V. L. (2000).
Harris, T. T., & Fuqua, J. D. (2000). What goes around Promoting early literacy through rhyme detection
comes around: Building a community of learners activities during Head Start circle-time. Child Study
through circle times. Young Children, 55(1), 44–47. Journal, 30(3), 143–151.
Healy, J. M. (1994). Who’s teaching the children to talk? Montessori, M. (1914). Dr. Montessori’s own handbook.
The NAMTA Journal, 19(1), 89–103. William Heinemann.
Housego, E., & Burns, C. (1994). Are you sitting too Montessori, M. (1967). The discovery of the child. Ballen-
comfortably? A critical look at “circle time” in prima- tine Books.
ry classrooms. English in Education 28(2), 23–30.

18 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Montessori, M. (1998). Creative development in the child: Wald, P. J., Morris, L. M., & Abraham, M. R. (1994).
The Montessori approach (Vol. 1). (R. Ramachandran, Three keys for successful circle time: Responding to
Trans.). Kalakshetra Press. children with diverse abilities. George Washington
National Center for Montessori in the Public Sector. University, Department of Teacher Preparation and
(2019a). Essential elements for Montessori in the public Special Education.
sector. Retrieved July 13, 2023, from https://drive. Wasik, B. A., Hindman, A. H., & Snell, E. K. (2016).
google.com/file/d/1oKtX7y9Pu70DWE7Jqo2_ Book reading and vocabulary development: A sys-
WH4kf Dv89M6k/view tematic review. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,
National Center for Montessori in the Public Sector. 37, 39–57.
(2019b). Essential elements rubric. Retrieved July 13, Wiltz, N. W., & Klein, E. L. (2001). “What do you do in
2023, from https://drive.google.com/file/d/176slt- child care?” Children’s perceptions of high and low
WoTioyPCIjAhCDVYC5J4au6zY16/view quality classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarter-
Platz, D., & Arellano, J. (2011). Time tested early child- ly, 16(2), 209–236.
hood theories and practices. Education, 132(1), Zaghlawan, H. Y., & Ostrosky, M. M. (2011). Circle time:
54–63. An exploratory study of activities and challenging
Qi, C. H., & Kaiser, A. (2006). Children’s behavior during behavior in Head Start classrooms. Early Childhood
teacher-directed and child-directed activities in Head Education Journal, 38, 439–448.
Start. Journal of Early Intervention, 28(2), 97–110. Zhang, C., & Quinn, M. F. (2018). Promoting early
Standing, E. (1998). Maria Montessori: Her life and work. writing skills through morning meeting routines:
Plume. Guidelines for best practices. Early Childhood Educa-
tion Journal, 46, 547–556.

Understanding Circle Time Practices 19

 Appendix A: Survey Instrument
Q1 Informed Consent
Q2 Thank you for your participation! For the purpose of this survey, “circle time” means a collective, large group gath-
ering during morning, in-person class time; it is synonymous with the phrases “line time” and “gathering time.” Please
answer questions according to your pre-COVID practices.

Please only participate in this survey if you are a current or former Montessori lead, co-lead, intern, or student
teacher in a 3­–6-year-old classroom.
First, we would like to ask a few questions about you and your classroom.
1. What is your primary role in the classroom?
o Montessori lead
o Montessori co-lead
o Montessori assistant
o Montessori student teacher
o Retired/former Montessori lead
o Other
o Prefer not to answer

Q3 What best describes your school?

o Private
o Public
o Independent/Nonprofit
o Charter
o Magnet
o Parochial
o Other
o Prefer not to answer
Q4 What best describes your Montessori program?
o AMI
o AMS
o A mix of AMI and AMS
o Neither AMI nor AMS
o Other
o Prefer not to answer
Q5 Where is your school located? [state list displayed]
Q6 About how many students are in your classroom?
o 10 or less
o 11 to 15
o 16 to 20
o 21 to 25
o 26 to 30
o 31 or more
o Prefer not to answer
Q7 How long have you been a Montessori guide?
o I am in training/doing an internship
o 1 year or less
o 2–5 years
o 6–10 years
o 11 years or more
o Prefer not to answer

20 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Q8 What ages are the children in your classroom? Please choose all that apply.
o Less than 2 years old
o 2 years old
o 3 years old
o 4 years old
o 5 years old
o 6 years old
o 7 years old
o Prefer not to answer
Q9 We will now ask some questions about the timing and logistics of circle time in your classroom.
How often does your classroom have circle time?
o Every day
o Most days
o Some days
o Never
o Prefer not to answer
Q10 When does circle time usually occur during the day?
o First thing in the morning
o During the morning
o End of the morning
o No fixed time
o Prefer not to answer
Q11 On average, how long does circle time generally last?
o Less than 5 minutes
o 6–10 minutes
o 11–15 minutes
o 16–20 minutes
o 21–25 minutes
o 26–30 minutes
o 31 minutes or longer
o Prefer not to answer
Q12 Who attends circle time?
o All children join circle time
o All children join circle time unless there are behavior issues or special needs
o All children attend circle time unless they are concentrating on their work
o All children are invited to circle time but it is optional
o Circle time is optional and children are not directly invited
o Circle time is initiated by the children and is optional
o Prefer not to answer
Q13 How long do children attend circle time?
o All children attend for the duration
o Most children attend for the duration except for those with behavior issues
o Children are encouraged to attend for the duration but do not have to
o Children can leave circle at a specified time
o Children are free to leave at will
o Prefer not to answer

Understanding Circle Time Practices 21

Q14 Usually during circle time...
o The guide talks most of the time
o The guide and children (collectively) share/participate an equal amount of time
o Children share/participate most of the time
o Prefer not to answer
Q15 The following three questions have the same possible answers. We will ask about the frequency of various circle
activities: whether they occur usually, sometimes, or never.
Which of the following activities usually occur during circle times? Please choose all that apply.
o General conversation
o Adult led question and answer
o Discussion of day/month/season (“calendar work”)
o Discussion of weather
o Music/rhythm work
o Singing
o Read aloud (stories)
o Read aloud discussions (stories)
o Read aloud (poetry)
o Read aloud discussion (poetry)
o Vocabulary lessons/discussions
o Dancing or movement
o Finger plays
o Grace and courtesy lessons
o Peace/conflict resolution lessons or discussions
o Math games or lessons
o Literacy games or lessons
o Cultural games or lessons
o Other group presentations
o Birthday celebrations
o Guest presentations
o Silence game
o Snack time
o Seasonal celebrations
o Presentations of new materials
o Discussion of class rules
o Show-and-tell
o Other
o None of the above. We do not have circle time.
o Prefer not to answer
Q16 Which of the following activities sometimes occur during circle time? Please choose all that apply.
o General conversation
o Adult led question and answer
o Discussion of day/month/season (“calendar work”)
o Discussion of weather
o Music/rhythm work
o Singing
o Read aloud (stories)
o Read aloud discussions (stories)
o Read aloud (poetry)
o Read aloud discussion (poetry)
o Vocabulary lessons/discussions

22 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 o Dancing or movement
o Finger plays
o Grace and courtesy lessons
o Peace/conflict resolution lessons or discussions
o Math games or lessons
o Literacy games or lessons
o Cultural games or lessons
o Other group presentations
o Birthday celebrations
o Guest presentations
o Silence game
o Snack time
o Seasonal celebrations
o Presentations of new materials
o Discussion of class rules
o Show-and-tell
o Other
o Prefer not to answer
Q17 Which of the following activities never occur during circle time? Please choose all that apply.
o General conversation
o Adult led question and answer
o Discussion of day/month/season (“calendar work”)
o Discussion of weather
o Music/rhythm work
o Singing
o Read aloud (stories)
o Read aloud discussions (stories)
o Read aloud (poetry)
o Read aloud discussion (poetry)
o Vocabulary lessons/discussions
o Dancing or movement
o Finger plays
o Grace and courtesy lessons
o Peace/conflict resolution lessons or discussions
o Math games or lessons
o Literacy games or lessons
o Cultural games or lessons
o Other group presentations
o Birthday celebrations
o Guest presentations
o Silence game
o Snack time
o Seasonal celebrations
o Presentations of new materials
o Discussion of class rules
o Show-and-tell
o Other
o Prefer not to answer

Understanding Circle Time Practices 23

Q18 Now we would like to know about reactions to circle time in your class.
How do most of the children in your class respond to a circle time invitation?
o They are eager to join circle time and/or ask for it
o They join circle time willingly
o They need to be reminded to join circle time
o They would rather do their work
o They avoid circle time
o Not applicable. We do not have circle time.
o Prefer not to answer
Q19 How many children participate during circle time (verbally or with motions)?
o All children participate during circle time
o Most children participate during circle time
o Some children participate during circle time
o Children usually don’t participate during circle time
o Prefer not to answer
Q20 What do children seem to enjoy most during circle time?
o General conversation
o Adult led question and answer
o Discussion of day/month/season (“calendar work”)
o Discussion of weather
o Music/rhythm work
o Singing
o Read aloud (stories)
o Read aloud discussions (stories)
o Read aloud (poetry)
o Read aloud discussion (poetry)
o Vocabulary lessons/discussions
o Dancing or movement
o Finger plays
o Grace and courtesy lessons
o Peace/conflict resolution lessons or discussions
o Math games or lessons
o Literacy games or lessons
o Cultural games or lessons
o Other group presentations
o Birthday celebrations
o Guest presentations
o Silence game
o Snack time
o Seasonal celebrations
o Presentations of new materials
o Discussion of class rules
o Show-and-tell
o Other
o Prefer not to answer
Q21 Do you enjoy circle time?
o Always
o Usually
o Sometimes
o Never
o Prefer not to answer

24 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Q22 What do you usually enjoy most during circle time? Choose all that apply.
o General conversation
o Adult led question and answer
o Discussion of day/month/season (“calendar work”)
o Discussion of weather
o Music/rhythm work
o Singing
o Read aloud (stories)
o Read aloud discussions (stories)
o Read aloud (poetry)
o Read aloud discussion (poetry)
o Vocabulary lessons/discussions
o Dancing or movement
o Finger plays
o Grace and courtesy lessons
o Peace/conflict resolution lessons or discussions
o Math games or lessons
o Literacy games or lessons
o Cultural games or lessons
o Other group presentations
o Birthday celebrations
o Guest presentations
o Silence game
o Snack time
o Seasonal celebrations
o Presentations of new materials
o Discussion of class rules
o Show-and-tell
o Other
o Prefer not to answer
Q23 Now we would like to learn about your circle time planning and preparation.
Do you feel like your training/Teacher Education Program prepared you for circle time?
o Always
o Usually
o Sometimes
o Never
o Not applicable. We do not have circle time.
o Prefer not to answer
Q24 How often do you prepare for circle time?
o I prepare for circle time every day
o I prepare for circle time every few days
o I prepare for circle time once a week
o I do not actively prepare and instead follow my inspiration
o Children lead circle time
o Other
o Prefer not to answer
Q25 How do you prepare for circle time? Please choose all that apply.
o By reviewing my classroom observations
o By reflecting on the students’ needs or interests
o By having discussions with my co-lead/assistant

Understanding Circle Time Practices 25

 o By referring to lesson plans and records
o By checking the calendar for events or birthdays
o By reflecting on housekeeping needs
o By discussions with students
o By following inspiration
o I do not actively prepare
o Prefer not to answer
Q26 In your circle time preparation, how much time do you plan for student participation during circle time?
o I plan for students to participate constantly during circle time
o I plan for students to participate most of the time
o I plan for students to participate about half of the time
o I plan for students to participate occasionally
o I plan for the students to participate rarely
o I do not plan for student participation
o Prefer not to answer
Q27 In our final section, we would like to explore how circle time impacts the three-hour work cycle in your classroom,
knowing that many teachers face obstacles in this regard.
How long is the typical morning work cycle in your classroom (from when children begin their work to when they stop
working in the morning)?
o 2 hours or less
o More than 2 hours–2.5 hours
o More than 2.5 hours–3 hours
o More than 3 hours–3.5 hours
o More than 3.5 hours
o Prefer not to answer
Q28 Do you feel like circle time complements the morning work cycle?
o Always
o Usually
o Sometimes
o Never
o Prefer not to answer
Q29 Do you feel like circle time lessens the morning work cycle?
o Always
o Usually
o Sometimes
o Never
o Prefer not to answer
Q30 Are you required to offer circle time in your classroom?
o Always
o Usually
o Sometimes
o Never
o Prefer not to answer

26 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 Appendix B: Survey Invitation
Hi there,
I am reaching out in hopes that you and your teachers will consider assisting me in my graduate research work. I am a
master’s student at UWRF and I’m studying Montessori circle time practices (or lack thereof) for my thesis project.
I am distributing a survey to AMI and AMS schools across the United States to learn more about Montessori circle
time norms and the three-hour work cycle. The survey is completely anonymous and is hosted on the UWRF Qual-
trics website. Would your primary level teachers consider taking the survey? There are 30 questions and it should take
10–12 minutes to complete. Please feel free to email/call/text with questions. I am happy to provide more information.
The survey may be found here:
Insert Link
Thank you in advance for your time,
Andrea Koczela
4xx-xxx-xxxx

Understanding Circle Time Practices 27

Montessori’s Perspective on
Citizenship Education: A View from
the Netherlands
Jaap de Brouwer, Lida T. Klaver, and Symen van der Zee
School of Education, Saxion University of Applied Sciences

Keywords: Montessori, citizenship education, peace education, moral development, sense of responsibility

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to synthesize Montessori’s writings on citizenship education to support the
implementation of a Montessorian view. This synthesis demonstrates that Montessori was of the explicit conviction
that a better world can be achieved through citizenship education, as it strives for a peaceful and harmonious society.
We approach this topic through the Dutch context. Although schools in the Netherlands are required by law to
promote active citizenship and social cohesion, this law does not stipulate which of the many different views on
citizenship education schools must adhere to. Schools have the liberty to devise their own citizenship curricula if
they can substantiate their views and choices. For Montessori schools, this requires insight into Montessori’s view
on citizenship education. Although Montessori’s views are still largely appropriate in our time, an ongoing dialogue
about citizenship education is required, as Montessori lived and worked in a specific geopolitical context. Based on our
analysis, we have identified seven themes that characterize Montessori’s view on citizenship education: one common
citizenship goal; preparation for independent thinking and action; image of the future citizen; adapted and critical
citizens; humanity for harmony; knowledge as prerequisite, personality development as goal; and an ever-expanding
worldview. The results of this study provide valuable insights for designing and teaching citizenship education through
a Montessorian lens.

Citizenship education is a hot topic in the Nether- the Montessori Method has been understood, devel-
lands (e.g., De Groot et al., 2022). While the recently oped, and implemented liberally from its inception in
passed Dutch Citizenship Education Act provides 1914 (de Brouwer et al., 2023). Since the twentieth
some direction, schools are largely left to explicate their century, schools have added elements to Montessori
views on citizenship education and implement prac- education and have put an emphasis on certain aspects
tices accordingly. Dutch Montessori schools naturally in response to developments in education and in society.
want to base their practice on Montessori’s ideas, but Despite the flexible ways in which Montessori principles
Montessori schools’ and teachers’ views on citizenship are being implemented, all schools affiliated with the
education may differ from her original vision. This is Dutch Montessori Association adhere to the Montessori
especially likely to be the case in the Netherlands where philosophy.

Journal
28 of Montessori
Journal ResearchResearch Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2
of Montessori
Fall 2023, Volume 9, Issue 2
 The aim of this study is to synthesize Montessori’s stitutions, civic morality, and patriotism. When and how
writings on citizenship education to support the imple- citizenship education developed in democratic countries
mentation of a Montessorian view, which will support depends on varying factors such as immigration, religion
Dutch Montessori schools in fulfilling their legal obliga- and secularism, voting rights, military conflict, multicul-
tion and pedagogical ambitions regarding the implemen- turalism, globalization, and the formation of supranation-
tation of citizenship education. Although there has been al institutions such as the European Union.
some writing on Montessori’s work in light of citizenship
education, these works are mostly essays, published in Citizenship Education in the Netherlands
non-peer reviewed journals (e.g., Hacker, 2015; Leonard, Dutch citizenship education was influenced by a
2015). Only four of her works have been systematically wide array of political and pedagogical thinkers such as
reviewed with a focus on citizenship education through Johan Rudolph Thorbecke, Philip Kohnstamm, Marti-
a literature-based, qualitative content analysis related to nus Langeveld, and, more recently, Micha De Winter, as
global citizenship and sustainability in Lower and Upper well as by the prevailing political climate and disrupting
Elementary and in middle school. In this review, Gynther events such as the attacks of September 11, 2001, and the
and Ahlquist (2022) focused on how to promote citizen- murder of the Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn (De Jong,
ship competencies and sustainability within Montessori 2021; Doppen, 2010). Different religious opinions and
education rather than on Montessori’s original intent. different ideas about the role of religion in education led
Deeper insight into Montessori’s views can help inform to the so-called School Struggle (schoolstrijd), which was
educational practices as schools formulate a Montessori- finally settled with Article 23, often referred to as Free-
an view on citizenship education. dom of Education (Rietveld-van Wingerden et al., 2003).
In what follows, we briefly describe the importance Through this article, the constitution stipulates that the
and history of citizenship education with a specific focus government decides on core educational objectives and
on the Netherlands. Our argument that views on citizen- supervises educational quality, but schools themselves are
ship education diverge quite substantially supports the free to choose their educational methods and adapt the
motivation for and context of our study. Summarizing curriculum how they see fit. Because of Freedom of Edu-
these differing views allows us to consider Montessori’s cation, the Netherlands now has great diversity in publicly
perspective within the range of possible ideas about funded schools with regards to religious orientation (e.g.,
citizenship education. We then provide a brief description Protestant, Catholic, and Islamic) and has publicly fund-
of Montessori’s life, with special attention to the geohis- ed schools with a range of pedagogical orientations (e.g.,
torical context of her time in relation to her ideas about Montessori, Dalton).
citizenship education. All schools can develop their own methods for and
outlook on citizenship education as long as they adhere to
Citizenship Education the core educational objectives determined by the Dutch
Convictions on the objectives of citizenship educa- government. Citizenship education became obligatory
tion have widely differed since ancient times. For exam- in all types of secondary education in 1968, when social
ple, while the education system in Sparta trained males studies (maatschappijleer) became part of the curriculum
to become loyal citizens through discipline and military (De Jong, 2021). This subject was meant to provide an
skills, the Greek and Roman elites, along with military introduction to modern society, but its objectives and
training, were taught math, reading, art, philosophy, and who should teach it were left unclear and became a
music as well (Heater, 2002). In the late 18th and 19th subject of debate. More recently, since the 1990s, social
centuries, mass schooling became the favored strategy cohesion, individualization, multiculturalization, and
of European states for nation building and citizenship national identity have become major themes in the dis-
development (Ramirez & Boli, 1987). What citizenship cussion about the importance of citizenship education.
education precisely entailed depended on the different To promote active citizenship and social integration, a
states’ ideologies (Heater, 2002). Democratic citizenship law on citizenship education (burgerschapsonderwijs)
education developed as a result of Enlightenment ideals, was passed in 2006 (De Groot et al., 2022). Moreover,
while totalitarian states, such as Nazi Germany, used to support the development of a shared national iden-
education to indoctrinate the young into the regime’s tity, the Dutch historical canon became a required part
ideology. Democratic citizenship education meant that of primary and secondary school curriculum in 2009
education promoted, for instance, knowledge about in- (Doppen, 2010).

Montessori and Citizenship Education 29

 Citizenship competences of Dutch students, mea- thinking skills, certain values, attitudes, behaviors (such
sured in the International Civic and Citizenship Educa- as freedom, equality, respect, tolerance, and solidarity),
tion Study of 2016, lagged behind those of students in and active participation. Hence, citizenship education
comparable countries (Dijkstra et al., 2021). In addition, can entail, for example, children being encouraged to visit
societal concerns grew about extremism, polarization, lonely elderly people, to pick up litter from the streets, to
and the weakening of the democratic constitutional state vote, to volunteer, and to respect and be tolerant of differ-
(Eidhof, 2018). The debate about citizenship education ences. According to Van der Ploeg (2020), this participa-
was fueled by incidents that showed friction between tory approach to citizenship education is consistent with
the state’s conception of good citizenship and Article the prevailing culture of neoliberalism, which assumes
23’s Freedom of Education stipulations (De Groot et al., that everyone must take care of themselves and stand up
2022). for themselves, and that societal problems can be solved
To clarify the schools’ citizenship task and to better by improving individuals’ behavior and lifestyle.
equip the Inspectorate of Education to intervene, the Although mainstream research and policy are based
Dutch Citizenship Education Act was passed in 2021 on the participatory idea and thus suggest consensus on
(De Groot et al., 2022). In line with the 2006 Citizen- the associated goals (Eidhof et al., 2016), other research-
ship Education Act, it obliges schools to promote active ers argue that there is in fact no consensus about the ob-
citizenship and social cohesion. The amended act of jectives of citizenship education and that differing views
2021 further required that citizenship education must on democracy and good citizenship exist (e.g., Guérin,
focus on respect for and knowledge of the basic values ​​of 2018; Sant, 2019). Ideas about democracy and good
the democratic state, on the development of social and citizenship can emphasize community, togetherness, and
societal competencies, and on knowledge and respect for a focus on behaving productively and appropriately (i.e.,
differences and equal treatment of all citizens. In addition, communitarian perspective). However, the emphasis can
the 2021 act mandated that schools must ensure a culture also be on autonomy, individual rights, and liberty (i.e.,
in line with basic democratic values so that students can liberal perspective). Yet another, more critical approach
practice these values ​​in an environment where students to citizenship emphasizes social justice, where a good
and staff feel safe and accepted. Although the new law citizen views society critically and acts accordingly (i.e.,
provides some direction for education, schools them- critical-emancipatory perspective). While these three ap-
selves must formulate citizenship objectives, determine proaches to good citizenship seem distinct, intermediate
their educational methods, and assess their students’ de- forms and slight variations are, of course, possible (e.g.,
velopment (Inspectorate of Education, 2022) beginning Eidhof et al., 2016; Geboers et al., 2015; Guérin, 2018;
with formulating their views on citizenship education. Leenders & Veugelers, 2009; Sant, 2019; Westheimer
& Kahne, 2004). In addition to these three approaches,
Contemporary Views on Citizenship Education other ideas about citizenship are less known. For example,
There appears to be no consensus on the precise there are more agonistic perspectives, in which conflict is
meaning of citizenship education. One way of thinking seen as valuable (Parra et al., 2021; Sant, 2019; Van der
about citizenship education—attributable to Dewey (van Ploeg & Guérin, 2016; Van Waveren, 2020). Addition-
der Ploeg, 2019)—is to view the whole of education as ally, non-participatory perspectives exist, which do not
civic education (Van der Ploeg & Guérin, 2016). From consider it necessary at all for everyone to be politically
this viewpoint, the school is responsible for general involved in order for a democracy to function (Van der
education. Developing elementary competences such as Ploeg & Guérin, 2016).
critical thinking and judgment skills, along with offering Because of the range of views on democracy and
a wide and in-depth curriculum, all add up to the require- good citizenship, schools must clearly justify why they
ments of good citizenship. However, a more particular choose a certain perspective (Guérin, 2018). To clarify
conception of citizenship seems to underpin mainstream what citizenship education can mean, we have contrasted
citizenship education policy and research (Guérin, 2018; the different views on citizenship education by posing the
Guérin et al., 2013; Joris, 2022). Guérin coined the term following fundamental questions:
participatory approach for this conception of citizenship
education. This approach is based on an idea of ​​good 1. What is the “why” of citizenship education?
citizenship characterized by political literacy, critical 2. Who is responsible for citizenship education?

30 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 3. What is the ideal citizen? awareness and emancipation (Moretti, 2021). In 1907,
4. Should citizenship education prescribe Montessori applied what she had learned in her work with
specific values and behaviors? intellectually disabled children in Rome’s low-income
5. What is emphasized in citizenship education? neighborhoods where she established the first Casa dei
6. What is the context of citizenship education? Bambini, which would later prove to be the starting point
of the worldwide dissemination of the Montessori Meth-
The appendix presents examples of possible contra- od (Kramer, 1976).
dictions for each fundamental question on citizenship
education. These contradictions provide the framework Montessori Education in Italy
for our analysis of Montessori’s writings. Although we As Montessori schools started to flourish in other
contrasted views, intermediate views are often possible. countries in the early 1920s, Montessori was introduced
For developing the framework of views on citizenship to Mussolini, the then prime minister of Italy, in 1923.
education, we referred to literature about views on good Mussolini announced that he wanted to transform Italian
citizenship and citizenship education (e.g., Guérin, 2018; schools according to the Montessori Method—a policy
Jeliazkova, 2015; Van der Ploeg, 2020; Veugelers, 2011), decision Montessori was eager to embrace, given the
the goals of citizenship education (e.g., Eidhof, 2020; small number of Montessori schools in Italy at the time
Hodson, 2020; Van der Ploeg & Guérin, 2016), citizen- (de Stefano, 2020; Kramer, 1976). A national Montessori
ship and democracy (Biesta, 2021), and about the con- training program, under state patronage, was established
texts for citizenship education (Biesta et al., 2009). The in 1926, but the transformation of Italian schools into
complete framework of views on citizenship education, as Montessori schools proved difficult. According to Kramer
used for our analysis, can be found in the appendix. (1976), Montessori insisted that she was “apolitical and
that ‘the cause of the child’ superseded ephemeral dis-
A Closer Look at Montessori’s Life to tinctions of party and nation” (p. 281). While this basic
Provide a Deeper Context for Her Views incompatibility meant that cooperation with Mussolini’s
fascist regime was convoluted from the very start, her
In this study we synthesize Montessori’s writings that relationship with Mussolini remained cordial, and Mon-
deal with citizenship education to express her view on tessori even made some concessions to adapt her method
citizenship and citizenship education. Events in Montes- to the fascist ideology—although it remains unclear what
sori’s life and the period in which she grew up shaped the adjustments, if any, were implemented (de Stefano, 2020;
way in which she interpreted the concept of citizenship Leenders, 1999). However, as government interference
in her pedagogy. Montessori advocated for human rights in the Italian Montessori Society and the organization of
and the emancipation of women well before her career as Montessori teacher training kept increasing, a rupture be-
an educator (Moretti, 2021). Montessori was a delegate came inevitable (Moretti, 2021; Quarfood, 2023). After
to the International Congress of Women in Berlin in 1896 ten years of collaboration with the regime, Montessori
where she not only represented Italy but also spoke on dramatically withdrew in 1933, leading to the closure of
equal rights to work and equal wages for men and women. all Montessori schools in Italy in 1936 (de Stefano, 2020;
After graduating from medical school in 1896, Montessori Quarfood, 2023).
worked as a volunteer at the psychiatric clinic in Rome
where she encountered children with intellectual disabil- Emerging Perspective on Peace
ity. During this period, she realized that working with Gradually, starting around 1932, Montessori increas-
these children was more of a pedagogical issue rather than ingly spoke of peace education and of one world for all
a medical one, and she became convinced of the need for humanity, a precursor to her ideas of world citizenship.
special schools (Kramer, 1976). Over time, Montessori Montessori started to place an increased emphasis on
began to explore educational and pedagogical approaches children’s rights. She no longer focused solely on chang-
to serve these children. ing the adult in the school, but also on changing society
In the early 1900s, entirely new neighborhoods were and therefore the world through education (de Stefano,
built around Rome to improve the lives of future citizens. 2020). To strengthen this view, Montessori announced
These plans addressed the root causes of deprivation and the Social Party of the Child at the International Mon-
inequality by educating young children through societal tessori Congress in Copenhagen in 1937, which was a
party that championed the rights of the child and ex-

Montessori and Citizenship Education 31

amined contemporary sociopolitical problems from the sessions. For example, the panelists discussed whether
child’s perspective (Montessori, 2019a; Moretti, 2021). Montessori’s view on citizenship education is focused
During World War II, when Montessori was in India for on cohesion within the child’s community or on cohe-
a prolonged period, she further developed the concept sion within society as a whole, and if Montessori’s view
of cosmic education, which essentially embodies the on citizenship education is mainly focused on attitudes
responsibility for building peace and developing moral and behaviors or mainly on knowledge. Discussing these
values (Raimondo, 2023). After spending the World War different views on citizenship education provided an
II years in India, Montessori returned to Europe in 1946. initial shared idea of Montessori’s stance on citizenship
In 1951, a year before her death, she spoke at UNESCO education within the expert panel. As citizenship educa-
about the importance of early childhood education to tion or related contemporary terminology was not part
improve society and the world. of Montessori’s vocabulary, the panelists formulated sen-
When examining the concept of citizenship in sitizing concepts, which they identified as closely related
Montessori education, we cannot avoid considering the to Montessori’s view on citizenship education based on
historical context of Montessori’s life. Her statements the aforementioned discussions. Sensitizing concepts give
about citizenship are deeply rooted in and informed by ideas of directions to pursue and sensitize researchers to
the geopolitical times through which she lived. Keeping particular aspects of a topic (Boeije, 2010). These con-
this in mind, we revisited Montessori’s original works cepts were: cosmic education, moral development, citi-
with a team of Dutch Montessori experts to analyze her zenship, peace, society, social development, responsibility,
conception of citizenship more closely. The main ques- freedom, and independence. These concepts were used
tion of this study is: What did Montessori think about to identify relevant Montessori literature. Using Montes-
citizenship education? sori’s own terminology not only guided the panel to select
relevant books but also relevant quotations within these
Method books. For example, the term cosmic education led us to
include Montessori’s book To Educate the Human Potential
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of in the literature review while excluding Psychoarithmetic
Montessori’s view on citizenship based on a literature re- because it mentions none of the identified concepts.
view conducted by a panel of Dutch Montessori experts. The literature search of Montessori’s works began with
six books selected based on consensus within the panel
Expert Panel regarding their relevance (see Table 1). Each book was
The panel of five Montessori experts conducting the read fully and reviewed by one of the panelists, and the
review was selected by the Dutch Montessori Association. retrieved citations were discussed in the panel. Based on
The panelists were Jaap de Brouwer, Anastasia Dingarten, these discussions, panelists identified and read another
Esther Pelgrom, Mirjam Stefels, and Annemarie Looijen- eight books (see Table 1), resulting in a saturation of new
ga. Each panelist has more than fifteen years of experience relevant citations .
as a Montessori teacher, teacher educator, administrator, The panel reviewed 14 of Montessori’s books in total
and/or researcher. De Brouwer, leader of the expert panel, (see Table 1). As the example in Table 2 demonstrates,
is a Montessori researcher and Montessori teacher edu- each panelist subdivided and systematically ordered their
cator with classroom experience as a Montessori teacher. retrieved citations by the views on citizenship education
Dingarten has a background in philosophy and is also a as outlined in the framework in the appendix. This result-
Montessori teacher educator. Both Pelgrom and Stefels ed in 494 citations of Montessori’s view on citizenship
have backgrounds as Montessori teachers and are now education found in her books, subdivided and systemat-
experienced Montessori teacher educators. Looijenga was ically ordered using the same framework (see the appen-
also a Montessori teacher and now holds a doctorate in dix). Some citations fit in multiple views of citizenship
educational research, having conducted her research in education. Table 2 demonstrates only a subset of Montes-
Montessori schools. sori’s citations that fit this view of citizenship education
as an example of the analysis we employed. De Brouwer
Procedure wrote a synthesis from the combined categorized Mon-
Using the framework of views on citizenship educa- tessori literature citations. The synthesis was completed
tion (see the appendix), the panel started discussing these with the help of two rounds of discussion with the panel.
views within Montessori philosophy in three two-hour Panel members reviewed and provided written feedback

32 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Table 1
General Description of the Methodology
Phase 1 The panel discussed views on citizenship education resulting in an initial shared idea of
Montessori’s views on citizenship education.
Phase 2 The panel formulated sensitizing concepts to identify relevant Montessori literature: cosmic educa-
tion, moral development, citizenship, peace, society, social development, responsibility, freedom,
and independence.
Phase 3 First round of reading and reviewing by the panel members. All retrieved citations were discussed
in the panel.
Citizen of the World (2019)
Education and Peace (1949/1992)
Door het Kind Naar een Nieuwe Wereld [Through the child into a new world] (1941/1952)
The Formation of Man (1949/1954)
The Child, Society and the World (1979/2016)
To Educate the Human Potential (1947/1998)
Phase 4 Second round of reading and reviewing by the panel members based on previous expert-panel
discussion. All retrieved citations were discussed in the panel.
The Advanced Montessori Method (1917/2022)
Education for a New World (1946)
From Childhood to Adolescence (1973)
Creative Development in the Child (2020)
The Montessori Method (1909/2016)
The 1946 London Lectures (2012)
The Secret of Childhood (2021)
The Absorbent Mind (1949/2019)
Phase 5 The panel members systematically ordered their retrieved citations, using the framework of views
on citizenship education.
Phase 6 De Brouwer wrote a synthesis from the categorized citations, completed with two rounds of discus-
sion within the panel and one round of written feedback by the panel members.

Table 2
Example of Systematically Ordered Retrieved Citations, Using the Framework of Views on Citizenship Education
View on citizenship edu- Society (government, school, parents) may decide what kind of citizen children should be. /
cation Children themselves may decide what kind of citizen they want to be.

“One of the tasks of the child is to build himself adapted to the environment. (…) Adaptation is
the starting point, the ground we stand on” (Montessori, 2019a, p. 11).
“The adult defeats the child; and once the child reaches adulthood the characteristic signs of
the peace that is only an aftermath of war—destruction on one hand and painful adjustment
on the other—remain with him for the rest of his life. The age-old, superficial notion that the
Montessori citations development of the individual is uniform and progressive remains unchanged and the mistaken
idea that the adult must mold the child in the pattern that society wishes still holds sway. (…)
The child is not simply a miniature adult. He is first and foremost the possessor of a life of his own
that has certain special characteristics and that has its own goal” (Montessori, 1949/1992, p. 15).
“The only true freedom for an individual is to have the opportunity to act independently”
(Montessori, 1949/1992, p. 55).

Montessori and Citizenship Education 33

on the final synthesis, but the member check did not lead goal (Montessori, 1941/1952).
to content-related revisions. According to Montessori (1947/1998, 1979/2016),
many changes for the benefit of the child were required
Results to achieve this common citizenship objective, including
parenting techniques, teaching methods, and the school
From her experiences and perspective, weighing the system itself. While early in the 20th century the general
consequences of the geopolitical context of Europe in the conditions for adults improved, Montessori (1949/1992)
first decades of the 20th century, Montessori was con- noted that conditions for children had worsened. The key
vinced that the improvement of society should begin with to improving conditions for the child was in the hands
educational reform. Montessori (1941/1952) reasoned of the adults who should be less proud, less selfish, and
that if the children do well, the world will eventually do less authoritarian (Montessori, 1979/2016). Montes-
well. She spoke of the “new man,” a generation of children sori revolted against the old patterns in which teachers
capable of building a new form of community, a new imposed their own values and beliefs onto the children
society in which strong, independent personalities live (1947/1998). She argued that teachers had to give the
together peacefully and freely (Montessori, 1941/1952; children space to form their own opinions and judgments
1949/1992, p. 21). Montessori education is therefore (1947/1998).
primarily aimed at fostering the progress of society. Mon- Montessori believed the same philosophy held true
tessori was confident that children could achieve this goal for the traditional educational system at large because it
if they were properly prepared for it. Children, according was not developing the child’s personality (Montessori,
to Montessori (1941/1952, 1949/1992), should not be 1979/2016). The environment did not allow children to
raised in the image of the adult. Instead, education should be active and, therefore, they were not allowed any influ-
enable children to shape their own futures because “the ence. Moreover, while the school curriculum should be an
child plays a fundamental role in determining the future aid to education, it should not be imposed on humanity
of humanity” (Montessori, 1941/1952, p. 35). This future in the name of an ideology or out of a social or political
requires an education that enables children to develop belief (Montessori 1941/1952, 1949/1992, 1979/2016).
into independent, balanced people that can make contri- Montessori (1946, 1949/1992) indicated that education
butions to society (Montessori, 1941/1952). should no longer consist of imparting knowledge but
Based on our analysis, we have identified seven should instead follow a new path, a path that explicitly
themes that characterize Montessori’s view on citizenship strives to unfold human potential and the development of
education: (1) one common citizenship goal; (2) prepa- personality. Urging a changing role for parents, teachers,
ration for independent thinking and action; (3) image of education, and adults in general is typical of Montessori’s
the future citizen; (4) adapted and critical citizens; (5) thinking about citizenship. Upbringing and education
humanity for harmony; (6) knowledge as prerequisite, shapes new generations, empowers them, and thereby
personality development as goal; and (7) an ever-expand- enables them to do things differently, if they decide to do
ing worldview. Each of these themes are discussed in the so themselves.
sections that follow.
Preparation for Independent Thinking and Action
One Common Citizenship Goal Montessori (1949/1992) believed that children
Citizenship, or the pursuit of a better society, is a should decide for themselves about the kind of citizens
responsibility for all adults (Montessori, 2019a). Mon- they want to be but not necessarily figure it out all by
tessori (2019a) stated that human beings do not form a themselves. Montessori (1947/1998) believed that
society if they only pursue their own personal goals. The children should be empowered so that they can make
ultimate form of human society is based on organization, their own informed decisions. To make informed deci-
cohesion, and having common objectives. The common sions, children should be initiated into society, study it,
goals that Montessori talked about include allowing the and try to understand and accommodate it (Montessori,
child’s personality to mature, which can then contribute 1941/1952, 1979/2016, 2019a). Teachers can give
to the advancement of a civilized, cohesive, and peaceful children the freedom to experience and absorb complex
human society (Montessori, 1949/1992, 1946). Home society in their individual ways by teaching them the
and school should work together to achieve this common norms, practices, behavior patterns, ideals, religions, and

34 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

other aspects of their society (Montessori, 1941/1952, help when needed, and dignity—these objectives cannot
1979/2016). Practices and experiences thus form the be reached by merely teaching them, but rather by having
basis for social and moral education in Montessori children experience and practice them from an early age,
education (Montessori, 1941/1952). In Montessori’s over a long period of time (Montessori, 1941/1952).
(1947/1998) view, education bears a specific responsi- A child that has adapted to culture and society can
bility to provide these experiences, although it is a shared subsequently begin to have independent thoughts about
responsibility of the school with parents or caregivers the individual’s role in relation to society, hence becom-
and community organizations. According to Montessori ing a critical citizen. Montessori called for independent
(1973, 1979/2016), home, school, and other organiza- thinking and giving children freedom to express them-
tions must work together as the child cannot develop selves and shape the world for themselves (Montessori,
without a social environment. 1941/1952, 1947/1998). She believed those who want to
work for a better society should not be guided by political
Image of the Future Citizen ideals or religion but rather be in the service of the whole
Montessori (1949/1992) had a clear image of an of humanity itself (Montessori, 1949/1954, 1947/1998).
ideal society in which citizens are interconnected and Montessori’s ideal citizen therefore deeply understands
responsible for living together in harmony. Being part of society, its values, and virtues, and uses this knowledge to
a community entails rules of behavior and obligations think and act in freedom and with a sense of responsibil-
that make it possible to live together in a peaceful manner ity toward society as a whole and the unique individuals
(Montessori, 2019a). The ideal citizen seeks common within it.
goals, contributes to these goals, is an independent and
balanced personality, and behaves responsibly to make a Humanity for Harmony
harmonious society possible. Although Montessori gave Montessori (1941/1952, 1949/1992, 1979/2016,
children the freedom and responsibility to decide for 1949/2019b) advocated solidarity, harmony, and peace,
themselves what kind of citizens they want to become, but noted that society does not adequately prepare people
she did have a clear conception of the future society— for a life as citizens. There is, according to Montessori
how education could contribute to it, and what kind (1949/1992), no “moral organization” of the masses (p.
of citizen was needed for that society. This represents a xi). People are raised to see themselves as isolated individ-
paradox in Montessori’s thoughts about citizenship: while uals who must satisfy their immediate needs by compet-
the adult should not impose moral judgments on children ing with other individuals. Montessori (1979/2016) ar-
and children should be given the liberty to decide for gued that humanity is unaware of the need for unification.
themselves what kind of citizen they wanted to become, She saw people fighting for themselves, their families, and
Montessori did have clear images of what the future their nation, yet being unaware of their responsibility of
society might look like and what kind of citizens would be working together (Montessori, 1947/1998). Montessori
required. saw it as her task to make children aware of the need for
unity because the mission of education is to cultivate
Adapted and Critical Citizens peace and peacefulness in children (Montessori, 1946,
The ideal citizen as seen by Montessori is both 1947/1998, 1949/1992). It would take a powerful edu-
socially adaptable and critical. Montessori (1941/1952, cational effort, according to Montessori (1949/1992), to
1949/1992, 1949/2019b) emphasized the impor- enable people to understand and structure social phe-
tance of social cohesion not based on personal desires nomena, to propose and pursue collective goals over indi-
but on social integration, where individuals identified vidual ones, and thus to achieve ordered social progress.
with the group to which they belonged (Montessori,
1949/2019b). The human harmony of which Montessori Knowledge as Prerequisite, Personality Development
wrote requires adaptability of the individual. According as Goal
to Montessori (2019a), becoming a well-adapted citizen In her call for a civilized, peaceful, and harmonious
is a crucial starting point for children’s development into society, Montessori seems to have been more focused
independent, balanced human beings who can fulfill their on the social aspect of citizenship education than the
adult roles in future society. Kindness toward others, love, political. She was politically active on a personal level
peace, brotherhood, respecting other people, offering with, for example, her commitment to women’s rights

Montessori and Citizenship Education 35

and the promotion of children’s rights, but she did not the older child needs an expanded environment to engage
envision a role for politics in education. As a result, it with society and further develop their moral conscious-
remains unclear how and to what extent politics should ness (Montessori, 1973, 1949/1992, 1917/2022). Mon-
be part of the curriculum. Montessori (1949/1992) did tessori (1949/1992) spoke of human cooperation in the
express her opinion that politics should prevent conflicts global community with all people having responsibility
and schools could contribute to this political mission by for each other. Thus, she saw the older child’s environ-
cultivating peace and peaceful problem solving. While ment as the entire world, with the overarching goal of
laws can protect the rights of children to support them developing children into global citizens.
growing up to be responsible, peaceful citizens, Montes-
sori (1979/2016, 2019a) argued that laws by themselves Conclusion
will never suffice to lead to harmonious coexistence. She
doubted whether children’s rights or civil rights alone Our analysis demonstrates that Montessori was
could guarantee the protection and support truly nec- convinced a better world is possible through education.
essary for a harmonious, peaceful society (Montessori, If we nurture future generations with knowledge and
1979/2016). skills through citizenship education, they will develop
Montessori (1949/1992, 2019a) also advocated for well-balanced personalities with a sense of responsibility.
teaching virtues and values related to world peace and Citizenship education can expand children’s experiences
harmonious coexistence. Education can provide children and thinking, opening up new worlds and preparing them
with the knowledge and practice to deal well with diverse for adult responsibilities by enabling them to participate
groups and cultures as adults. Knowledge, in its broad- competently, morally, and reliably in society. This partici-
est sense, helps children develop their personality and pation goes hand in hand with being critical and reflecting
morality (Montessori, 1941/1952, 1917/2022). Moral- on society. Reflection enables one to consider the present
ity, knowing the difference between right and wrong, is in light of the common goal of humanity: living together
something that Montessori (1917/2022) considered to in harmonious, peaceful ways.
be teachable and refined through practice and experience. To make explicit how Montessori’s vision of citizen-
According to Montessori (1949/1992), the personality of ship can be expressed in education, we have drawn up
the child must be developed in such a way that it can con- design principles that can give direction to shaping citi-
tribute to the construction of a new society. To this end, zenship education in Montessori schools. These six design
the child should acquire knowledge and social experienc- principles are grounded in Montessori’s view on citizen-
es simultaneously (Montessori, 1941/1952, 1973). ship education and address the six fundamental questions
of citizenship education (see appendix). The design prin-
An Ever-Expanding Worldview ciples are stated in the form of if-then reasonings because
Montessori described the child’s personality develop- multiple views on citizenship education are possible. If
ment in an ever-expanding prepared environment. Such one thinks about citizenship education in a certain way,
a prepared environment aims to make the adult world then this has consequences for one’s educational practic-
accessible to the child, whatever the child’s stage of de- es. With this formulation, we encourage teachers to reflect
velopment. In Montessori’s view, children as young as six on their own views on citizenship education and their
can have constructive contributions to their environment educational practices in relation to Montessori’s views.
(1941/1952), older children care for the environment See Table 3 for the six design principles.
and do productive work in it (1941/1952, 1949/1992),
and children from the age of 12 should actively participate Discussion
in society beyond school. She advocated that adolescents
produce, sell, work, and experience working life by inter- Although Montessori had a very comprehensive view
acting with others, learning the value of money, and being of citizenship education, as our results demonstrated, we
part of their community (1949/1992). Through social must recognize that there are some gaps: aspects of citi-
experience and practical knowledge from the immediate zenship education that she did not address in her work.
environment, the child develops into a responsible citizen For example, we found little in Montessori’s literature
(1941/1952). At some point, she argued, the protected, about whether a Montessori school should propagate one
prepared school environment no longer suffices because specific perspective on good citizenship or present a vari-

36 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Table 3
Six Design Principles to Develop Montessori Citizenship Education
What is the “why” of citizenship education?
…then you will equip children with knowledge, skills, and a sense
If you want to make the world a better place through of responsibility so that they can make the changes in society that
education… they believe are necessary and you will enable them to actively work
towards a world that is peaceful and harmonious.
Who is responsible for citizenship education?
…then you jointly represent society for the child and provide children
If you believe that citizenship is a joint responsibility with enough experiences so that they can form their own personalities
of all adults and that children are allowed to decide for and moralities (emancipation). You give children the space to form
themselves what kind of citizens they want to be… their own way of thinking and do not impose your own views—or way
of life—upon them.
What is the ideal citizen?
…then you stimulate respect for other people, and cultures, and
If you believe that children should adapt to today’s dignity—without forcing children to behave in a compliant manner.
society in order to form their own critical opinions You also encourage independent thinking, a love of knowledge and
about it… work ethic, and you give them the freedom to express themselves and
to take initiative.
Should citizenship education prescribe specific values and behaviors?
If you think that children ultimately have the respon- ...then you stimulate knowledge in the broadest sense of the word and
sibility for peaceful and harmonious coexistence provide an environment in which children learn to think and act for
and you want to cultivate this without molding the themselves and develop a balanced personality, which can lead to a
children to your own moral image… peaceful and harmonious world.
What is emphasized in citizenship education?
…then you assume that positive attitudes are a result of acquiring
If you believe that the emphasis in citizenship edu- knowledge and skills and an awareness of the responsibility for
cation should be on knowledge, skills, and a sense of realizing a peaceful and harmonious society. Attention to rights is
responsibility… important, but it is more necessary that children understand what they
themselves can do to improve society.
What is the context of citizenship education?
…then children must gain the social experiences that allow them to
understand the importance of respect for and connections with other
If you want to develop children into citizens of the
people and cultures. They must learn to understand the world and to
world…
set and pursue collective goals that enable them to make a real and
fundamental contribution to the world.

ety of perspectives. Furthermore, although it is tempting al, growth-oriented, individualistic society, which tends to
to adopt Montessori’s thinking on citizenship education isolate people and undermine the harmony and solidarity
and align educational practice with it, we must recognize that is at the heart of Montessori’s thinking (Han, 2022).
that Montessori’s ideas arose in a particular time and The challenges for implementing Montessori’s vision of
context with specific characteristics and challenges. If citizenship education were quite different from those
she had lived today, perhaps her ideas would have been faced by educators today.
different. She could not have determined once and for all Neoliberal society focuses on individual success
and for everyone what citizenship is. Just as the interpre- and the adapted citizen. The ideal citizen, according
tation of Montessori’s works must take into account the to this narrative, is someone who conforms to the
time in which she lived, the interpretation of contempo- existing societal structures, contributes to them, strives
rary citizenship education must take into account mod- towards individual success, and does not question
ern society. The society in which Montessori developed social conditions. What is missing in this dominant
her philosophy and method has given way for a neoliber- narrative, from a Montessorian point of view, is the

Montessori and Citizenship Education 37

critical citizen—the citizen who is capable of questioning practice align. Furthermore, it is worth exploring whether
societal structures and conditions in light of the ideal the views of Montessori teachers match the Montessorian
of a harmonious, peaceful society. The citizen who can view on citizenship education that we found. A question-
help change the world and shape the new society is the naire with different views on citizenship education could
one who is able to deal with complex future challenges be a means to explore this question and could provide
and complicated problems. The knotty question for insights into differences between countries. Comparative
Montessori education today is: What, in the face of these studies could uncover to what extent Montessori’s views
challenges, does this require of our educational practice? of citizenship are universal or are influenced by social, cul-
This is not an easy question to answer because it requires tural, legal, historical, and economical national contexts.
a deep and ongoing dialogue about Montessorian
citizenship education. This study can provide a International Input
framework for this continued discussion. Since our panel consisted only of Dutch experts,
familiar with the Dutch context in the field of citizenship
Limitations and Montessori education, future research could examine
whether an international panel (including, for instance,
These conclusions are based on a review of Italian speakers) would find similar results as our Dutch
Montessori’s work. However, methodologically, our study panel.
has had several limitations. First, although we believe that
the experts who contributed to the review of Montessori’s Comparing Views
work are well qualified and have done excellent work, This study can serve as a useful foundation for
convenience played a role in their selection and the comparing Montessori’s views on citizenship education
judgement of their expertise was subjective. Second, we not only with other reform pedagogies from Montessori’s
decided to start with a framework of views on citizenship own time, such as Dalton, Jenaplan, or Waldorf schools,
education, which may have narrowed the panel’s view but also with contemporary thinkers on pedagogy and
on the breadth of what citizenship education may entail. education.
Another approach could have been to study the works Citizenship is a multifaceted concept, encompassing
of Montessori inductively, without establishing a prior multiple dimensions within which different conceptual-
framework of views on citizenship education. However, izations are possible. Therefore, it is crucial that
the panel approach we employed required a framework to Montessori schools understand the origins of Montessori
facilitate a common discourse. Third, for practical reasons, education and Maria Montessori’s thoughts on citizen-
we divided the selected works of Montessori among the ship education. The Dutch Citizenship Education Act
experts so that each work was only studied by one expert. gives direction to the interpretation of citizenship educa-
Our analysis would be more thorough and our results tion but leaves schools in the Netherlands much room to
more reliable if each work had been studied by multiple shape it in their own way. The insights our study gives into
experts. Fourth, we could have studied Montessori’s the views of Montessori on citizenship education can help
writings using digital methods and coding; however, we schools shape their citizenship education and make their
saw value in leveraging the expertise and experience of thoughts explicit.
the panel. Although we acknowledge these limitations,
the insights from this study can provide a foundation for Acknowledgments
designing and teaching citizenship education through a
Montessorian lens. The authors thank Annemarie Looijenga, Mirjam
Stefels, Esther Pelgrom, Anastasia Dingarten, Geert Bors,
Directions for Future Research and Joke Verheul for their contributions to the research
Although we now have a better understanding of reported.
Montessori’s vision of citizenship education, this study
leads to further research questions. Author Information

Understanding Practice †Corresponding Author

Examining citizenship education as implemented in Jaap de Brouwer† is an educational researcher and
Montessori schools may clarify to what extent theory and Montessori educator at the Progressive Education Re-

38 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

search Group at Saxion University of Applied Sciences. De Groot, I., Daas, R., & Nieuwelink, H. (2022). Edu-
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- cation for democratic citizenship in Dutch schools:
dressed to Jaap de Brouwer, School of Education, Saxion A bumpy road. Journal of Social Science Education,
University of Applied Sciences, Handelskade 75, 7417 21(4). https://doi.org/10.11576/jsse-5381
DH, Deventer, The Netherlands. De Groot, I., & Veugelers, W. (2015). Why we need to
Email: j.debrouwer@saxion.nl question the democratic engagement of adolescents
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8641-8306 in Europe. Journal of Social Science Education, 14(4),
Lida T. Klaver is an educational researcher at the Pro- 27–38. https://doi.org/10.2390/jsse-v14-i4-1426
gressive Education Research Group at Saxion University De Jong, W. (2021). Sociologen in zakformaat? Burger-
of Applied Sciences. schapsvorming en het schoolvak maatschappijleer
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2994-8634 in Nederland (1945-2020) [Pocket-sized sociolo-
Symen van der Zee is professor of Progressive Edu- gists? Citizenship education and the subject social
cation at the Progressive Education Research Group at studies in the Netherlands]. Pedagogische Studiën, 98,
Saxion University of Applied Sciences. 204–220.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3615-4397 De Stefano, C. (2020). Maria Montessori: Het kind is de
meester [The child is the teacher]. Xander Uitgevers
This article is based on data published in De Brouwer B.V.
et al. (2022). Our work was funded by the Dutch Dijkstra, A. B., Dam, G., & Munniksma, A. (2021).
Montessori Association. Inequality in citizenship competences: Citizenship
education and policy in the Netherlands. In B. Mal-
References ak-Minkiewicz & J. Torney-Purta (Eds.), Influences
of the IEA Civic and Citizenship Education Studies:
Biesta, G. (2021). Burgerschapsvorming: Pedagogische Practice, policy and research across countries and
en levensbeschouwelijke eigenheid op het democratisch regions. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
speelveld [Citizenship education: Educational and 030-71102-3
philosophical uniqueness on the democratic playing Doppen, F. H. (2010). Citizenship education and the
field]. Verus, vereniging voor katholiek en christelijk Dutch national identity debate. Education, Citizen-
onderwijs. https://www.verus.nl/aanbod/produc- ship and Social Justice, 5(2), 131–143. https://doi.
ten/whitepaper-gert-biesta-pedagogische-en-levens- org/10.1177/1746197910370723
beschouwelijke-eigenheid-op-het Eidhof, B. B. F. (2018). Influencing youth citizenship [Doc-
Biesta, G., Lawy, R., & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding toral dissertation, University of Amsterdam]. https://
young people’s citizenship learning in everyday life: dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=371e3f5e-0870-4cf6-
The role of contexts, relationships and dispositions. ac3e-677d8ae39a9d
Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5–24. Eidhof, B. B. F. (2020). Handboek burgerschapsonderwijs:
https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197908099374 Voor het voortgezet onderwijs [Handbook of citi-
Boeije, H. (2010). Analysis in qualitative research. Sage zenship education: For secondary education]. Pro-
Publications. Demos. https://www.bureaucommonground.nl/s/
De Brouwer, J., Klaver, L., & van der Zee, S. (2022). Eidhof-2019-Handboek-Burgerschapsonderwijs.pdf
Montessori en burgerschapsonderwijs: Balanceren tussen Eidhof, B. B. F., Ten Dam, G. T. M., Dijkstra, A. B., & Van
toerusten en ruimte geven [Montessori and citizen- de Werfhorst, H. G. (2016). Consensus and contest-
ship education: Balancing between equipping and ed citizenship education goals in Western Europe. Ed-
providing freedom]. Saxion Hogeschool. https://doi. ucation, Citizenship and Social Justice, 11(2), 114–129.
org/10.14261/Montessori-en-burgerschap-de-brou- https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197915626084
wer-klaver-van-der-zee-2022.pdf Geboers, E., Geijsel, F., Admiraal, W., & Ten Dam, G.
De Brouwer, J., Leenders, H. H. M., & Sins, P. H. M. (2015). Citizenship orientations and knowledge
(2023). Montessori in the Netherlands. In A. Murray, in primary and secondary education. Social Psy-
E.-M.T. Ahlquist, M. McKenna, & M. Debs (Eds.), chology of Education, 18(4), 749–767. https://doi.
Handbook of Montessori education. Bloomsbury Pub- org/10.1007/s11218-014-9265-7
lications.

Montessori and Citizenship Education 39

Guérin, L. J. F. (2018). Group problem solving as citizenship Values Education (pp. 21–34). Springer Netherlands.
education: Mainstream idea of participation revisited https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2510-4_2
[Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University]. Saxion Leenders, H. H. M. (1999). Montessori en fascistisch Italië:
Progressive Education University Press. https:// Een receptiegeschiedenis. [Montessori and fascist Italy:
www.academia.edu/36759967/ A reception history]. Intro.
Guérin, L. J. F., Van der Ploeg, P. A., & Sins, P. H. M. Leonard, G. (2015). The Montessori classroom: A foun-
(2013). Citizenship education: The feasibility of a dation for global citizenship. NAMTA Journal, 40(2),
participative approach. Educational Research, 55(4), 91–110.
427–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2013 Montessori, M. (1946). Education for a new world. Kalaak-
.844945 shetra.
Gynther, P., & Ahlquist, E.-M. T. (2022). Education for Montessori, M. (1952). Door het kind naar een nieuwe
sustainability and global citizenship for 6-12-year- wereld [Through the child into a new world]. Kin-
olds in Montessori education. Journal of Education for heim-uitgeverij. (Original work published in 1941)
Sustainable Development, 16(1–2), 5–18. https://doi. Montessori, M. (1954). Het onbegrepen kind [The forma-
org/10.1177/09734082221118336 tion of man]. Van Holkema & Warendorf N.V. (Origi-
Hacker, B. L. (2015). Promoting world citizenship: A cru- nal work published 1949)
cial area of study. NAMTA Journal, 40(2), 139–148 Montessori, M. (1973). From childhood to adolescence.
Han, B. C. (2022). De palliatieve samenleving. [The pallia- Schocken Books.
tive society]. Ten Have. Montessori, M. (1992). Education and peace. Clio-Press.
Heater, D. (2002). The history of citizenship education: (Original work published 1949)
A comparative outline. Parliamentary Affairs, 55(3), Montessori, M. (1998). Onderwijs en het menselijk poten-
457–474. https://doi.org/10.1093/parlij/55.3.457 tieel [To educate the human potential]. Projectgroep
Hodson, D. (2020). Going beyond STS education: Build- Montessori APS. (Original work published 1947)
ing a curriculum for sociopolitical activism. Canadian Montessori. M. (2016). The child, society and the world.
Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Edu- Montessori-Pierson Publishing Company. (Original
cation, 20(4), 592–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/ work published 1979)
s42330-020-00114-6 Montessori, M. (2019a). Citizen of the world. Montes-
Inspectorate of Education. (2022). Onderzoekskader 2021 sori-Pierson Publishing Company.
voor het toezicht op de voorschoolse educatie en het Montessori, M. (2019b). Het brein van het jonge kind [The
primair onderwijs [Research framework 2021 for super- absorbent mind]. Montessori-Pierson Publishing
vision of pre-school and primary education]. https:// Company. (Original work published 1949)
www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/onderwerpen/onder- Montessori, M. (2022). Zelfopvoeding [deel 1] [The
zoekskaders/documenten/publicaties/2021/07/01/ advanced Montessori method]. Montessori-Pierson
onderzoekskader-2021-primair-onderwijs Publishing Company. (Original work published
Jeliazkova, M. I. (2015). Citizenship education: Social 1917)
science teachers’ views in three European countries [Doc- Moretti, E. (2021). The best weapon for peace: Maria
toral dissertation, University of Twente]. https://doi. Montessori, education, and children’s rights. University
org/10.3990/1.9789036540056 of Wisconsin Press.
Joris, M. (2022). Citizenship: A matter of schooling? An Parra, S. L., Bakker, C., & Van Liere, L. (2021). Practicing
educational inquiry into the normativity of citizen- democracy in the playground: Turning political con-
ship education [Doctoral dissertation, Katholieke flict into educational friction. Journal of Curriculum
Universiteit Leuven]. https://www.researchgate.net/ Studies, 53(1), 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/002
publication/368918253_Citizenship_a_matter_of_ 20272.2020.1838615
schooling_An_educational_inquiry_into_the_nor- Quarfood, C. (2023). Maria Montessori: Life and his-
mativity_of_citizenship_education torical context. In A. Murray, E.-M. T Ahlquist, M.
Kramer, R. (1976). Maria Montessori, a biography. G. P. McKenna, & M. Debs (Eds.), Handbook of Montessori
Putnam and Sons. education. Bloomsbury Publications.
Leenders, H., & Veugelers, W. (2009). Different perspec- Raimondo, R. (2023). Cosmic Education: The Vital
tives on values and citizenship education. In Global Center of the Montessori Perspective. In A. Murray,

40 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 E.-M. T. Ahlquist, M. McKenna, & M. Debs (Eds.), Van der Ploeg, P., & Guérin, L. (2016). Questioning
Handbook of Montessori education. Bloomsbury Pub- participation and solidarity as goals of citizenship
lications. education. Critical Review, 28(2), 248–264. https://
Ramirez, F. O., & Boli, J. (1987). The political con- doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2016.1191191
struction of mass schooling: European origins and Van der Ploeg, P. A. (2019). Dewey and citizenship
worldwide institutionalization. Sociology of Education, education: Schooling as democratic practice. In A.
60(1), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112615 Peterson, G. Stahl, & H. Soong (Eds.), The Palgrave
Rietveld-van Wingerden, M., Sturm, J. C., & Miedema, handbook of citizenship and education (pp. 1–14).
S. (2003). Vrijheid van onderwijs en sociale cohesie Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
in historisch perspectief [Freedom of education and 319-67905-1_20-1
social cohesion in historical perspective]. Pedagogiek, Van Waveren, J. (2020). Burgerschapsonderwijs en de leer-
23(2), 97–108. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/han- kracht binnen het speelveld van pedagogiek en politiek
dle/1874/187625 [Citizenship education and the teacher in the playing
Sant, E. (2019). Democratic education: A theo- field of education and politics, Doctoral dissertation,
retical review (2006–2017). Review of Educa- University of Humanistic Studies].
tional Research, 89(5), 655–696. https://doi. Veugelers, W. (2011). The moral and the political in
org/10.3102/0034654319862493 global citizenship: Appreciating differences in edu-
Van der Ploeg, P. (2020). Burgerschapsvorming in tij- cation. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9(3–4),
den van communitair neoliberalisme [Citizenship 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2011
education in times of communal neoliberalism]. .605329
NRO-werkplaats Democratisering van Kritisch Den- Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen?
ken. https://werkplaatsburgerschap.nl/wp-content/ The politics of educating for democracy. Ameri-
uploads/2020/03/BV-beleidsanalyse-2020.pdf can Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237–269.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002237

Montessori and Citizenship Education 41

 Appendix
Framework of Views on Citizenship Education

Question View A View B

What is the “why” of citizen- Citizenship education is important because
Citizenship education is important because
ship education? society needs citizens with certain com-
children need to get acquainted with how our
petencies. For instance, to deal with social
society works, and children need the possibility
issues (extremism, threats to democracy,
to shape society as they wish.
climate change…).
Citizenship education is important,
Citizenship education is important, so children
because it can bring about social change or
themselves can give a destination to their own
protect and maintain the existing social and
life.
political situation.
School is the place for citizenship educa- School is the place for citizenship education;
tion; it is a small society where children can this is where children can study diverse social
practice citizenship. forms and types of citizenship.
Citizenship education should bring chil- Children should be able to have an unconcerned
dren in contact with the complex reality. childhood.
Who is responsible for citi- The goals set by the school should mainly The goals set by the government should mainly
zenship education? be decisive for citizenship education. be decisive for citizenship education.

Parents/caregivers are a potential risk for Parents/caregivers should determine the direc-
democratic education. tion of education.
The school is primarily responsible for The goals of citizenship education are a joint
achieving the goals of citizenship educa- social responsibility (of sport clubs, cultural
tion. organizations, parents, school, etc.).
Society (government, school, parents) may
Children themselves may decide what kind of
decide what kind of citizen children should
citizen they want to be.
be.
What is the ideal citizen? The focus of citizenship education should
The focus of citizenship education should main-
mainly be on treating each other well,
ly be on engagement with politics and political
taking each other into account, and dealing
issues.
with differences and diversity.
Citizenship education should mainly Citizenship education should mainly stimulate
stimulate certain emotions, attitudes, and that children themselves critically think about
behaviors (for instance, empathy and soli- what good emotions, attitudes, and behaviors
darity) in children. are.
The focus of citizenship education should The focus of citizenship education should main-
mainly be on loyalty, togetherness, unity, ly be on judging independently and critically,
community spirit, and sense of nationality. and civil disobedience if necessary.

42 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Should citizenship education The school should propagate one specific The school should present a variety of perspec-
prescribe specific values and perspective on good citizenship. tives on good citizenship.
behaviors?
Children should learn that a good citi-
zen participates socially and politically. Children may determine themselves if they wish
Citizenship education should, for instance, to be socially and politically active. You are also
stimulate active membership of associa- a good citizen when you do not participate. Indi-
tions and organizations, voting, and civic vidual freedom of choice is important herein.
engagement.
Children should learn to shape society them-
Children should adapt to society.
selves.
Teachers should not be allowed to change the
Teachers should help children to change
opinion of children. A child may have an opin-
their opinion if it goes against prevailing
ion that goes against prevailing norms, values,
norms, values, and views.
and views.
Teachers should share their political and Teachers should stay neutral about their political
ideological preferences. and ideological preferences.
What is emphasized in citi- The focus of citizenship education should The focus of citizenship education should main-
zenship education? mainly be on attitudes and behaviors. ly be on knowledge.
Children should learn that anger, conflict,
resistance, and fight can be worthwhile Children should mainly learn forms of peaceful
as form of activism, engagement, and decision-making.
solidarity.
In citizenship education, there should In citizenship education, there should mainly be
mainly be attention to individual and col- attention to duties and responsibilities (obeying
lective rights (Rights of the Child, human the law, paying taxes, working and learning,
rights, fundamental rights). caring for each other).
The focus of citizenship education should The focus of citizenship education should main-
mainly be on learning to think about and ly be on learning to take action towards resolving
make decisions about social problems. social problems.
What is the context of citi- Citizenship education should be directed to
Citizenship education should be directed to
zenship education? cohesion within the child’s community (for
cohesion within society as a whole.
instance, religion/origin/group).
It is mainly important that children are
It is mainly important that children are commit-
committed to the interests of their commu-
ted to the common good.
nity (for instance, religion/origin/group).
The focus should mainly be on citizenship The focus should mainly be on citizenship with-
within the local and national context. in the European and worldwide context.
At school, social issues should mainly
At school, social issues should be approached
be approached from a local or national
from a worldwide perspective.
perspective.
Citizenship education should be about is- Citizenship education should be about issues
sues within the child’s world of experiences. outside the child’s world of experiences.
Citizenship education should also be about
Citizenship education should only be about
issues that the child has no or only indirect
issues that the child has direct influence on.
influence on.

Montessori and Citizenship Education 43

Reframing and Recontextualizing
Maria Montessori’s 1915
California Visit
Joel Parham
JRP Consulting & Research

Keywords: Maria Montessori, Montessori Method of education, Panama–Pacific International Exposition (San Francisco),
Panama–California Exposition (San Diego), Adelia McAlpin Pyle, Helen Parkhurst

Abstract: Maria Montessori’s visit to California in 1915—her second visit to the United States—coincided with
multiple events in the region: San Francisco’s Panama–Pacific International Exposition (PPIE), San Diego’s Panama–
California Exposition (PCE), and the National Education Association of the United States (NEA) annual meeting in
Oakland. Her visit also came at a time when the American Montessori movement was splintering, and the academic
elite increasingly criticized her educational model. These circumstances made Montessori’s visit to California a
potentially valuable opportunity to rekindle interest in Montessori education across the United States. Discussions of
Montessori’s visit in 1915 have been framed around her training course and demonstration school at the PPIE. Based
on information from primary sources (e.g., newspapers and archival materials), some of which have been overlooked,
this article asserts that her visit to California had broader implications. While her eight months in California did have a
positive impact on the growth of the Montessori movement, Montessori’s engagement with mainstream education had
limited impact and it gave way to waning interest in Montessori education in the United States.

In 1915, Maria Montessori made her second visit in 1914. Due to her father’s health and the outbreak of
to the United States. During her initial visit in 1913, World War I, her return trip was delayed until 1915 (C.
her itinerary was situated around East Coast cities (e.g., Montessori, 2015, pp. vii–x).
Washington, D. C., New York City, and Boston; see Gutek After her 1913 visit, the demand for more Montessori
& Gutek, 2016). This first visit to the United States was training within the United States went unsated. The
successful at inserting Montessori education into the primary factor inhibiting this—and an exponential spread
American educational zeitgeist and it left an American of Montessori education—was Montessori’s tight control
audience hungry for more training courses enabling over who was qualified to provide training courses. She
more individuals to become Montessori educators and asserted that training conducted by anyone other than
thus establish Montessori schools. As a direct result of herself was unauthorized and invalid (Gutek & Gutek,
this, Montessori intended to return to the United States 2020; Cohen, 1972, pp. 369–370). Americans’ demand

Journal
44 of Montessori
Journal ResearchResearch Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2
of Montessori
Fall 2023, Volume 9, Issue 2
for more training courses, combined with Montessori’s Diego, as well as the National Education Association of
restrictions and the uncertainty of Montessori’s return, the United States (NEA) annual meeting in Oakland,
led to some of her former students from the East Coast which coincided with an International Congress on
leading unauthorized Montessori training courses Education also in Oakland. During her visit to California,
(“American Montessori training school for teachers,” Montessori attended and lectured at these events in
1914; WES21). Many of these individuals were aligned addition to delivering speeches and courses in other cities
with the Montessori Educational Association (MEA), the across the Golden State (e.g., Los Angeles and Pasadena).
first Montessori organization established in the United The PPIE and the PCE were both large world’s fairs
States. Learning about this, Montessori interpreted these organized to celebrate the completion and opening of the
actions as direct affronts to her declarations, and she Panama Canal. The PPIE took place during most of 1915
questioned the interests and loyalty of the leaders of the in San Francisco and, somewhat confusingly, the PCE
American Montessori movement—specifically, the MEA happened in San Diego during the same general period.
and its affiliates (e.g., Samuel S. McClure, Alexander While both events were world’s fairs, the PPIE was much
Graham Bell, Mabel Hubbard Bell, and Anne E. George; larger in scale and notoriety. Many of the secondary
Gutek & Gutek, 2020). The MEA was directly involved sources that discuss this period of Montessori’s biography
in Montessori’s 1913 trip to the United States, but these emphasize the role of her participation in the PPIE, going
actions related to training course offerings, among others, so far as to frame it as the crux of her travels (Bonsteel,
led to a rift and resulted in Montessori’s decision to rebuff 1995; Buckenmeyer, 2018; Kramer, 1976) while some
their involvement in her 1915 visit (Cohen, 1972; Gutek sources have generally overlooked her involvement in the
& Gutek, 2020; Povell, 2010, pp. 101–102). Additionally, PCE (Gutek & Gutek, 2020; Kramer, 1976; Standing,
in 1915, Montessori issued a formal declaration regarding 1998).
the establishment of Montessori associations which, as Simultaneous to these overlapping events in
Cohen (1972) asserted, “disavowed the MEA” (p. 369). California, World War I was underway in Europe, and
According to Cohen (1972), this declaration, titled Montessori’s relationship with her original East Coast
“General Regulations for the Formation of an Authorized American disciples and the MEA was disintegrating.
Montessori Society,” had specific clauses declaring While her 1913 visit was sponsored and coordinated
that Montessori would have complete control over the by the MEA and Samuel S. McClure (see Gutek &
creation of any Montessori society (pp. 369–370). These Gutek, 2016), her 1915 visit purposely avoided their
events thrust the American Montessori movement into an involvement. Instead, she relied on financial support from
existential crisis. the wealthy family of Adelia McAlpin Pyle, Montessori’s
Regardless, Montessori was intent upon visiting former student and an ardent disciple. Mario Montessori,
America to share her educational Method with the other former students (e.g., Katherine Moore and Helen
masses. While her 1913 visit to the East Coast was Parkhurst), and her longtime friend Anna Fedeli also
primarily geared toward the private sphere, her 1915 visit assisted her (Gutek & Gutek, 2020, pp. 190–192).
to the West Coast focused on the public sphere as well as Her visit also came at a time of personal and
general appeal. professional tumult. Her father, Alessandro Montessori,
was ailing and her relationship to her son, Mario, who had
Coming to America been born out of wedlock, was becoming increasingly
discussed in the American press.2 On the professional
Maria Montessori and her son, Mario Montessori side, in addition to the rift with the MEA, 1915 was
(the Montessoris), traveled to California at a convergence the year that William Heard Kilpatrick published his
of national and international events happening across highly critical evaluation of the Montessori education
the region. There were two world’s fairs, the Panama– Method, Montessori Examined. Kilpatrick was a highly
Pacific International Exposition (PPIE) in San Francisco influential pedagogue who wielded immense power over
and the Panama–California Exposition (PCE) in San the educational practices in the United States from his

1
All newspaper articles with unknown authorship have been assigned 2
Across different news reports, he was identified as her nephew,
an alphanumeric identifier, based on the publication name, which are cousin, adopted son, or son. For further details regarding the evolution
referenced in-text. These references and identifiers are listed in the of Maria’s and Mario’s relationship, see Babini & Lama (2000, pp.
“Newspaper Articles” subsection of the reference list. 107–109).

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 45

professorship position at Teachers College (New York). and individuals: Adelia Pyle (a former student living
In his evaluation of the Montessori Method, Kilpatrick in New York who was from a wealthy family), Alvin
was paradoxically critical of the freedom given to children E. Pope (Chief of the Department of Education and
to pursue their interests while simultaneously critiquing Acting Commissioner General in New York City for the
the structured use of the didactic materials. PPIE), the NEA, Katherine Moore3 of Los Angeles (a
Despite these hardships and challenges, Montessori former student and leader of the Montessori Alumnae
was hopeful about the expansion of her educational Association in Los Angeles), the Dante Alighieri
Method (SFC4). A newspaper article from 1914 quoted Society, J. H. Francis (Superintendent of Los Angeles
Montessori as being “enthusiastic about America,” and City Schools), Jesse F. Millspaugh (President of the
went on to explain that “the United States was the country Los Angeles State Normal School4), George F. Bovard
where she expected to see her method of educating (President of the University of Southern California), and
the young brought to perfection” (NYT1). Clearly, she the California State Board of Education.
approached her visit to America with optimism, seeing While several sources asserted that Montessori went
it as a valuable opportunity to expose her Method to a to California specifically to participate in the PPIE (Gutek
wider audience. & Gutek, 2020; Kramer, 1976; Standing, 1998), other
evidence points to her primary destination being Los
Historical Reevaluation Angeles (and adjacent Pasadena) with plans to participate
in the PCE (LAH5; LAR1). Based on press reports, their
The recent digitization, transcription, and indexing itinerary was constantly fluctuating as plans developed
of primary source materials, such as newspapers and (LAH5; LAH6; LAT2; LAT3; NYT3). Montessori’s
other archival sources, has made it possible to expand, personal letters, as well as contemporary news reports,
reframe, and reconcile the historiography of Montessori’s indicate that she did not fully commit to attending the
1915 visit to the United States. The following sections PPIE in San Francisco until early June (C. Montessori,
present the timeline of events as supported by primary 2015, pp. 30–35). While a news report from October
source materials while critically evaluating the accounts 1914 indicated Montessori had committed to participate
included in the previously discussed secondary sources. in the PPIE, many of Montessori’s plans had changed in a
By reconciling primary sources with secondary sources, year (“Educational news and editorial comment,” 1914).
this article seeks to provide more clarity concerning Whereas Montessori’s visit to the United States in 1913
Montessori’s travels and to document the impact of her was focused on private education, her 1915 visit focused
visit. more on public education.
The Montessoris’ itinerary was hectic and
appears to have been in a constant state of flux, which Italy to New York
understandably caused confusion among both secondary
and primary sources. Kramer (1976) asserted that the The Montessoris embarked from Naples, Italy aboard
trip to California was “under the auspices of the [NEA] the steamship Duca degli Abruzzi on April 7, 1915,
to demonstrate her work to educators and the public at bound for New York (NYSun1; NYTrib1). According to
the Panama–Pacific International Exposition,” yet did not the passenger list (see Figures 1a and 1b), Mario, listed
include evidence to support this claim (Kramer, 1976, p. under his father’s last name, Montesano, was visiting a
212). Buckenmeyer (2018, pp. xi–xiv) affirmed the lack “relative or friend” identified as “Ms. Moore Catherine,
of evidence for Kramer’s claim. Cohen (1972) asserted Los Angeles,” while Montessori’s entry indicated that she
that the Montessori Alumnae Association in Los Angeles was visiting “nobody” (Ancestry.com [Duca degli Abruzzi
was the organization that planned Montessori’s visit, also passenger list], 2010). The passenger list provided
neglecting to include supporting evidence. information that other sources had overlooked. With
Some authors have wrestled with the question of this information, the Montessoris’ intended destination
who deserves credit for the invitation, arrangement, and
planning of the Montessoris’ travel (Buckenmeyer, 2018;
Gutek & Gutek, 2020; Kramer, 1976; C. Montessori,
3
At least four different spellings of her name have been encountered.
“Katherine Moore” was the most common form used across primary
2015). Secondary sources provide no evidence-based sources, including her listing in both the 1915 and 1916 Los Angeles
answers, though primary sources indicate there may have City Directories (Los Angeles Directory Company, 1915, 1916).
been a combined effort among a number of organizations 4
The predecessor to University of California, Los Angeles.

46 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Figure 1a
Duca degli Abruzzi Passenger List – Maria Montessori and Mario Montesano (page 1)

Figure 1b
Duca degli Abruzzi Passenger List – Maria Montessori and Mario Montesano (page 2)

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 47

appears to have been Los Angeles where they would held a reception in her honor (C. Montessori, 2015,
rendezvous with Katherine Moore. p. 4). Afterward, they boarded a San Francisco-bound
After 12 days at sea during wartime, the Montessoris train and arrived in Oakland on the morning of April 25
arrived at the Port of New York on April 19 (ITA5; (C. Montessori, 2015, p. 5; SFC5). They reached San
NYSun1; NYTrib1; WES1). Upon their arrival, the Francisco by ferry, where they were driven by automobile
Montessoris were welcomed by former students, to a “suite of rooms” at the Inside Inn7 (SFC5; SFCP3).
Montessori disciples, and others. Cohen (1972, pp. Montessori also managed to attend two events in her
368–369) asserted that Anna Fedeli traveled with the honor later that day (ITA3; ITA6; C. Montessori, 2015,
Montessoris, and that Helen Parkhurst was present to pp. 13–16; SFC5; SFC6; SFCP2; SFCP3). Three days
welcome them. While Fedeli and Parkhurst did meet later, they traveled to Los Angeles.
up with the Montessoris, primary sources confirm
they did so in California and were not present in New Los Angeles and its Environs
York (Ancestry.com [Ancona passenger list], 2010; C.
Montessori, 2015, pp. 33, 39; SPJ3). Several secondary sources have discussed
Montessori’s time in the Los Angeles area (Buckenmeyer,
New York to San Francisco to Los Angeles 2018; Cohen, 1972; Gutek & Gutek, 2020; C.
Montessori, 2015) and, for the most part, the details
The Montessoris’ brief stay in New York was concur with primary sources. One report asserted that
documented in secondary sources (Cohen, 1972; Gutek the Montessoris arrived in Los Angeles on April 26 (C.
& Gutek, 2020; C. Montessori, 2015) and an analysis Montessori, 2015, p. 12), though the consensus among
of primary sources confirms the majority of the details. primary sources is that they arrived April 28 (LAE2;
However, in one instance, Cohen (1972) incorrectly LAH2; LAR2; LAT4).8 Upon their arrival in Los Angeles,
reported “[the Montessoris] came straight to Los they immediately traveled to the Hotel Maryland in
Angeles” after their arrival in New York (p. 369). To the Pasadena (LAE2). This hotel was of interest because
contrary, a day after their arrival in New York, Montessori it was the location of a Montessori class established by
participated in a conference at a Children’s House located one of her former students, Mildred Johnston (LAH1;
in a tenement housing complex5 at 520 E. 77th Street, LAR2; LAT4). There were two other Montessori classes
which was established by the New York chapter of the in the area, both established by Katherine Moore: St.
MEA (Gutek & Gutek, 2020, pp. 223–224; Rodman, Catherine’s School (636 W. Adams St.) and Seventh
1915). Sources also revealed that one of Montessori’s Street School (1822 E. 7th St.; LAR2). St. Catherine’s
former pupils, Margaret Naumburg, was present at the School was a private school, but the Seventh Street
conference and eagerly informed Montessori that she School was a public school in Los Angeles and is notable
had received approval to begin a Montessori classroom at because it has been credited as the first instance of a
New York’s Public School 4 (PS4), which must have been public Montessori program in the United States (Price,
encouraging news to Montessori (Gutek & Gutek, 2020, 1915).
pp. 223–224; Rodman, 1915). An element of Montessori’s travels that has not
On April 21, two days after their arrival, the been documented in secondary sources was her brief
Montessoris and Adelia Pyle visited the Bronx to see side trip to San Diego to consult on plans for the
Angelo Patri at Public School 45 (PS45) where he was the Montessori Institute at the PCE (SDET6). On May 2,
principal.6 Then, in the afternoon, the Montessoris and the Montessoris and their contingent, including Adelia
Pyle were aboard a Chicago-bound train (C. Montessori, Pyle and Mary Powell Jordan, traveled to San Diego
2015, pp. 2–6). Upon their arrival in Chicago, they went (SDU5, p. 1). Their visit lasted less than 36 hours, but it
to the Blackstone Hotel, where her former students was important because it helped lay the groundwork for
Montessori’s involvement in the PCE and gave them an
opportunity to tour some of the local schools (SDET1).
5
A picture of children at “a Montessori school for the children of
New York’s East Side” was printed in the pages of Outlook magazine
(March 10, 1915, p. 579). It’s plausible that this is the same school that 7
Inside Inn was a hotel located within the grounds of the PPIE.
Montessori visited. 8
One report indicated Montessori and her fellow travelers were met
6
For information about Angelo Patri and his role in New York public by Katherine Moore in San Francisco to escort them to Los Angeles
schools, see Wallace (2005). (LAH2).

48 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Upon their arrival in San Diego in the afternoon of May each day by being bathed and dressed at the Seventh
2, they were met by Duncan MacKinnon, San Diego’s Street School (Price, 1915).10 According to Buckenmeyer
superintendent of city schools, who escorted them to the (2018), Montessori delivered a lecture on May 12 about
PCE grounds (LAT8; SDU3). the Montessori materials, which was likely part of the
On May 3, the Montessoris and their contingent training course, but this connection was not confirmed
returned to Los Angeles, where they attended a few (2018, pp. 3, 11).
social engagements held in honor of Montessori that Meanwhile, Montessori solicited the help of Helen
demonstrated a clear public interest in her work. On May Parkhurst, a former pupil and professor at Wisconsin
6, Montessori was honored in Pasadena at a dinner event State Normal School in Stevens Point. Parkhurst took a
and at a public reception hosted by the Pasadena Board leave of absence and joined the Montessori contingent
of Trade (LAE5). On May 14, Montessori attended a in Los Angeles to assist with the training courses
meeting of the Friday Morning Club, a local women’s club (SPJ3). Additionally, Montessori had written to her
(LAT9). Montessori spoke at the Castelar Street School longtime friend Anna Fedeli in Italy, who was looking
on May 19, and she attended a celebration that evening at after her father, requesting she join them in California
the Los Angeles High School auditorium (ITA7; LAE3). (C. Montessori, 2015, pp. 27–28). Records indicate
She was also an honored guest at the inaugural meeting that Fedeli departed Naples, Italy on May 26 aboard the
of University of Southern California’s Scholarship Society Ancona bound for New York. She arrived on June 8 and
where she delivered a speech through an interpreter about continued westward by train to Los Angeles (Ancestry.
her educational Method (WN1; WN2; LAE3; LAH4; com [Ancona passenger list], 2010; see Figures 2a and
LAT1; LAT7). 2b).11 Montessori’s letters place Fedeli’s arrival in Los
In addition to these public events, Montessori Angeles as June 13 (C. Montessori, 2015, pp. 33, 39).12
conducted a series of 10 public lectures given across six Comparing secondary and primary sources related
weeks, held at Los Angeles’ Olive Street School (419 to the Los Angeles leg of the Montessoris’ trip revealed
S. Olive Street) beginning on May 27 (LAE4; LAH3; that only part of the story was documented. Facts about
LAT6). According to Buckenmeyer, the first lecture (May their time in Los Angeles were scattered across secondary
27) and the fifth lecture ( June 9) of this series pertained sources without a clear consensus. By connecting these
to “the social liberation of the child” (Buckenmeyer, facts into a detailed chronology here, it becomes apparent
2018, pp. 3, 15–22). Buckenmeyer also indicated that that Montessori’s time in Los Angeles was notable for
the sixth lecture ( June 10) in this series focused on “the a few reasons: the third International Training Course
social rights of the child and the Casa dei Bambini, Rome, began there; she recruited public school children to
Italy” (2018, pp. 3, 23–29). demonstrate her methods; and it became a proving
Concurrently with these public events and ground for events at the PCE and PPIE.
appearances, Montessori was engaged in the first part of
the third International Training Course9, which took place San Diego and the Panama–California
in Pasadena, Los Angeles, and at the PCE in San Diego Exposition
(National Montessori Promotion Fund, 1916). The
course commenced in Pasadena at the Montessori class The Montessoris and their contingent of Anna Fedeli,
at Hotel Maryland on May 8 (LAT5). The remainder of Adelia Pyle, Helen Parkhurst, Helen Little, Edith Little,
the Los Angeles courses were held at the Boyle Heights and Mary Powell Jordan arrived in San Diego on June
Intermediate School (LAH8). The Los Angeles City 28, where they stayed for the month of July (SDET8).
Schools administration made special arrangements for
Montessori to engage 30 children from the Seventh
Street School for the course held at the Boyle Heights
10
Price’s statement reflects the prevailing attitude of the time that
ethnicities and nationalities were distinct and nonoverlapping, along
Intermediate School. The children, transported to the with the exclusionary idea that White people were true “Americans.”
location via automobile, “represent[ed] seven or eight 11
C. Montessori (2015, p. 30) indicates that Fedeli departed Naples on
nationalities, none Americans,” and reportedly began May 27.
12
Gutek and Gutek (2020, p. 188) asserted that Fedeli arrived in
Los Angeles on June 19, and they cite C. Montessori (2015, p. 39) as
9
The National Montessori Promotion Fund (1916) identified this their supporting evidence. Gutek and Gutek (2020) miscalculated or
course as “1st California Class 1915.” confused the dates.

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 49

Figure 2a
Ancona Passenger List – Anna Fedeli (page 1)

Figure 2b
Ancona Passenger List – Anna Fedeli (page 2)

50 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Reportedly, they were also joined by “a private class San Francisco and the Panama–Pacific
composed of fifty young girls from all parts of the United International Exposition
States” (SDET8; see Appendix C). The Montessoris’
time in San Diego has received limited attention; only This portion of Montessori’s 1915 visit is well
some secondary sources have included brief discussions documented across several secondary sources (Bonsteel,
(Buckenmeyer, 2018; Kramer, 1976; C. Montessori, 1995; Buckenmeyer, 2018; Cohen, 1972; Gutek & Gutek,
2015). Regardless of the reason for this, the Montessoris’ 2020; C. Montessori, 2015; Sobe, 2004). Additionally,
travel to San Diego was confirmed in newspaper reports as the PPIE drew much press coverage, information
(as early as March 1915), which indicated Montessori concerning Montessori’s participation in the Exposition
would conduct a training course at the PCE (LAH7; was readily available. Yet, like other aspects of her
LAR1; SDET4). Their participation in the PCE was visit to California, some details have been overlooked,
significant because it built on their experience from Los inaccurately portrayed, or inconsistently reported.
Angeles and served as a warm-up or practice for the larger By the end of July, news reports declared Montessori
PPIE. had decided to extend her California visit, indicating
Montessori’s arrival was inaugurated with a lecture that Montessori and Fedeli would conduct a training
she delivered in Italian and interpreted by Pyle for an course at the PPIE from August through November
audience of 50 students (SDET2; SDET3). Similar to (NYT2). In letters to her father, Montessori described
her public lectures in Los Angeles, Montessori planned weighing the decision to extend her visit to conduct the
a short course of lectures and demonstrations “for the course, specifically emphasizing the financial aspects (C.
benefit of mothers, teachers, and all others interested,” Montessori, 2015, pp. 48–51). Arriving in San Francisco
but these plans were canceled due to time constraints on August 1, Montessori and her contingent hit the
(Robinson, 1915; SDET3; SDU4). The Montessori ground running. The following morning, Montessori
training course in San Diego, a continuation of the first commenced the second part of the third International
part of the third International Training Course, began on Training Course at the PPIE15 and, a few days later, the
Thursday, July 1, and was conducted on Tuesdays and demonstration classroom opened under the direction and
Thursdays at 3:30 p.m. at the San Diego State Normal supervision of Parkhurst (ITA1).16 The demonstration
School13 in conjunction with a summer school program classroom in the Palace of Education, often referred to
(Robinson, 1915; SDET8; SDU1; SDU7). Fedeli, as the “glass house,” included theater-style seating to
Parkhurst, and Helen Little conducted a demonstration encourage visitors to observe the Montessori system
Montessori class on Mondays and Wednesdays (SDU7; in action (see Figure 3; Bonsteel, 1995; Hinkle, 1915;
SDET3).14 Initially, the demonstration class was planned Sobe, 2004). The class of 30 children was selected from
for the Exposition grounds (GEN1; ODJ2). On July an application pool of approximately 2,500 and news
12—Educational Day at the PCE—Philander P. Claxton reports provided a list (see Appendix B) of those who
and Maria Montessori both delivered speeches at were enrolled in the demonstration class (Buckenmeyer,
the Spreckels Pavilion (LAE1; C. Montessori, 2015; 2018, pp. 254–255; ITA10; SFC2). This large application
SDET5; SDET10; SDU2). This booking with the U.S. pool once again demonstrated the public interest in the
Commissioner of Education probably sparked interest in Montessori Method.
the Montessori Method amongst the general public.
Conducting a course in connection with the PCE at
the San Diego State Normal School and participating in 15
National Montessori Promotion Fund (1916) identified this course
special events at the PCE were valuable opportunities for as “2nd California Class 1915.”
Montessori to present her educational Method to a new
16
Cohen (1972) reported the demonstration school was conducted
by Montessori herself with assistance by Moore and Parkhurst (p.
and receptive audience. After concluding the training 369), yet primary sources refute this, and no contemporary evidence
course at the PCE, Montessori and her contingent has been located to support the assertion that Moore accompanied
headed north to San Francisco where they applied their the Montessoris to San Francisco. Cohen cited a source from October
experience at the PCE to their program at the PPIE. 1914 to support this claim (see “Educational news and editorial
comment; American Montessori courses,” 1914), though many
details of Montessori’s itinerary were not finalized at that point.
13
The predecessor to what is currently San Diego State University. Contemporary news reports from August through December 1915
14
For a list of the children who participated in the San Diego do not indicate Montessori supervised the demonstration school, but
demonstration class, see Appendix A. reports confirm that Parkhurst was the supervisor (Hinkle, 1915).

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 51

 Figure 3
Montessori Demonstration Classroom, PPIE, San Francisco

Located in the Palace of Education, this is an interior view of the Montessori demonstration classroom with
children gathered around a table and adults standing in the background. Records indicate there were 30
children enrolled in the class yet there are 35 children seated at the table in this photo. The adults standing in
the background include Maria Montessori, Adelia Pyle, Helen Parkhurst, Anna Fedeli, and Mario Montessori,
among others. Just beyond the windows, an audience is peering in, watching the young children. Though this
photograph does not include a specific date, it was likely taken on the classroom’s opening day, August 4, 1915.
Source: Edward A. Rogers Panama–Pacific International Exposition photograph collection, University of
California, Berkeley, Bancroft Library (BANC PIC 2015.013:15989--NEG). https://oac.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/
k6zp4dxk

52 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 Montessori devoted her time to conducting lectures National Teachers Association and became formally
for educators (the training course), limited to 30 pupils known as the NEA in 1870.17 Then it was chartered by
each, and held in various State buildings across the the U.S. Congress in 1906 (Selle, 1932). By 1915, the
exposition grounds four times a week. Demonstrating the NEA was the largest organization of education-related
level of interest from educators, reports indicate around professionals in the United States. In an historical account
1,800 students applied (SFC3; SFC7; SFE1; Todd, of the NEA, West (1980) explained how the strength
1921, vol. 4, p. 68). Similar to the PCE, the PPIE training and importance of the NEA was exerted through their
courses were conducted by Montessori in Italian, aided by conventions, publications, and the recommendations
Fedeli, who served as her assistant, and Pyle, who served of their committees. These committees were tasked
as her interpreter (ITA4; SDU7; SFCP4). August 5th with recommending “a course of study for high schools;
was the day of the first training course at the PPIE, which [preparing] an ideal program for the education of youth;
took place in the Nevada State Building; subsequent and [reporting] on school registers and annual reports”
lectures were delivered at other State buildings (ITA9; (West, 1980, p. 7). Since it was the largest organization
SFC3; Todd, 1921, vol. 4, p. 68). Ultimately, the training representing the interests of educators in the United
course in San Francisco spanned from August through States at the time, the NEA wielded substantial influence
November, but the official number of classes held remains on members’ and policymakers’ practices related to
elusive. the public education system. This influence specifically
Montessori and her colleagues spent considerable concerned pedagogical practices, and the Montessori
time preparing for the PPIE, and their efforts yielded Method of education had piqued their interest. The
some direct impacts. For example, some students who event was well attended by an international gathering
took the training course went on to disseminate the of between four and five thousand educators, including
Montessori Method of education to part of China (Chen Montessori (SU1). Thus, the involvement of Montessori
& Liu, 2023; SFCP1; SFCP5; SFCP6). Additionally, the and her allies had the potential to insert the Montessori
PPIE provided ample opportunity to expose the general Method into public schools across the country. Overall,
public to Montessori’s methods in a classroom where they Montessori delivered four speeches at the NEA meeting.
could observe the Method in action. The transcripts were published in the conference
proceedings (see M. Montessori, 1915a, 1915b, 1915c,
Oakland and the National Education 1915d).
Association Annual Meeting In conjunction with the NEA meeting and the related
International Congress on Education, there was also a
While her travels and activities in San Francisco at Montessori Congress held August 28 in the ballroom
the PPIE are well documented, her time in Oakland at of Hotel Oakland.18 The program for the conference
the NEA Annual Meeting is less widely documented indicates that David Starr Jordan (President of the
in secondary sources despite the coverage in primary NEA) presided over the Montessori Congress, which, in
sources. Buckenmeyer (2018) and Cohen (1972) addition to a speech by Montessori, included speeches
both include some details while overlooking others by Edward L. Hardy and Arthur H. Chamberlain
and perpetuating some inaccuracies. For example, (Secretary of the California Council of Education and
Buckenmeyer (2018) included the transcript of a speech, California Teachers’ Association).19 According to the
which he identified as “Oakland lecture: Biological liberty
and the psychic development of the child” and dated
August 28, 1915, though no context for the speech was 17
The conference program, published prior to the event, listed August
provided. An examination of the conference program 16–28 but the subsequently published proceedings listed August
16–27 (NEA, 1915a, 1915b).
and the speech transcript establishes that the speech was 18
Cohen (1972) documented Montessori’s participation in the NEA
delivered during the Montessori Congress (Buckenmeyer, annual meeting; however, his account lacked information about
2018, pp. 241–247; NEA, 1915b). her participation in the International Congress on Education and
The NEA’s 53rd Annual Meeting was held in Montessori Congress.
19
Claxton did not attend, but one of his representatives was in
Oakland, August 16–27, at the newly constructed
attendance to deliver prepared remarks (ITA2). Hardy’s speech was
Municipal Auditorium (or, Civic Auditorium) and at titled “Possibilities and Opportunities of the Montessori Work for
Hotel Oakland. The NEA was founded in 1857 as the American Children,” and Chamberlain’s was titled “The Future of the
Montessori School in America” (NEA, 1915b, pp. 42–43).

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 53

program, Montessori delivered an untitled “Address” at several news reports provide some insight. According
the Montessori Congress on August 28 (NEA, 1915b, to one report, Montessori had been offered a large sum
pp. 42–43). Buckenmeyer (2018) included a speech of money to establish her system in Spain’s primary
transcript dated August 28, which revealed itself as the schools (NYTrib2). In another, a note from Montessori’s
speech Montessori delivered to the Montessori Congress secretary to the California State Board of Education
in the Hotel Oakland ballroom (ITA2).20 indicated she left for Spain “heartbroken over the harsh
It is unclear if any immediate impact or action treatment she was accorded in California” and that
resulted from Montessori’s participation in the NEA she “cancelled all her contracts in this country” (SS1).
meeting. Regardless, her presence was important because Another account indicated Montessori’s plans changed
it provided her the opportunity to share her Method due to her father’s death and concluded by mentioning a
with a large audience of influential educators and congratulatory note acknowledging the kindness shown
policymakers. to her (ITA8). The harsh treatment which Montessori
references is unclear, but it is possible this relates to
After the Expositions remarks by Edward Hyatt (Secretary, California State
Board of Education), who characterized her Method
Over the course of her 1915 visit to the United as a fad or a passing fancy (Hyatt, 1915). These
States, Maria Montessori received numerous invitations inconsistencies across primary sources are difficult to
from across the nation to visit various cities and conduct reconcile.
lectures or courses. In addition to others, invitations came
from New York, Washington, D.C., Portland, Oregon, Discussion and Conclusion
and Stevens Point, Wisconsin (ODJ1; ODJ2; SPJ1; SPJ2;
SPJ4; SPJ5). This widespread interest demonstrates how Historically, literature pertaining to Maria
educators, and the American public, were interested in Montessori’s 1915 California visit have framed the
the Montessori Method of education. However, beside conversation around her participation in the PPIE. While
speaking at a conference in New York, her itinerary was this was probably the most widely documented aspect of
solely focused on California. These invitations from her California visit, it was only a fraction of the time she
outside California were rebuffed, except for Stevens Point, spent in California. Misunderstandings, inconsistencies,
Wisconsin, which received serious consideration (SFC1; and oversights regarding Montessori’s California
SPJ1; SPJ2; SPJ5). itinerary occurred. Though Montessori’s intent to take a
Stevens Point was considered because Montessori’s faculty position at Wisconsin State Normal School was
assistant and confidante Helen Parkhurst was on the previously documented (see Gutek & Gutek, 2020), the
faculty of the Wisconsin State Normal School at Stevens details of this decision are one of the most unreported
Point, and Montessori was offered a position there. aspects of her time in America in 1915. Her brief visit to
She would be able to continue her training courses and San Diego in early May and her month-long sojourn there
related work with a steady salary and institutional support in July are other periods of her time in California that
(SPJ1; SPJ2; SPJ5). Interestingly, the faculty position have generally been overlooked. Additionally, primary
was negotiated, agreed upon, and contracts signed; sources indicated that Montessori actually conducted two
Montessori was set to begin in January 1916 (SPJ5). separate training courses during her time in California in
But this arrangement never became a reality. Ultimately, 1915 (National Montessori Promotion Fund, 1916).
Montessori canceled the Stevens Point contract and By examining the historiography associated with
departed America to accept an opportunity in Spain this part of Montessori’s biography through primary
(NYTrib2; SS1). and secondary sources, the inconsistencies have been
The reasoning for her change of plans is unclear, but examined to achieve a more accurate record. Beyond
reframing the historiography, this article also sought to
examine the impact of Montessori’s travels to California
20
The August 28 speech transcript included in Buckenmeyer (2018) in 1915. 1915 was a time of both personal tumult and
is identified by two distinct titles: (1) “Montessori’s address to the progress for Montessori education and the Montessori
N.E.A. national meeting: Learning and developmental freedom of the
child,” and, (2) “Biological liberty and the psychic development of the
movement in the United States. While it is tough to
child,” (pp. 4, 241). quantify the impact of her visit, a few points are clear.

54 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Prior to Montessori’s visit to California in 1915, a Ancestry.com. (2010). New York, U.S., Arriving
relatively small number of Americans were trained under passenger and crew lists (including Castle Garden
the tutelage of Montessori. Her visit changed this trend, and Ellis Island), 1820–1957 [database online].
and it made training more accessible to Americans, (Ship Passenger and Crew List for both Ancona and
especially those on the West Coast. Meanwhile, Duca degli Abruzzi, digitized from a collection of
participation in both the PCE and PPIE increased the microfilm held at the National Archives and Records
notoriety of her educational Method in the United Administration)
States. Further, her training course at the PPIE had a Bonsteel, A. (1995). Maria Montessori and the “glass
direct impact on the diffusion of Montessori education in house.” NAMTA Journal, 20(3), 7–13.
America and even overseas to China (Chen & Liu, 2023; Buckenmeyer, R. G. (2018). The California lectures
“Colony celebrates anniversary,” 1915, p. 19; National of Maria Montessori, 1915: Collected speeches and
Montessori Promotion Fund, 1916; SFCP1; SFCP5; writings. Montessori-Pierson. (Originally published
SFCP6). While we can only speculate, it seems plausible in 1997 by Clio)
that if Montessori had followed through with her faculty Chen, J., & Liu, Y. (2023). Montessori education in
position at the Wisconsin State Normal School in Stevens China. In A. K. Murray, E.-M. Tebano Ahlquist, M.
Point, the historical trajectory may have been different; K. McKenna, & M. Debs (Eds.), The Bloomsbury
the advancement of her Method across the United States handbook of Montessori education (pp. 377–380).
may have taken a stronger foothold. Bloomsbury Academic.
Reframing Montessori’s 1915 visit to California by Cohen, S. (1972). Montessori comes to America,
challenging our understanding of Montessori’s biography 1911–1917. Notre Dame Journal of Education, 2(4),
potentially paves the way for other avenues of research. 358–372. (Reprinted in 1981 and 1983 in Montessori
For instance, another Montessori demonstration school schools in America: Historical, philosophical, and
was established at the PCE in the summer and fall of empirical research perspectives, edited by John P.
1916 (SDU6). Montessori’s return to the United States Chattin-McNichols)
in 1917, where she delivered another series of lectures Colony celebrates anniversary. (1915). The Western
in San Diego, has received limited analysis (see Cohen, Comrade, 3(1), 15–19. https://archive.org/details/
1972; Moretti, 2013, 2021). Another area requiring westerncomrade0304losa/page/n19/mode/2up
deeper analysis is the lasting impact of her 1915 courses Educational news and editorial comment; American
on teachers and schools in California and beyond. Given
Montessori courses. (1914). Elementary School
the new resources and information that are becoming
Journal, 15(2), 61–62. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/
accessible, it may be time to reconsider and reevaluate
uc1.b3096363?urlappend=%3Bseq=79
more details of her biography and the diffusion of
Gutek, G. L., & Gutek, P. A. (2016). Bringing Montessori
Montessori education across the United States.
to America: S. S. McClure, Maria Montessori, and the
campaign to publicize Montessori education. University
Author Information
of Alabama Press.
Gutek, G. L., & Gutek, P. A. (2020). America’s early
Joel Parham is an independent researcher with JRP
Montessorians: Anne George, Margaret Naumburg,
Consulting & Research, as well as an affiliated researcher
Helen Parkhurst, and Adelia Pyle. Palgrave Macmillan.
at the Center for Learner Agency Research and Action
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54835-3
(CLARA) at the University of Kansas. He can be reached
H. S. Crocker Co. (1915). Crocker-Langley San Francisco
at joel@jrpconsultingresearch.com. https://orcid.
directory for the year ending June 1915. https://archive.
org/0000-0002-5636-0879
org/details/crockerlangleysa1915sanfrich
H. S. Crocker Co. (1916). Crocker-Langley San Francisco
References
directory for the year ending June 1916. https://archive.
org/details/crockerlangleysa1916sanfrich
American Montessori training school for teachers,
Hinkle, F. R. (1915, September 12). A day with Dr. Maria
Torresdale House, Torresdale, Philadelphia, Penna.
Montessori and her youthful charges is an eye opener
[Advertisement]. (1914). American Annals of the
for the average parent. San Francisco Chronicle, 6.
Deaf, 59(5), 520. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uva.
https://www.proquest.com/docview/574390980
x004925869?urlappend=%3Bseq=558

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 55

Hyatt, E. (1915). Doctoressa Maria Montessori. Congress on Education (Vol. 53). https://hdl.handle.
California Blue Bulletin, 1(3), 5. https://babel. net/2027/uc1.a0004282620
hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b3013433&seq=65 National Education Association of the United States
Kramer, R. (1976). Maria Montessori: A biography. (NEA). (1915b). Official program, fifty-third annual
Putnam. convention, National Education Association and
Los Angeles Directory Company. (1915). Los Angeles city third International Congress on Education, Oakland,
directory, 1915, including San Pedro and Wilmington. California, August 16 to 28, 1915. Series 1, Box
https://tinyurl.com/la-city-directory-1915 3958, Folder 4: NEA1008–RG National Education
Los Angeles Directory Company. (1916). Los Angeles city Association – Conferences and Conventions.
directory, 1916, including San Pedro and Wilmington. Special Collections Research Center, The George
https://tinyurl.com/la-city-directory-1916 Washington University Libraries, Washington, DC.
Montessori, C. (Ed.). (2015). Maria Montessori writes to National Montessori Promotion Fund. (1916). Directory
her father: Letters from California, 1915. Montessori- of Montessori classes and Montessori teachers in
Pierson. the United States. https://books.google.com/
Montessori, M. (1915a). Education in relation to books?id=yO4KAAAAIAAJ
the imagination of the little child. Journal of Povell, P. (2010). Montessori comes to America: The
Proceedings and Addresses of the Annual Meeting leadership of Maria Montessori and Nancy McCormick
of the National Education Association, 53, Rambusch. University Press of America.
661–667. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1. Price, G. (1915, May 8). Famous Dr. Montessori
a0004282620?urlappend=%3Bseq=677 begins to teach L.A. children next Monday. Los
Montessori, M. (1915b). My system of education. Angeles Record, 4. https://www.newspapers.com/
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Annual image/678145871
Meeting of the National Education Association, Robinson, E. S. (1915, July 7). Mme. Montessori tells of
53, 64–73. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1. work with tots. San Diego Union, 2.
a0004282620?urlappend=%3Bseq=80 Rodman, H. (1915, April 21). Dr. Montessori aims to
Montessori, M. (1915c). The mother and the child. aid poor: Italian educator says their children are
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Annual more eager to learn. New York Tribune, 6. https://
Meeting of the National Education Association, 53, chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1915-
1121–1130. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1. 04-21/ed-1/seq-6
a0004282620?urlappend=%3Bseq=1137 Selle, E. S. (1932). The organization and activities
Montessori, M. (1915d). The organization of the National Education Association: A case
of intellectual work in school. Journal of study in educational sociology. Teachers College,
Proceedings and Addresses of the Annual Meeting Columbia University. https://archive.org/details/
of the National Education Association, 53, organizationacti0000sell
717–722. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1. Sobe, N. W. (2004). Challenging the gaze: The subject
a0004282620?urlappend=%3Bseq=733 of attention and a 1915 Montessori demonstration
A Montessori school for the children of New York’s East classroom. Educational Theory, 54(3), 281–297.
Side. (1915). Outlook, 109, 579. https://hdl.handle. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0013-2004.2004.00020.x
net/2027/uc1.b2989253?urlappend=%3Bseq=599 Standing, E. M. (1998). Maria Montessori: Her life and
Moretti, E. (2013). Teaching peace in a time of war: work. Plume.
Maria Montessori’s 1917 lectures. AMI Journal, Todd, F. M. (1921). The story of the exposition: Being the
2013(1–2), 17–31. official history of the international celebration held at
Moretti, E. (2021). Ending conflict with education: The San Francisco in 1915 to commemorate the discovery of
1917 peace lectures. In E. Moretti, The best weapon for the Pacific Ocean and the construction of the Panama
peace: Maria Montessori, education, and children’s rights Canal (5 vols.). G.P. Putnam. https://catalog.
(pp. 100–124). University of Wisconsin Press. hathitrust.org/Record/001515106
National Education Association of the United States Wallace, J. M. (2005). A Gary School survives: Angelo
(NEA). (1915a). Journal of proceedings and addresses Patri and urban education. History of Education
of the fifty-third annual meeting and International Quarterly, 45(1), 96–111. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/20461925

56 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

West, A. M. (1980). The National Education Association: Los Angeles Express (LAE)
The power base for education. Free Press. https:// LAE1. Addresses teachers. (1915, July 13). 8. https://
archive.org/details/nationaleducatio00west www.newspapers.com/image/608012921
LAE2. Dr. Montessori reaches L.A. (1915, April 30). 8.
Newspaper Articles https://www.newspapers.com/image/608093561
Note: This list includes newspaper articles with LAE3. Dr. Montessori to address U.S.C. body. (1915,
unknown authorship. They have been assigned an May 20). 7. https://www.newspapers.com/
alphanumeric identifier, based on the publication image/608014747
name, which have been referenced in-text. LAE4. Dr. Montessori to talk. (1915, May 25). 6. https://
Glendale Evening News (GEN) www.newspapers.com/image/608016084
GEN1. Exposition notes. (1915, May 27). https:// LAE5. Pasadena women to honor Dr. Montessori.
archive.org/details/c100_2012_019/page/n13/ (1915, May 4). 2. https://www.newspapers.com/
mode/2up image/608009381
L’Italia (ITA) Los Angeles Herald (LAH)
ITA1. All’esposizione fu iniziato ieri il corso educativo LAH1. Americans are given praise by educator.
della Dottoressa Montessori. (1915, August 5). (1915, April 30). 1. https://cdnc.ucr.
4. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/ edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150430.2.162
sn85066408/1915-08-05/ed-1/seq-4 LAH2. Child educator to be greeted by all L.A.
ITA2. Il congresso Montessori a Oakland: Il metodo (1915, April 27). 20. https://cdnc.ucr.
educativo della Dr. Montessori discusso ed esaltato edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150427.2.453
dagli insegnanti Americani. (1915, August 30). 4. LAH3. Dr. Montessori to open class here.
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=ITA19150830.2.35 (1915, May 25). 13. https://cdnc.ucr.
ITA3. La D.ssa Montessori nella nostra città. edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150525.2.460
(1915, April 26). 5. https://cdnc.ucr. LAH4. Dr. Montessori to speak at U. of S.C.
edu/?a=d&d=ITA19150426.2.35 (1915, May 20). 1. https://cdnc.ucr.
ITA4. La Dr. Montessori a San Francisco: L’illustre edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150520.2.314
pedagogista iniziera’ oggi il corso delle sue lezioni LAH5. Mme. Montessori invited. (1915 March 4). 1.
all’esposizione. (1915, August 2). 4. https://cdnc.ucr. https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150304.2.232
edu/?a=d&d=ITA19150802.2.37 LAH6. Mme. Montessori to teach in Calif.
ITA5. Maria Montessori a New York: Essa rimarrà in (1915, April 20). 7. https://cdnc.ucr.
America 4 mesi e verrà direttamente in California. edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150420.2.77
(1915, April 21). L’Italia, 1. https://cdnc.ucr. LAH7. Montessori ends her work in L.A.
edu/?a=d&d=ITA19150421.2.3 (1915, June 24). 5. https://cdnc.ucr.
ITA6. Maria Montessori a San Francisco. edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150624.2.341
(1915, April 25). 4. https://cdnc.ucr. LAH8. Montessori holds first class here.
edu/?a=d&d=ITA19150425.2.36 (1915, May 10). 1. https://cdnc.ucr.
ITA7. Maria Montessori festeggiata a Los edu/?a=d&d=LAH19150510.2.224
Angeles. (1915, May 24). 8. https://cdnc.ucr. Los Angeles Record (LAR)
edu/?a=d&d=ITA19150524.2.48 LAR1. Educator to San Diego. (1915, March 23). 8.
ITA8. La partenza di Maria Montessori. https://www.newspapers.com/image/678145164
(1915, December 3). 4. https://cdnc.ucr. LAR2. Montessori, educator, is due tomorrow. (1915,
edu/?a=d&d=ITA19151203.2.37 April 27). 1. https://www.newspapers.com/
ITA9. La prima lezione della Montessori alle maestre. image/678145703
(1915, August 6). 4. https://chroniclingamerica.loc. Los Angeles Times (LAT)
gov/lccn/sn85066408/1915-08-06/ed-1/seq-4 LAT1. The city and environs: Events briefly told; new
ITA10. La scuola Montessori. (1915, August 6). college society. (1915, May 21). I–10. https://www.
4. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/ proquest.com/docview/160235612
sn85066408/1915-08-06/ed-1/seq-4 LAT2. Dr. Montessori coming: Noted educator to hold
her third international training school in this city in

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 57

 May. (1915a, March 9). I–10. https://www.proquest. Sacramento Star (SS)
com/docview/160150196 SS1. Montessori grieved. (1915, December 6). 3. https://
LAT3. Dr. Montessori coming. (1915b, March 14). I–12. www.newspapers.com/image/607481806
https://www.newspapers.com/image/380296841 Sacramento Union (SU)
LAT4. Expected today. (1915, April 28). II–8. https:// SU1. Educators gather at Bay for international
www.newspapers.com/image/380595861 session. (1915, August 15). 8. https://cdnc.ucr.
LAT5. Girls may rue war husbands; heroes in trenches edu/?a=d&d=SDU19150815.2.84
may not be fireside dears; day to come, says Britisher, San Diego Evening Tribune (SDET)
when women repent; Pasadena visitor said last good- SDET1. City schools are praised. (1915, May 4). 1.
by to father. (1915, May 10). II–6. https://www. SDET2. Dr. Montessori gives lecture. (1915, July 2). 10.
newspapers.com/image/380511173 SDET3. Dr. Montessori will lecture for adults. (1915, July
LAT6. Montessori lectures. (1915, May 25). II–1. 3). 8.
https://www.proquest.com/docview/160180902 SDET4. Invitation accepted by Madame Montessori.
LAT7. Noted educator at U.S.C.: Mme. Montessori will (1915, March 22). 6.
address Scholarship Society and persons prominent SDET5. Italian woman speaks Monday. (1915, July 9). 9.
in school circles. (1915, May 21). II–3. https://www. SDET6. Mme. Montessori here to consider school.
proquest.com/docview/160198409 (1915, May 3). 6, 7.
LAT8. Teaching plans of Montessori; goes to San SDET7. Montessori class at normal ends. (1915, August
Diego to talk over arrangements at the fair. (1915, 11). 8.
May 3). II–6. https://www.proquest.com/ SDET8. Montessori to teach 25 San Diego children.
docview/160166572 (1915, June 26). 4.
LAT9. Women’s work, women’s clubs. (1915, May SDET9. Summer school to open Monday. (1915, June
14). II–6. https://www.newspapers.com/ 30). 10.
image/380512529 SDET10. Tomorrow at the exposition; education day.
New York Times (NYT) (1915, July 10). 9.
NYT1. Carnival days make Rome gay. (1914, San Diego Union (SDU)
February 22). C2. https://www.proquest.com/ SDU1. Dr. Montessori heard by 400 pupils, tutors. (1915,
hnpnewyorktimes/docview/97575856 July 20). 9.
NYT2. Dr. Maria Montessori at exposition. (1915, SDU2. Dr. Montessori speaks at fair; keep child’s mind
July 22). 18. https://www.proquest.com/ free, hearers told. (1915, July 13). 1, 4.
docview/97736222 SDU3. Gleaned on prado and isthmus. (1915, May 2).
NYT3. Mme. Montessori at Exposition. (1914, 10.
August 3). 8. https://www.proquest.com/ SDU4. Lecture course register open. (1915, July 6). 5.
hnpnewyorktimes/docview/97537224 SDU5. Montessori class planned, $1000 voted for
New York Tribune (NYTrib) building; founder of system sees fair. (1915, May 3).
NYTrib1. Dr. Montessori arrives: Italian educator to 1, 3.
demonstrate methods on coast. (1915, April 20). SDU6. Montessori method to be shown at
14. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/ fair. (1916, June 3). 5. https://cdnc.ucr.
sn83030214/1915-04-20/ed-1/seq-14 edu/?a=d&d=SDDU19160603.2.80
NYTrib2. Spain recalls Montessori: Has $75,000 offer to SDU7. Normalites hear Italian educator. (1915, July 2). 6.
install system, she sends word. (1915, December 18). San Francisco Call and Post (SFCP)
5. https://www.newspapers.com/image/468971551 SFCP1. Chinese girl, protegee of Mrs. Gould, to teach
Oregon Daily Journal (ODJ) Montessori in Orient. (1915, August 28). 4. https://
ODJ1. Dr. Montessori is not to come here. (1915, cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SFC19150828.2.105
December 1). 9. https://www.newspapers.com/ SFCP2. Dr. Montessori women’s guest at Jewel
image/78374929 City. (1915, April 26). 8. https://cdnc.ucr.
ODJ2. Famous educator will soon come to this coast: edu/?a=d&d=SFC19150426.2.90
Effort being made to secure Dr. Montessori for SFCP3. Mme. Montessori to be fair guest.
Portland. (1915, April 25). 7. https://www. (1915, April 24). 11. https://cdnc.ucr.
newspapers.com/image/78480363 edu/?a=d&d=SFC19150424.2.174

58 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

SFCP4. Montessori child education method is opened Stevens Point Journal (SPJ)
at exposition today; kiddies trained at fair under SPJ1. Dr. Montessori accepts Stevens Point invitation.
new system. (1915, August 2). 1. https://cdnc.ucr. (1915, October 9). 1. https://www.newspapers.
edu/?a=d&d=SFC19150802.2.103 com/image/250412314
SFCP5. Mrs. Gould and her sister, Mrs. Wong, to teach in SPJ2. Dr. Montessori will teach in Stevens Point? (1915,
China; rail magnate’s wife to introduce Montessori October 6). 1. https://www.newspapers.com/
system in the Orient. (1915, November 1). 3. image/250412055
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SFC19151101.2.31 SPJ3. Going to California: Miss Helen Parkhurst of
SFCP6. Mrs. Gould sails tomorrow to begin life work in normal to assist Dr. Montessori. (1915, May 26). 1.
China; sisters, long separated, now plan to devote https://www.newspapers.com/image/250573464
years to Oriental race. (1915, November 5). 5. SPJ4. Madam Montessori returning to Italy:
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SFC19151105.2.55 Announcement of the cancelling of Madam
San Francisco Chronicle (SFC) Montessori’s engagement made by local bureau.
SFC1. Dr. Montessori will give twelve lectures: Going (1915, December 8). 1. https://www.newspapers.
to Wisconsin after her work at exposition. (1915, com/image/250416241
October 19). 5. https://www.proquest.com/ SPJ5. Montessori to teach: Famous woman educator
docview/576515480 will give course at normal. (1915, October 28). 2.
SFC2. Education by suggestion will be aim of Montessori https://www.newspapers.com/image/250413686
class at fair: Individuality of the child will be The Sun (NYSun)
developed by famous teacher. (1915, August 5). 11. NYSun1. Dr. Maria Montessori here: Teacher of “sense
https://www.proquest.com/docview/574390245 system” to instruct in California. (1915, April
SFC3. First Montessori lecture. (1915, August 6). 5. 20). 3. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/
https://www.proquest.com/docview/574389001 sn83030272/1915-04-20/ed-1/seq-3
SFC4. Four Montessori schools to start. (1915, May 1). 1. Washington Evening Star (WES)
https://www.proquest.com/docview/574338139 WES1. Go to greet Dr. Montessori: Capital educators will
SFC5. Great educator here for visit. (1915, April 26). 4. welcome teacher back to United States. (1915, April
https://www.proquest.com/docview/576476922 20). 20. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/
SFC6. Mme. Montessori to arrive here today. (1915, sn83045462/1915-04-20/ed-1/seq-20
April 25). 33. https://www.proquest.com/ WES2. To lecture at G.W.U.: Montessori method to
docview/366160776 be topic of Dr. Harriet E. Hunt. (1915, February
SFC7. Montessori classes to open at exposition. 9). 7. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/
(1915, July 30). 11. https://www.proquest.com/ sn83045462/1915-02-09/ed-1/seq-7
docview/574353624 Whittier News (WN)
San Francisco Examiner (SFE) WN1. Attend address. (1915, May 21). 3. https://www.
SFE1. Dr. Montessori due here on Sunday next. newspapers.com/image/684728148
(1915, July 30). 9. https://www.proquest.com/ WN2. Dr. Montessori explains her system: Mind
docview/2132790517 development for child is keynote; local people
in audience. (1915, May 22). 1. https://www.
newspapers.com/image/683610941

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 59

Appendix A
List of Children in PCE Demonstration Class, San Diego
Name Parent Name Name Parent Name
1 Sylvia Allerback a
Fred Allerback 21 Arthur Kelly a
John L. Kelly
2 John Barter b
– 22 Dorothy Ash Lindsay a, b
–
3 Marjory Barter b – 23 Clayton Mosher a G. W. Mosher
4 Annette Clewett a, b
George E. Clewett 24 Norman O’Farrell a, b
Fred O’Farrell
5 Richard Clewett a, b
George E. Clewett 25 Harold Obercotter a, b
L. M. Obercotter
6 Robert Clewett a, b
George E. Clewett 26 Clara Packard a, b
Walter Packard
7 Charles H. Clower a Dan E. Clower Alexander
27 Martha D. Reynolds a, b
Reynolds, Jr.
8 Ida Virginia Clower a, b Dan E. Clower
28 Robert Perring Ridout b –
9 Harriet Sefton Crouse a, b
Lena Crouse
29 Richard L. Sinclair a, b B. W. Sinclair
10 John Nydegger Degelman b
–
30 Ethelyn Stanton a Leon I. Stanton
11 Laura Ferris Degelman b –
31 Evadne Teggart a, b
Frank Teggart
12 Marie Eastin a John Eastin
32 Justin Thomas b
–
13 Amelia Fiola a Tom Fiola
33 Dorothy Titus b –
14 Lillian Gould a, b Arthur Gould
34 William Van Horne a F. W. Van Horne
15 Barbara Gray a, b Gordon Gray
35 Edwin Arden Watkins a
Mrs. E. P. Watkins
Rev. Howard
16 May Juliet Grube a, b 36 Amy Fredericka Webb a, b
Frederick Webb
Grube
17 Angelyn Courtney Hay a, b
Arthur Hay Mrs. H. C.
37 Howard Kermit Williams a, b
Williams
18 Warren Hershner a, b –
38 Ione Beatrice Wright a W. D. Wright
19 David Clark Hipolito b
–
39 Marie Young a Emmett Young
20 Ward Clayton James a, b
Lloyd O. James

Note. As is evident from this list, there are discrepancies among sources as to who attended the demonstration class. For instance,
of the 39 children, 20 of them are listed in both sources, 11 are unique to SDET8, and 8 are unique to SDET7. Another source
indicates that “there will be about forty little pupils,” which seems to confirm the above list of 39 children (SDET9). Children in
the demonstration class ranged in age from three to six and were taught by Anna Fedeli, Helen Parkhurst, Helen Little, and Edith
Little. The demonstration class was conducted on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 3:30 p.m. The model school was conducted in the art
studio of the San Diego State Normal School, not on the Exposition grounds as was initially planned (Robinson, 1915).
a
SDET8.
b
SDET7.

60 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Appendix B
List of Children in PPIE Demonstration Class, San Francisco
Name Address City
1 William Mitchell Baxter 1713 Green St. San Francisco
2 Alice Bernee – –
3 Bruce Worster Brown – –
4 Robert Summer Brookings – –
5 Chester Buchanan 2717 Berkeley St. Berkeley
6 Percy Cotton 946 Noe St. San Francisco
7 Marinda Cummings 556 Sixteenth Ave. San Francisco
8 John S. Drum, Jr. 2114 Broadway San Francisco
9 Alice Ellinwood 2523 Filbert St. San Francisco
10 John Corbett Gill 2555 Larkin St. San Francisco
11 Jean Baird Hartzell 3021 Fulton St. Berkeley
12 Mortimer Kuhn – –
13 Margaretha McCracken 1 – –
14 Arthur McEwen – –
15 C. Elizabeth McWood – –
16 Kathleen [MacLemore] 2 2843 Green St. San Francisco
17 Joseph Marks 3326 Washington St. San Francisco
18 Matthew Marsh 1501 Leavenworth St. San Francisco
19 Emil Morris, Jr. 2872 Clay St. San Francisco
20 Catherine Musante 1270 Jackson St. San Francisco
21 Marcella Oberti 1511 Mason St. San Francisco
22 Mercedes Quinonez Stanford Ct. Apartments San Francisco
23 Helen Storer – –
24 Franklin Thomas 6117 Racine St. 3
Oakland
25 Welbourne Thomas 617 Racine St. 3 Oakland
26 Margaret Pershing Post of Presidio #20 4 San Francisco
27 Claudine Cotton Warren 2098 Vallejo St. San Francisco
28 Charles Albert Warren – –
29 Ralph Waldo Wellerstein 430 Point Lobos Ave. San Francisco
30 Robert T. Whitcomb Massachusetts Bldg. San Francisco
Note. This information is sourced from the following: Buckenmeyer, 2018, pp. 254–255; Crocker-Langley San Francisco Directory,
1915, 1916; SFC2; ITA10.
1
Margaretha McCracken is listed in Buckenmeyer (2018) as “Maryaretha McCracker,” but a review of the original source confirms
the correct spelling (see ITA10).
2
Buckenmeyer (2018) identifies this name as “Kathleen Mechemore,” however, upon inspection of Buckenmeyer’s source for this
information it appears that the last name actually reads “MacLemore.”
3
The address included in the original source material, and subsequently in Buckenmeyer (2018), inconsistently identify the street
numbers for the Thomas siblings, but it is unclear which is accurate.
4
Margaret Pershing’s address was misspelled in Buckenmeyer (2018) and should read, “Post of Presidio #20.”

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 61

Appendix C
List of Participants in the First California Training Course (Pasadena, Los Angeles, and PCE in San Diego)
Name Residence
1 Miss Edna Christine Abbott 268 Sterling Place, Brooklyn, N. Y.
2 Mrs. Alfa Wood Anderson Glendora, Cal.
3 Mrs. Emma Ashburn 303 West E. St., Ontario, Cal.
4 Mrs. Katharine Bates El Cajon, R.F.D., Cal.
5 Miss Anita Rose Blun The Wellsmore, 77th St. and Broadway, New York City
6 Mrs. Prudence Stokes Brown Llano, Cal. c/o Del Rio Co-operative Community
7 Mrs. Ruby H. Bruning 5032 St. Lawrence Ave., Chicago, Ill.
8 Mrs. J. P. Burlingham 206 ½ Comstock Ave, Syracuse, N. Y.
9 Miss M. Pamelia Clough 2427 Prospect St., Berkeley, Cal.
10 Mrs. Augustus (May) Davis 693 S. Euclid Ave., [Pasadena], Cal.
11 Mrs. Hope Gardiner Dillingham 1106 Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, Ill.
12 Miss Jeanie Joel Dillon 950 Clark St., Stevens Point, Wis. Perm. add., Alvarado Hotel,
Los Angeles, Cal.
13 Miss Pauline H. Field Hollywood, Cal.
14 Miss Roberta L. Fletcher 1525 35th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. Perm. Victorville, Cal.
15 Miss Marie A. F—tz 909 Harrison St., Syracuse, N. Y.
16 Miss Enid Frank 345 West 88th St., New York City
17 Mrs. S. H. Friend 406 Irving Place, Milwaukee, Wis.
18 Miss Ellen B. Frink 907 Hilyard St., Eugene, Ore.
19 Miss Mary Louise Gilman 405 West D. St., Ontario, Cal. Perm. add., Covina, Los Angeles,
Cal.
20 Miss Elizabeth L. Glass 683 Shepard Ave, Milwaukee, Wis.
21 Mrs. Florence P. Griffith 10 Aurora Drive, Riverside, Cal.
22 Mrs. Lillian Parks Gunnell 381 Lincoln Ave., Palo Alto, Cal.
23 Miss Cecelia Hardman 1317 12th St., Santa Monica, Cal. Perm. add., 2826 10th St.,
Seattle, Wash.
24 Mrs. Hazel Clark Hipolito 2345 Ocean View Ave., Los Angeles, Cal.
25 Miss Mary T. G. Hodenpyl Cooperstown, N. J., c/o Susan Fenimore Cooper Foundation.
Perm. add., 123 Hobart Ave, Summit, N. J.
26 Mr. Prince Hopkins ‡ Santa Barbara, Cal.
27 Mrs. Agnes C. Houghton 26 Hancock St., Lexington, Mass.
28 Miss Mildred Johnston Alameda and Santa Rosa Sts., Altadena, Cal. Perm. add., P. O.
Box 404, Chicago, Ill.
29 Dr. Mary [Powell] Jordan 230 Colina Ave, Los Angeles, Cal.
30 Miss Helen Klock 406 Irving Place, Milwaukee, Wis. Perm. add., Derry Village, N.
H.
31 Mrs. J. W. Lawrence 925 Flink Ave., Venice, Cal.

62 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 Name Residence
32 Miss Lois Lindsay 1256 Western Ave., Topeka, Kan.
33 Miss Edith R. Little 1225 Hinman Ave., Evanston, Ill.
34 Miss Helen M. Little †
1225 Hinman Ave., Evanston, Ill.
35 Miss Helen McCall 1506 Harmon Place, Minneapolis, Minn. Perm. add., 910 2nd St.,
Santa Monica, Cal.
36 Miss May T. McGuinness 131 Benevolent St., Providence, R. I.
37 Miss Lucy Mead 555 Chestnut St., San Francisco, Cal.
38 Miss Katherine Moore 2003 So. Grand Ave., Los Angeles, Cal.
39 Miss Ruth Pendleton Morrison 1506 Harmon Place, Minneapolis, Minn.
40 Mrs. Mary L. Newland 281 Addison Ave., Palo Alto, Cal.
41 Mrs. Hazel G. Owen 718 So. Los Robles, Pasadena, Cal.
42 Miss Helen Parkhurst a
56 West 75th St., New York City
43 Miss Dorothy Peck 1350 Bryant St., Palo Alto, Cal.
44 Miss Margaret E. Perkins 1525 35th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. Perm. add., Windsor,
Vermont
45 Miss Louise Person Alameda St., Altadena, Cal. Perm. add., 4601 E. Colorado St.,
Pasadena, Cal.
46 Miss Adelia McAlpin Pyle a Calle Duputacio, 262, Pral., Barcelona, Spain. Perm. add., 11 E.
68th St., New York City
47 Miss Dorothy Sears Kenilworth, Ill.
48 Mrs. Belle F. Stein † 56 W. 75th St., New York City
49 Miss Mildred Tarrant Grand Rapids, Wis. Perm. add., Durand, Wis.
50 Mrs. Beulah Townsend 2347 Ocean View Ave., Los Angeles, Cal.
51 Mr. James Townsend 712 San Fernando Bldg., Los Angeles, Cal.
52 Miss Adele Von Berlo 195 Harrison St., Brooklyn, N. Y.
53 Miss Blanch Weill 555 Chestnut St., San Francisco, Cal. Perm. add., 1627 17th St.,
[Bakersfield], Cal.
54 Miss Irma Weill 555 Chestnut St., San Francisco, Cal. Perm. add., 1627 17th St.,
[Bakersfield], Cal.
55 Miss Elizabeth Whitcomb Glendora, Los Angeles County, Cal.
56 Miss Agnes Wiley 612 Kensington Road, Los Angeles, Cal.
57 Miss Bertha A. Wiley 1324 ½ S. New Hampshire Ave., Los Angeles, Cal.
58 Mr. J. Stitt Wilson Ridge Road, Berkeley, Cal.
59 Mrs. J. Stitt Wilson Ridge Road, Berkeley, Cal.
[Emma Agnew Wilson]
60 Miss Violette Wilson Ridge Road, Berkeley, Cal.
Note. This data is sourced from National Montessori Promotion Fund (1916).
†
Attended only part of the course.
‡
Attended part time but does not hold certificates.
a
Attended both 1915 California training courses.

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 63

Appendix D
List of Participants in the Second California Training Course (PPIE, San Francisco)
Name Residence
1 Miss Ruth Cooper Fisch ‡ ——
2 Mrs. Eugene Andriano 1461 Vallejo St., San Francisco, Cal.
3 Miss Lydia Atterbury † 3620 LeConte Ave., Berkeley, Cal.
4 Miss Marion Baldwin 1440 Clay St., San Francisco, Cal.
5 Miss Ella A. Barrett ‡
3109 Sacramento St., Los Angeles, Cal.
6 Mrs. Florence Bassity Peking, China
7 Mrs. Marion Ebon Beaufait c/o Castelleja School, Palo Alto, Cal. Perm. add., 1408 Scenic
Way, Berkeley, Cal.
8 Mrs. F. A. Berne 2197 Divisadero St., San Francisco, Cal. Perm. add., South
Tacoma, Wash.
9 Miss Dorothy Chapel 661 Mansfield Place, Brooklyn, N. Y.
10 Miss Lillian Mark Crawford 1521 28th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. Perm. add., 432 S.
Prospect St., Hagerstown, Mass.
11 Miss Julia Farney c/o John Muir School, Berkeley, Cal. Perm. add., San Jose, Box
87, Cal.
12 Mrs. C. H. Farrington 483 E. 25th St., Portland, Ore.
13 Miss Catherine L. Flanner 1350 Bryant St., Palo Alto, Cal. Perm. add., Chicago, Ill.
14 Mr. William Gerkee Room 324, 417 Montgomery St., San Francisco, Cal.
15 Mrs. Harriett Germaine 501 Greenwood Ave., Blue Island, Ill.
16 Mrs. Jean E. Gilbert 110 Cooper Ave., Upper Montclair, N. J.
17 Miss Helen E. Goodell Loda, Ill.
18 Mrs. Grace J. Greenhill 1023 Jefferson St., Waco, Texas
19 Miss Emily H. Greenman 353 West 117th St., New York City
20 Miss Eleanor Hay LaGrange, Mo., c/o Dr. J. T. Muir. Perm add., Urbana, Ill.
21 Mrs. Florence Hoffman 553 Oakland Ave, Oakland, Cal.
22 Miss Nina Hurlbut Tulalip, Wash.
23 Miss Louise Klein Blackmer Home, 50 Takota, Oi Matsu Cho, Koishikawa,
[Tokyo], Japan. Perm. add., 321 E. Second St., Plainfield, N. J.
24 Miss Ellen Wheeler Knight Fordyce, Ark.
25 Miss Ah Ying Low 53 Pen Tzu Hutung, Peking, China
26 Miss Margaret Murphy 116 Lake St., Oakland, Cal. Perm. add., 108 Peck St., Negaunne,
Mich.
27 Miss Helen Parkhurst a 56 West 75th St., New York City
28 Miss Adelia McAlpin Pyle a
Calle Duputacio, 262, Pral., Barcelona, Spain. Perm. add., 11 E.
68th St., New York City
29 Mrs. Sarah Scroggs 1806 Addison St., Berkeley, Cal.
30 Miss Mary Spiers Calistoga, Cal.

64 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

 Name Residence
31 Mrs. Esther Taylor 2116 San Jose St., Alameda, Cal.
32 Miss Rose Trumpler 1629 McAllister St., San Francisco, Cal.
33 Miss Dorothy Dart Watrous 406 Hawthorne St., San Diego, Cal.
34 Miss Mary Alice Woitishik 1402 B Ave., Cedar Rapids, Iowa
35 Mrs. Sun Yue Wong 53 Pen Tzu Hutung, Peking, China
Note. This data is sourced from National Montessori Promotion Fund (1916).
†
Attended only part of the course.
‡
Attended part time but does not hold certificates.
a
Attended both 1915 California training courses.

Reframing Montessori’s California Visit 65

Montessori Elder and Dementia
Care, and Trauma-Informed
Approaches: A Thematic Analysis
Examining Connections Between
the Models
Bernadette Phillips, Maynooth University, Ireland

Keywords: Montessori Method, dementia, trauma, trauma-responsive, trauma-informed practice

Abstract: According to the World Health Organization, there are currently more than 55 million people living with
dementia worldwide, and this figure is expected to triple by 2050. Recent studies suggest that there may be a link
between childhood trauma (which refers to exposure to overwhelmingly stressful experiences before the age of 18
years) and the onset of dementia in later life. Therefore, in communities caring for persons living with dementia, some
residents may have been exposed to trauma in childhood. Currently, there is an increasing awareness of the negative
impact of childhood trauma on later adult health and well-being, and a corresponding recognition of the need for
services, including for dementia care, to be trauma-informed. In the last decade, the Montessori Method has become
established as a legitimate approach to elder/dementia care. However, it has not yet been examined as a trauma-
informed approach. The aim of this paper is to address that gap by (a) highlighting how Maria Montessori took steps
to integrate interdisciplinary knowledge of trauma into her Method when she began to understand the potential of
childhood trauma to adversely impact adult health and well-being, and (b) outlining how the Montessori Method,
when applied to dementia care, incorporates many of the core principles of trauma-informed practice. This paper
concludes that the Montessori Method for dementia care has the built-in capacity to be trauma-sensitive and trauma-
responsive, but that its ongoing rollout should follow Montessori’s lead by specifically integrating knowledge about the
neurobiology of trauma into its training programs.

Journal
66 of Montessori
Journal ResearchResearch Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2
of Montessori
Fall 2023, Volume 9, Issue 2
 According to the Centers for Disease Control with adversity-experienced individuals of the need for
and Prevention, “Dementia is not a specific disease human services—including services for dementia care—
but is rather a general term for the impaired ability to to be ACE-aware and trauma-informed. Being trauma-
remember, think, or make decisions, that interferes with informed means being aware of the potentially negative
doing everyday activities” (Centers for Disease Control impact of exposure to adversity and trauma on individuals
and Prevention, 2023). Dementia results from a variety (Cations et al., 2020, 2021; Couzner et al., 2022).
of injuries and diseases that affect the brain, including This recognition of the need to make dementia care
vascular diseases and strokes. The most common form of become trauma-informed has an important bearing on
dementia, accounting for 60-80% of cases, is Alzheimer’s the relatively recent use of the Montessori Method in the
disease (Alzheimer’s Association, 2023). Although care of people living with dementia. Given the possible
dementia is not a normal part of aging, the prevalence link between early exposure to trauma and the onset of
of dementia is increasing year on year (World Health dementia in later life, it is important that Montessori
Organization, 2023). This prevalence is occurring for a practitioners for dementia programs are aware of
number of reasons, including increased longevity. Global how childhood trauma can impact the progression of
dementia cases are forecasted to triple by 2050 (GBD dementia and how a trauma-informed approach can
2019 Dementia Forecasting Collaborators, 2022). result in better care practices. This paper highlights how
Recent studies (Corney et al., 2022; Couzner et al., Montessori understood the potential of unaddressed
2022; Radford et al., 2017; Schickedanz et al., 2022; Tani childhood trauma to adversely impact later adult health
et al., 2020) suggest that a link exists between exposure and well-being, and in response took steps to integrate
to adversity or trauma in childhood and the onset of interdisciplinary knowledge on trauma into her Method
dementia in later life. Childhood adversity includes such (Montessori, 2013a/1917). It also outlines how the
stressors as exposure to neglect, abuse, domestic violence, Montessori Method, when applied to dementia care,
parental substance misuse, parental mental health incorporates (perhaps unconsciously) many of the
problems, and parental divorce (Felitti et al., 1998). These core principles of trauma-informed practice. This paper
types of experiences overlap with what is considered concludes that the Montessori Method for dementia
childhood trauma, which refers to exposure to stressful care has the in-built capacity to be trauma-sensitive and
experiences that overwhelm children and adolescents trauma-responsive, but that its ongoing rollout should
under the age of 18 in the absence of a supportive follow Montessori’s lead by specifically integrating
adult (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services knowledge about trauma and trauma-informed practice
Administration, 2014). The groundbreaking Adverse into its training programs.
Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study (Felitti et al., 1998)
found that adverse experiences in childhood are common Method
and are found in all socioeconomic groups. Therefore,
in communities caring for elders and persons living This paper examines connections between the
with dementia, it is likely that some of the residents may Montessori Method for elder and dementia care, and
have been exposed to adversity or trauma in childhood. trauma-informed approaches. To conduct this study,
Building on the findings of the ACE study, an increasing Braun and Clarke’s (2022) analytical approach to
body of literature highlights the negative impact of thematic analysis was used. This approach involved six
childhood trauma on later adult health and well-being steps. The first step was to become familiarized with the
(Bellis et al., 2019; Burke Harris, 2019; Shonkoff et al., data in the literature listed in Table 1, and to take note
2012; van der Kolk, 2014). Chandrasekar and colleagues of any recurring features and initial thoughts on how
found that exposure to adversity in childhood predisposes to code the data. The second step involved extracting
an individual to multimorbidity, i.e., living with two or pieces of text and highlighting them with different colors
more chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, to create initial codes or meaningful labels that could
diabetes, or mental illnesses such as anxiety or depression identify recurring ideas in the data set. For example,
(Chandrasekar et al., 2023). Their findings showed that when reading Montessori’s pamphlet about the World
“Childhood adversity was associated with a progressively War I French and Belgian refugee children (Data Group
increasing burden of multimorbidity across adulthood F), I extracted several pieces of text from which I created
into early old age” (p. 2). Accompanying these findings the initial codes “war,” “trauma,” “physical wounds,”
is a corresponding recognition by professionals working “psychological wounds,” and “human degeneration.”

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 67

Table 1
List of Resources

Resources on Montessori Methods for dementia

Author Date Title of Document Document
Camp, C. J. 1999 Montessori-based activities for persons with dementia. Vol. 1 Book

Camp, C. J. et al. 2006 Montessori-based activities for persons with dementia. Vol 2 Book
Camp, C. J. 2012 Hiding the stranger in the mirror: Book
A detective’s manual for solving problems associated with Alzhei-
mer’s disease and related disorders.
Brenner, T. & Brenner, K. 2020 The Montessori Method for connecting to people with dementia: Book
A creative guide to communication and engagement in dementia
care.
Brush, J. 2020 Montessori for elder and dementia care. Book
Resources on the possibility of a link between childhood trauma and dementia
Radford et al. 2017 Childhood stress and adversity is associated with late-life demen- Article
tia in Aboriginal Australians.

Tani et al. 2020 Association between adverse childhood experiences and demen- Article
tia in older Japanese adults.

Schickedanz et al. 2022 The association between adverse childhood experiences and Article
positive dementia screen in American older adults.
Corney et al. 2022 The relationship between adverse childhood experiences and Article
Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review.

Resources on the need for trauma-informed aged care

Cations et al. 2020 Trauma-informed care in geriatric inpatient units to improve staff Article
skills and reduce patient distress: a co-deigned study protocol.

Cations et al. 2021 The case for trauma-informed age care. Article
Couzner et al. 2022 Delivering trauma-informed care in a hospital ward for older Article
adults with dementia: An illustrative case series
Resources on trauma-informed principles
Fallot, R. & Harris, M. 2009 Creating cultures of trauma-informed care: A self-assessment and Article
planning protocol.
SAMSHA 2014 SAMSHA’s concept of trauma and guidance for a trauma-in- Report
formed approach.
Resources on adverse childhood experiences and trauma
Felitti et al. 1998 Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to Report
many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Child-
hood Experiences (ACE) Study.
Perry, B. D. 1999 Memories of fear: How the brain stores and retrieves traumatic Book chapter
experience.
Resources on Montessori’s involvement with trauma-affected children
Montessori, M. 2013/1917 The white cross Pamphlet

68 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Table 2
Stages in the Thematic Analysis

Data Group Literature topics Initial Codes Emerging Themes

A: Montessori Methods for Camp’s Insight – links between the The perfect fit: applying the Montessori
dementia Montessori Method and interventions for Method to dementia care
persons with dementia.
B: Possible links between The compelling facts and figures; the Is there a link between adversity in childhood
childhood trauma and dementia limitations in the studies. and the onset of dementia in adulthood?

C: The need for trauma- Past history of neglect or abuse, personal care There is a real need for aged-care staff
informed aged care issues. to be trauma-informed to prevent re-
traumatization.
D: Trauma-informed principles The need for safety, trust, peer support, Is the Montessori Method for dementia a
collaboration, choice, empowerment. trauma-informed approach?
E: Adverse childhood Neglect, abuse, caregiver mental instability; The impact of childhood adversity on later
experiences and trauma household substance abuse; domestic physical and mental health.
violence; incarceration of family member;
death of caregiver; separation from caregiver.
F: Montessori’s involvement War/trauma/physical wounds/psychological Montessori’s involvement with trauma-
with trauma-affected children wounds. affected children.

Montessori’s concerns for trauma-affected

children’s exposure to criminality.
Montessori’s concerns for trauma-affected
children’s mental and physical health.
Montessori’s concerns for trauma-affected
children’s later adult health.
G: Montessori’s core principles Human need for work (meaningful How the Montessori Method when applied
activity, independence, respect, self-worth, to aged and dementia care can promote these
contribution, intergenerational living, core principles.
belonging, sense of community.

These initial codes and references to the data sources that they were distinct enough from other emerging themes
support them are listed in Table 2. The third step involved to stand alone. The fifth step involved naming the themes
identifying potential or emerging themes. In this respect, such that they would be engaging and of interest to a
I took a deductive approach in that my choice of themes potential reader. The sixth step involved the write up of
was influenced by my existing knowledge. This step the article using the themes as the structure.
also involved grouping some of my codes into broader
themes. For example, from the initial codes, I created the Theoretical Framework
following emerging themes: Montessori’s involvement
with trauma-affected children; Montessori’s concerns This study is based on the pioneering research
for trauma-affected children’s exposure to criminality; of Cameron Camp, through which he discovered the
Montessori’s concerns for trauma-affected children’s potential of the Montessori Method to help persons
mental and physical health; Montessori’s concerns for living with dementia to live meaningful and fulfilling lives
trauma-affected children’s later adult health. Emerging despite their particular challenges (Camp, 1999, 2010,
themes from the data groups are listed in Table 2. The 2012; Camp et al., 2006; Camp & Shelton, 2023). It is
fourth step involved reviewing the potential themes also anchored on the groundbreaking ACE study (Felitti
against the data to establish relevance, usefulness, and that et al., 1998) and the concept of trauma and trauma-

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 69

informed practice as adopted by established authorities can lead to disease, disability, social problems, and even
on trauma, including the Substance Abuse and Mental premature death. While the ACE study’s groundbreaking
Health Services Administration (SAMHSA; 2014). research explained the link between ACEs and many
Additionally, this study is centered on Montessori’s common illnesses (including heart disease, cancer,
writings on the dangers of unaddressed childhood diabetes, asthma, anxiety, and depression), it did not
trauma to the health and well-being of present and future refer specifically to the possibility of a link between ACEs
generations as specifically expressed in the publication and the onset of dementia in late adulthood. However,
she circulated during World War I (Montessori, it is arguable (although Felitti et al. did not specifically
2013a/1917). state this) that habits such as smoking, high alcohol
consumption, poor diet, lack of physical activity, low
Results levels of cognitive stimulation—all of which have been
found to be risk factors for the onset of dementia—may,
Three major themes emerged from the analysis (with in some cases, have their origins in early life exposure to
a number of sub-themes in the third theme). These were: adversity or trauma.
(a) the possible link between ACEs and dementia; (b) To date, few studies have focused on the possible
Montessori’s insights into the risks posed by childhood link between exposure to ACEs in childhood and the
trauma to later physical and mental health; and (c) The onset of dementia in later years. However, studies on
Montessori Method for aged care and people living with this topic are beginning to emerge. In 2017, the work of
dementia. Radford and colleagues provided compelling evidence
that childhood stress and adversity are associated with
The Possible Link between ACEs and Dementia late-life dementia in aboriginal Australians (Radford et
The first theme that emerged from the analysis al., 2017). The obvious limitation of the study was that it
relates to the possible link between exposure to ACEs only included data relating to a relatively rural population
and the onset of dementia in late adulthood. The ACE of Aboriginal elders. In 2020, Tani and colleagues
study showed that exposure to ACEs (e.g., neglect, conducted a research project that they claimed was the
abuse, domestic violence, issues with caregivers such first study to examine the association between adverse
as mental illness, substance misuse, death, divorce, or childhood experiences and dementia incidents using
incarceration) before the age of 18 can lead to the onset a large-scale cohort study of “older Japanese people”
of negative conditions in later life (Felitti et al., 1998). (Tani et al., 2020, p. 8). The findings of their large-scale
These conditions include mental health issues such as study (17,412 persons) revealed that “having three or
anxiety and depression, which can lead to a lifestyle more adverse childhood experiences was associated with
marked by isolation, poor diet, lack of exercise, or the increased dementia risk among older Japanese adults” (p.
adoption of health risk behaviors. These behaviors 1). The association was weaker after adjusting for social
include misuse of alcohol or drugs and premature or relationships. This suggests that social connection may
risky sexual practices, all of which are the lead causes be a factor that can influence the link between adverse
of chronic disease and even early death in adulthood experiences in childhood and the onset of dementia in
(Felitti et al., 1998). It is worth noting that these factors later life. The findings in this study are important because
also negatively impact overall brain health (Tani et al., they suggest that preventing or reducing ACEs in the first
2020). The ACE study used a straightforward scoring place or helping the victims of these experiences to heal
method which became known as the ACE Score (a may provide a pathway toward preventing or delaying the
measure of reported exposure to 10 different types of onset of dementia in later life. However, the study had
adversity in childhood) to determine the extent of each limitations in that it used retrospective surveys, which
of the study participant’s exposure to childhood adversity. are vulnerable to recall bias, and the findings may not be
The major findings of the ACE study were that ACEs generalizable to other cultures.
are (a) common, (of the 17,337 predominantly white, More recently, Schickedanz and colleagues (2022)
educated, middle-class participants surveyed, almost claimed that their study is the first to examine the
two thirds reported exposure to at least one ACE), (b) association between ACE scores and “a positive dementia
interrelated (e.g., exposure to caregiver substance abuse screen” among a national sample of older adults in the
often also involves exposure to physical abuse), and (c) United States (p. 2399). They found that a higher number
a common pathway toward negative behaviors, which of ACEs was associated with an increased possibility of

70 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

screening positively for dementia. They say that their for elderly and dementia care because if adverse
findings were not unexpected given the fact that the childhood experiences are associated with an increased
ACE study showed the correlation between exposure to susceptibility to developing dementia, then it follows
adversity and future vulnerability to chronic diseases. that (a) an appropriate evidence-based intervention
They claim that the risk of dementia is affected by “early strategy is needed to identify elders who may not have
life stress” as well as sociodemographic and other factors dementia yet but who are at a high risk of developing it
including genetic predisposition (Schickedanz et al., because of exposure to trauma in their childhood, and (b)
2022, p. 2401). In an effort to back up this claim, they in communities of people who already have dementia,
state that the association between ACEs and the risk for some are likely to have experienced adversity or trauma
dementia found in their study provides further evidence in childhood. Therefore, staff working with them will
of the long-lasting and detrimental impact of exposure need to be capable of incorporating a trauma-informed
to adversity and trauma in childhood on early brain lens into their daily caring practices. This will involve
development and function. They further claim (referring understanding the basics of how trauma can impact the
to Perry & Pollard, 1998) that ACE score-related dementia mind and the body. It will involve being aware of such
risk may be an enduring consequence of “adaptive things as the workings of the stress response system, the
neurodevelopment” (in response to neuroactivation role of adaptive responses, and the problem of trauma
that impacted the formation of certain neural networks) triggers. It involves recognizing how triggers (which could
in the formative years, arising directly from exposure to take the form of a memory, a color, a smell, a sight or a
adversity or trauma (Schickedanz et al., 2022, p. 2401). sound) can have an adverse impact on an individual and
They further point out that ACE scores have been shown learning how to reduce or eliminate them, if possible.
to be associated with social isolation and they suggest that
there might be “a domino effect” beginning with exposure Montessori’s Insights into the Risks Posed by
to childhood adversity, which can lead to attachment Childhood Trauma to Later Physical and Mental
problems and difficulties with relationships in adulthood, Health
tending towards an increased risk of “social isolation” The second theme that emerged from the analysis
and dementia in the later years (Schickedanz et al., 2022, relates to Montessori’s insights and concerns in relation
p. 2402). Limitations in the study included the fact that to the dangers of unaddressed childhood trauma on
a person’s ACE score does not indicate the severity or later adult health and well-being. Maria Montessori
frequency of the individual’s exposure to ACEs, nor does it (1870-1952) was one of Italy’s first female physicians
take into account the age of the person when the exposure and a recognized expert in psychiatry (Babini & Lama,
occurred. Limitations also include the fact that a person’s 2000; De Stefano, 2022; Gutek & Gutek, 2016; Kramer,
ACE score does not give information on the presence or 1976; Povell, 2010; Standing, 1957). She had a profound
absence of resilience factors such as positive relationships interest in the area of mental health and the study of
with family, friends, or communities. Notwithstanding mental illness (Babini, 2000). In fact, the title of her
these limitations, the authors claim that their study is the thesis for her M.D. degree was “Contributo clinico allo
first U.S. study to actually show the association between studio delle allucinazioni a contenuto antagonistico,”
ACE scores and dementia risk, and they conclude with the or “A clinical contribution to the study of delusions of
admonition that “childhood adversity and trauma should persecution” (Montessori, 1897), which was published
be considered risk factors for dementia” (Schickedanz et a year after her graduation. The term “antagonistico”
al., 2022, p. 2403) and that a greater exposure to ACEs referred to what today would be called “paranoid”
is associated with a “higher probability” of a positive (Kramer, 1976, p. 48). Over 100 years ago, in a short
dementia screen in older adulthood (Schickedanz et al., publication, Montessori expressed her concerns about
2022, p. 2398). Similarly, Corney and colleagues (2022) the long-term effects of childhood trauma on later adult
concluded from their systematic review on the relationship health and well-being (Montessori, 2013a/1917). In
between ACEs and Alzheimer’s disease that adverse this publication, written during the first world war, she
childhood experiences appear to be associated with “an stated that trauma-affected children (especially war-torn
increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease,” although they state children) suffer “mental lesions” and “a weakening of
that further research is needed (p. 1). the entire nervous system,” which poses “a danger to his
The findings from these studies are of importance future life” (Montessori, 2013a/1917, pp. 38-39). Her
for all professionals involved in the design of models publication not only anticipated current findings on the

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 71

potentially devastating impacts of unaddressed childhood do not already have dementia to deter its onset. Maloney
trauma on later adult life (Burke Harris, 2019; Felitti et and Lahiri suggest that evidence from epigenetics “could
al., 1998; van der Kolk, 2014), but the vital importance of lead to ways to detect, prevent, and reverse such processes
the timing of the exposure to trauma. Her statement that before clinical dementia” is diagnosed (p. 1). Montessori’s
“the younger the age of the child when this lesion comes, insight, therefore, into the capacity of childhood
the greater the danger to his future life” (Montessori, trauma to negatively impact the future mental health of
2013a/1917, p. 39) anticipates the findings of several of individuals and even that of future generations is worthy
the world’s leading experts in childhood trauma. One of note. If we heed her advice to take clear and decisive
such expert, Bruce Perry, states that adverse experiences steps to protect the mental health of children, we may find
in early childhood “can alter the organization of ourselves on the path towards guarding against dementia
developing neural systems in ways that create a lifetime of in some individuals.
vulnerability” because “the brain is most plastic (receptive It is also clear from Montessori’s pamphlet published
to environmental input) in early childhood” (Perry, 2009, during the war years that she believed the “psychic
p. 245). Furthermore, Montessori’s statement that “when wounds” (Montessori, 2013a, p. 39) from childhood
this shock or lesion comes during the prenatal period, trauma, which include a loss of “mental energy and
it is even more dangerous” (Montessori, 2013a/1917, intelligence” (p. 39), may leave children exposed to
p. 39), anticipates the findings of leading organizations “great dangers” (p. 39). Some of these dangers include
that deal with child health. For example, a relatively a vulnerability to adopting behaviors that can lead to
recent publication from the National Scientific Council children becoming “juvenile criminals” at rates “far
on the Developing Child (2020) at Harvard University greater than at other times” (p. 39). She said that it is
emphasizes the risks posed by pre-natal trauma to life- “well known” that this vulnerability in the individual is
long health and well-being. evident after a great disaster (p. 39). It is arguable that she
Montessori also recognized that the harm caused anticipated (albeit in a modest way given that she did not
to children by exposure to trauma had the capacity to conduct any empirical studies on this issue) what Felitti
be “passed on to succeeding generations” (Montessori, and colleagues were to discover about the link between
2013a, p. 38). In this respect one could argue that she exposure to adversity and trauma in childhood, and later-
anticipated the relatively new science of epigenetics, life susceptibility to adopting behaviors that can lead to
(although her understanding of this area of science chronic illness and even early death, as outlined in the
would necessarily have had to be more intuitive than groundbreaking ACE study (Felitti et al., 1998).
research-based). Epigenetic changes are modifications Montessori’s response to the problem of childhood
to DNA that regulate whether genes are turned on trauma was clear and carefully considered. She urged the
or off. This is interesting in relation to the onset of bringing together of experts in psychiatry, education,
dementia because, currently, research in the area of medicine, social work, and other related professions to
epigenetics and dementia suggests that dementia design an interdisciplinary trauma-informed training
may not be a suddenly occurring disease but rather a course to be delivered to professionals involved in the
gradual change in crucial cellular neural pathways that, care of trauma-affected children (Montessori, 2013a).
through the process of neurodegeneration, change a If Montessori were here today, it is likely that she would
healthy state into a dysfunctional state. For example, recommend a similar coming together of experts to
relatively recent research by Maloney and Lahiri design a trauma-informed course for persons involved in
(2016) on the epigenetics of dementia explains that as the Montessori approach to the care of people living with
epigenetic changes occur over time in response to our dementia.
environment, accumulated environmental hits produce
latent epigenetic changes in an individual. They claim The Montessori Method for Aged Care and People
that “these hits can alter biochemical pathways until a Living with Dementia
pathological threshold is reached, which appears clinically The third and final theme that emerged from the
as the onset of dementia” (p. 1). This theory has relevance analysis relates to the Montessori Method for aged care
for those offering a Montessori approach for aged and and people living with dementia. This theme has three
dementia care because, as prevention is better than cure, sub-themes: (a) the goals of the Montessori approach
the science of epigenetics may help aged persons who for aged and dementia care; (b) how the key principles

72 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

of trauma-informed practice are embodied in the core principles in aged and dementia care center on
Montessori Method for aged and dementia care; (c) the human need for work (engagement in meaningful
how the Montessori Method, when applied to dementia activities); independence (being supported to do as much
care, provides a sense of belonging and the strength of as one can with remaining abilities); respect for human
community—which are powerful factors in promoting dignity (being treated in ways that acknowledge one’s
healing from trauma. Before the exploration of these dignity, for example, by being offered choice); self-esteem
sub-themes, a brief background to the origins of the (promoted by helping an individual to accomplish tasks
Montessori Method as applied to aged and dementia care and maintain remaining skills); contribution (to the family
is necessary. or community one lives in); and intergenerational living
Almost 30 years ago, Cameron Camp, a psychologist (promoted where possible by liaising with local schools
conducting applied research in gerontology and to allow the elders to help children with their school
dementia, began to examine the materials, method, and work). In practice, the Montessori approach to dementia
environment, associated with Montessori education care focuses on supporting the person behind the
(Camp, 2010), and began to see “linkages” between dementia by identifying their interests, remaining skills,
Montessori’s approach and the translation of “concepts and abilities, and offering a choice of meaningful activities
in neuroscience” into practical interventions for persons that help to maintain and, in some cases, even build
living with dementia (Camp, 2010, p. 4). In 1996, Vance, on these skills (Phillips & Phillips, 2015). This is done
Camp, and colleagues published an article in Montessori (with the resident’s permission) in collaboration with the
Life in which the concept of using the Montessori Method resident and their family or friends who can often help to
as an approach to dementia care was discussed. Camp identify the person’s strengths.
was struck by the potential of Montessori Methods
as interventions to relieve “challenging behaviors” in How the Montessori Method, When Applied to Aged and
persons living with dementia (2010, p. 2). In 1999, Camp Dementia Care, Embodies the Key Principles of Trauma-
published the first ever manual outlining Montessori- Informed Practice
based activities for persons living with dementia, adding The second sub-theme relates to how the Montessori
another volume a few years later (Camp et al., 2006). As a Method embodies the key principles of trauma-informed
direct result of Camp’s research, the Montessori Method practice when it is applied to aged and dementia care.
for aged care and people living with dementia has now The 2014 SAMHSA document states that their concept
become established as a legitimate and helpful approach of a trauma-informed approach is “grounded in a set of
in which Montessori’s philosophies and principles are four assumptions and six key principles” (Substance
effectively adapted to the needs of persons living with Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, p. 9).
dementia. The four assumptions—the four Rs—are that a trauma-
informed organization realizes the widespread impact of
The Goals of the Montessori Approach to Aged Care and trauma; recognizes the signs and symptoms of trauma;
People Living with Dementia responds by fully integrating knowledge about trauma
The first sub-theme relates to the goals of the into policies, procedures, and practices; and actively
Montessori approach to aged and dementia care. resists re-traumatization of clients. The six key principles
The Montessori approach to aged and dementia care listed by SAMHSA are: safety; trustworthiness and
has several goals, the most important of which is to transparency; peer support; collaboration and mutuality;
improve the quality of life of elders and people living empowerment, voice, and choice; cultural, historical,
with dementia (Camp & Shelton, 2023). This goal is and gender issues. The first five of these principles were
achieved by creating low-stress prepared environments identified by Fallot and Harris (2009) in their seminal
for this plane of life in which respect for human dignity, work on trauma-informed services as being the essential
independence, and meaningful engagement is promoted principles of trauma-informed care.
and supported. It is also vital that all staff understand The Four Rs. From the published literature on
that these are factors of paramount importance Montessori Methods for dementia, it is not apparent
for the human being’s physical, social, emotional, that the four Rs recommended by SAMHSA for an
psychological, and spiritual well-being. The approach organization to be trauma-informed are being addressed
is based on six core principles that form the essence of in the training program manuals for students taking
Montessori’s discoveries about the human being. These training in Montessori Methods for dementia. However,

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 73

since one important aspect of Montessori programs for psychological environments promote a sense of safety
aged and dementia care is knowing the person, which and calm for both staff and clients.
includes knowing the person’s background, previous In a lecture delivered in Kodaikanal, India,
employment or occupations, interests and hobbies, Montessori addressed this issue of physical and
remaining strengths, and self-regulating habits, it is psychological safety in the context of the design of school
arguable that the four Rs could be more intentionally buildings for children. She said, “Our idea is to build
incorporated into the Montessori approach to dementia them so that they are psychologically satisfying, i.e., the
care. building should correspond to the psychological needs
The Six Principles: Safety. The Montessori of the children” (Montessori, 2013b, p. 11). She said that
approach to aiding people living with dementia promotes when we design buildings, we need to think about “the
a sense of physical and psychological safety in an older psychological contents” (p. 12) of each element of the
person by providing a continuous dose of “safety cues” buildings. For example, she said “the windows should
throughout the day in the form of the use of gentle be ‘psychological windows’ and not merely aerating
tones of voice, friendly facial expressions, and non- windows” (p. 12). Similarly, with regard to the gardens,
threatening body language. This continuous “trickle” she said, “The garden must also have certain psychological
of safety cues can help staff to calm persons (especially dimensions,” and she said it “should be well-sheltered
new residents) who may feel a sense of fear, resulting in from any dangers” (p. 17). Currently, photographs of
agitated behaviors (Couzner et al., 2022). These safety Montessori communities for aged care and dementia
cues have the effect of calming the amygdala (the fear show by their layouts that they are providing physical and
center in the brain) and dampening the stress response psychological safety to elders with and without dementia
systems (van der Kolk, 2014). People who have been (Brush, 2020).
exposed to trauma often see the world as an unsafe place; By using a trauma-informed lens when trying to
helping them to feel physically and psychologically safe is help a distressed older person, staff can avoid possible
a priority (Herman, 1994). misinterpretations of the source of a person’s distress.
Montessori gave copious instructions and This involves considering “What happened to you?”
recommendations to her teachers about their self- rather than “What’s wrong with you?” (Perry & Winfrey,
preparation (Montessori, 1936, 1964/1912, 1967/1949). 2021). This is particularly relevant to the area of personal
She wrote, “The teacher should study her own care for persons living with dementia. Couzner and
movements, to make them as gentle and graceful as colleagues (2022) recount the case of Mrs. G., a 94-year-
possible” (Montessori, 1967/1949, p. 277). In more old woman with Alzheimer’s disease who was admitted
recent times, two experts in Montessori Methods for to the hospital after a fall at home. They wrote that Mrs.
dementia also emphasized the importance of positive G. would become distressed, particularly during personal
body language both for the residents and for the staff care, and this distress was accompanied by verbal and
(Brenner & Brenner, 2020). They advise us to be aware physical aggression. They state that the staff could not
of things such as the way we greet the people in our care. identify the triggers for this behavior until a family
They remind us that “our smile and a positive attitude member disclosed that Mrs. G. had experienced sexual
can uplift the elders we care for” (p. 20) and that “the abuse in the past. Couzner states that the family and
simplest exchange can lead to the most profound moment staff then identified that Mrs. G. was triggered by having
of connection and joy” (p. 20). While positive body personal care delivered by male staff and she found it
language is important for any person with dementia, disrespectful.
it is all the more important for persons with dementia Trustworthiness and Transparency. The
who have also been affected by trauma because people Montessori approach to aiding people living with
who have experienced trauma “tend to have problems dementia promotes trustworthiness and transparency
accurately reading social cues” (van der Kolk, 2003, p. by involving the residents in decisions about their daily
299) and, consequently, they often “over-read, (mis- routines and activities and by involving family members
interpret) non-verbal cues” (Perry, 1999, p. 10), and in the care of their relative. Montessori was remarkable
wrongly interpret innocent facial expressions and body in that from the outset of her work with children, she
language as being threatening. Montessori communities involved family members and specifically arranged for the
for people living with dementia must consider and mothers to talk with the directress, giving her information
address where necessary how their physical and concerning the home life of the child and receiving

74 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

helpful advice from her (Montessori, 1964). dementia is the ability to read” (p. 33). The Montessori
Peer Support. The third principle regards how approach also fosters listening to the voice of residents,
the Montessori approach to aiding people living with and it involves them in shared decision-making. Finally,
dementia promotes peer support by giving opportunities it is an approach that provides choice by laying out
to residents to work together on everyday tasks such as materials in a manner that makes them attractive, inviting,
washing dishes, preparing snacks, and raking leaves in and accessible. This exactness in the layout enables a
the garden. During these joint activities, residents have person to choose which materials they wish to work with.
natural opportunities (as opposed to formally organized Brenner and Brenner (2020) show that the provision of
opportunities) to talk with peers and share experiences, choice allows for a feeling of being in control, which can
both good and bad. It also promotes peer support result in a reduction in anxious or frustrated behavior.
by giving opportunities to residents to have positive They explain that by giving someone a choice, large or
relational interactions with staff members, which may lead small, you are giving them a sense of autonomy, a feeling
to opportunities for a staff member to share experiences of dignity and respect.
with a resident. Most people experience such things as the Cultural, Historical, and Gender Issues. The final
loss of, or illness in, a loved one, and often it is therapeutic of the six principles, the Montessori approach to caring
when a staff member (whose familiar experience makes for people living with dementia actively acknowledges
them a peer) shares their story of grief or loss with a and respects cultural, historical and gender issues. Since
resident. the Montessori Method is based on respect for each
Collaboration and Mutuality. The Montessori human being, a thoughtful and even reverential approach
approach to aiding people living with dementia promotes to diverse cultures and multi-cultural practices has always
collaboration and mutuality by collaborating with the been a part of the Montessori approach. Throughout
resident and their family to gather information about the her life, Montessori worked in many countries with
person’s preferences. Brush writes that staff collaborate peoples of diverse cultural and religious traditions, and
with the elder to create a “Meaningful Engagement she embraced them and regarded herself as a citizen of
Plan within two weeks of the individual’s move onto the world. This respect for diverse cultures is replicated
the community” (Brush, 2020, p. 9). The plan is used in Montessori communities for aged and dementia care
as a guide for care partners to ensure that each person through the honoring of the customs, festivals, art, music,
is participating daily in individualized activities and and culinary dishes of different cultures. In Camp’s
meaningful roles (Brush, 2020). Additionally, by beautiful book Hiding the Stranger in the Mirror, he tells
involving all staff members in the elder’s “Meaningful a very touching story of an Aboriginal lady who was
Engagement Plan,” the care approach, according to described by staff at her facility as being very “resistive”
Brush, becomes a community-wide effort wherein all to taking a shower (Camp, 2012, p. 30). He says, “the
staff members, having been educated in the Montessori staff member then visited the village where her resident
philosophy, can collaborate to help the elder person had lived and came back with a plan” (p. 30). The plan
to experience well-being. This well-being is most involved leading the resident outside where she happily
successfully achieved when staff members work together sat on a rock with screens around her and with the aid of a
to introduce, support and prompt elders with self-chosen garden hose, washed herself in keeping with the customs
activities and self-chosen roles when needed (Brush, she had used for years in her former home. Camp states
2020). that “there were no more ‘problems’ regarding the
Empowerment, Voice, and Choice. The fifth resident keeping clean” (p. 30).
principle regards how the Montessori approach to caring Montessori lived through two world wars and several
for people living with dementia promotes empowerment, other conflicts, and she was very much aware of the
voice, and choice. It is an approach that empowers a impact of historical trauma on human beings, especially
person by focusing on their preserved strengths. For in their later life (Montessori, 2013a). She devoted much
example, persons with dementia may have lost the ability of her adult life to promoting environments that nurture
to talk but may still have preserved the ability to read. peace between individuals (Moretti, 2021), a legacy that
Camp explains that persons with dementia frequently carries on in the Montessori Method for aged care and
retain some abilities or “pockets of strength,” far into the dementia (Brush, 2020).
progression of their illness (Camp, 2012, p. 33). He says Although it is not widely known, Montessori was an
that an ability “that often remains far into the course of early activist campaigning for women’s rights (Babini,

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 75

2000; Babini & Lama, 2000). Early in her career, she Brush and Benigas (2019) reported an increase in positive
campaigned for the right of women to vote, to be paid a facial expressions in residents. In addition, the research
wage equal to that of their male coworkers, and to have showed that elders reported an increase in “feelings of
the same educational and professional opportunities as self-esteem and belonging” (Brush et al., 2018a, p. 4)
men (De Stefano, 2022; Kramer, 1976; Trabalzini, 2011). and that observational research data indicated “increased
Perhaps because of this, the Montessori approach has, engagement” in activities and the life of the community
from its inception, been an approach that is sensitive (Brush et al., 2018a, p. 42). These are very encouraging
to gender issues. Montessori Methods for aged care results indicating that Montessori Methods for dementia
and people living with dementia carries forward this have the capacity to positively impact the lives of persons
approach. Respect for gender issues is embedded in the with dementia.
core principles, especially the principle of respect for the
equality of men and women. Discussion

How the Montessori Method Provides a Sense of This paper offers an original contribution to
Belonging and a Strength of Community—Powerful Montessori research in that it examines connections
Factors in Promoting Healing from Trauma between Montessori elder and dementia care and trauma-
The third sub-theme of theme three relates to how informed approaches. To my knowledge, this is the first
the Montessori Method, when applied to dementia study to do this. Currently, the Montessori Method is
care, provides a sense of belonging and a strength of recognized as a legitimate and helpful approach to caring
community, which are powerful factors in promoting for elders and people living with dementia. This paper
healing from trauma. It offers an individual the warmth has shown that this approach naturally incorporates what
and sense of community or what Perry and Winfrey call are now generally recognized as the six key principles of
“the power of connectedness,” which has been shown trauma-informed practice. However, what is not clear
to be a powerful factor in bringing healing from trauma is to what extent the four Rs emphasized by SAMHSA
(2021, p. 254). Perry and Winfrey write, “the brain is are incorporated into Montessori for dementia training
continually scanning the social environment for signals programs. To be able to realize the widespread impact of
to tell you if you do or don’t belong. When a person gets trauma, to recognize the signs and symptoms of trauma,
the signals—many of which are subconscious—that they to respond by fully integrating knowledge about trauma
belong, their stress response systems quiet down, telling into policies, procedures, and to actively resist re-
them they’re safe” (p. 263). In this respect, Montessori traumatization requires interdisciplinary knowledge about
Methods for dementia have a unique capacity to make the neurobiology of trauma, and the impact of trauma
a person feel that sense of community, that sense of on the mind and body. This kind of interdisciplinary
belonging described by Perry and Winfrey. knowledge can best be gained through attendance of staff
Relatively recent research shows that the Montessori at trauma-informed programs or by integrating modules
approach to dementia care is having a positive effect on on trauma and trauma-informed practice into the general
residents’ emotions and behaviors. Brush and colleagues, training of Montessori for dementia personnel.
describing the implementation of Montessori for While, initially, it might look as if the possible
dementia care, explain that the program aims to form association of childhood trauma with dementia
and maintain a caring community that is attuned to the complicates matters, it may well turn out to be the very
needs, interests, and abilities of the elders living in it by reverse. If we have an understanding of the neurobiology
creating an environment that is carefully prepared to of trauma, how trauma affects our brain and body, our
provide opportunities for choice, independence, self- stress response systems, the role of adaptive responses,
initiated activity, and success. Brush and colleagues say the problem of trauma triggers, and most importantly,
that elder persons’ lives are, therefore, enriched through what caregivers can do to help a person to regulate their
their engagement in routines, roles, and activities, which mind and body when they become hyper-aroused as the
fosters a sense of belonging and community and that this result of a trauma trigger (which could take the form of
promotes well-being (Brush et al., 2018a, 2018b). Brush a memory, a color, a smell, a sound, or a sight), we will
and colleagues also state that “elders reported significantly be in a better position to understand, empathize with,
more positive emotions” (Brush et al., 2018a, p. 42). and help persons with dementia. This is what Montessori

76 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

attempted to do when she began to understand the Maynooth University Department of Psychology and
neurobiological impact of trauma on children. She Social Sciences Institute. Her research focuses on trauma-
saw the importance of approaching trauma from an informed practice in Montessori environments. She can
interdisciplinary standpoint. This was what impelled her be contacted at bernadettemmphillips@gmail.com.
to try to organize groups of experts to come together to
share their diverse professional knowledge and devise References
trauma-informed training for nurses and teachers who
would work with traumatized children to help them to Alzheimer’s Association. (2023). 2023 Alzheimer’s
heal. disease facts and figures. Alzheimer’s and Dementia,
Currently, when we care for persons with dementia 19(4), 1598–1695. https://doi.org/10.1002/
who may have been exposed to childhood trauma, we alz.13016
cannot go back in time to give them the help they so Babini, V. (2000). Science, feminism, and education: The
desperately needed in the past. However, we may be able early work of Maria Montessori. History Workshop
to help them now. Trauma does not magically heal with Journal, 49(1), 44–67. https://doi.org/10.1093/
the passing of time, but often stays in the body at a cellular hwj/2000.49.44
level, triggerable at any time. However, recovery can occur Babini, V., & Lama, L. (2000). Una donna nuova: Il
when certain factors, which have proved to be healing, femminismo scientifico di Maria Montessori [A new
are present. As stated earlier, one of the most important woman: The scientific feminism of Maria Montessori].
of these factors is the healing power of community, and Franco Angeli.
it is this power that makes the Montessori Method for Bellis, M. A., Hughes, K., Ford, K., Ramos Rodriguez, G.,
dementia excel as an approach to dementia care. The Sethi, D., & Passmore, J. (2019). Life course health
combination of helping people to be as independent consequences and associated annual costs of adverse
as possible, treating people with the greatest of respect, childhood experiences across Europe and North
offering people meaningful activities, identifying, and America: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The
supporting people’s remaining strengths, allowing people Lancet Public Health, 4(10), e517–e528.
to contribute to the environment they find themselves https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30145-8
in, and building and supporting people’s sense of self- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic
esteem all combine to make Montessori for dementia analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research
communities unique in dementia care. This approach in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.
is trauma-responsive and healing by its very nature, but org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
its ongoing roll-out should follow Montessori’s lead by Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A
specifically integrating knowledge about the neurobiology practical guide. SAGE.
of trauma and trauma-informed practice into its training Brenner, T., & Brenner, K. (2020). The Montessori Method
programs. for connecting to people with dementia: A creative guide
to communication and engagement in dementia care.
Acknowledgements Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Brush, J. (2020). Montessori for elder and dementia care.
This research was funded by the Irish Research Health Professions Press.
Council under Grant Number: IRC GOIPG/2020/1500. Brush, J., & Benigas, J. (2019). Meaningful engagement
Many sincere thanks to the editor, copy editors, and through Montessori. Provider 47(12).
reviewers who work incredibly hard to enable the Brush, J., Douglas, N., & Bourgeois, M. (2018a).
publication of Montessori research. A special thanks to Implementation of the Montessori program in
Stephen Phillips for his assistance with technical issues. assisted living: positive outcomes and challenges.
Journal of Nursing Home Research Sciences 4, 42–48.
Author Information http://dx.doi.org/10.14283/jnhrs.2018.9
Brush, J., Douglas, N., & Bourgeois, M. (2018b).
Bernadette Phillips is an Irish Research Council Increased positive affect and life engagement as a
(IRC) funded scholar in Maynooth University result of Montessori programming. The Journal of
Department of Education, and the Centre for Mental Nursing Home Research Sciences 4, 64–70. https://doi.
Health and Community Research (www.cmhcr.eu) at org/10.1016/j.jalz.2018.06.556

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 77

Burke Harris, N. (2019). The deepest well: Healing the long- Delivering trauma-informed care in a hospital ward
term effects of childhood adversity. Marine books. for older adults with dementia: An illustrative case
Camp, C. J. (1999). Montessori-based activities for persons series. Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, 3. https://
with dementia (Vol. 1). Health Professions Press. doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2022.934099
Camp, C. J. (2010). Origins of Montessori programming De Stefano, C. (2022). The Child is the teacher. Other
for dementia. Non-Pharmacological Therapies in Press.
Dementia 1(2), 163–174. Fallot, R. D., & Harris, M. (2009). Creating cultures of
Camp, C. J. (2012). Hiding the stranger in the mirror: A trauma-informed care: A self- assessment and planning
detective’s manual for solving problems associated with protocol. Community Connections.
Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders. Center for Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D.
Applied Research in Dementia. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., Koss, M. P., & Marks,
Camp, C. J., Schneider, N., Orsulic-Jeras, S., Mattern, J., J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and
McGowan, A., Antenucci, V. M., Malone, M. L., & household dysfunction to many of the leading
Gorzelle, G. J. (2006). Montessori-based activities for causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood
persons with dementia (Vol. 2). Health Professions Experiences (ACE) Study. American Journal of
Press. Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258. https://doi.
Camp, C. J., & Shelton, E. G. (2023). Montessori org/10.1016/s0749-3797(98)00017-8
education-based interventions for persons with GBD 2019 Dementia Forecasting Collaborators. (2022).
dementia (pp. 535–543). In A. Murray, E.-M. T. Estimation of the global prevalence of dementia in
Ahlquist, M. McKenna, & M. Debs (Eds.) The 2019 and forecasted prevalence in 2050: An analysis
Bloomsbury handbook of Montessori education. (2023). for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The
Bloomsbury. Lancet Public Health, 7(2), e105–e125. https://doi.
Cations, M., Laver, K., Couzner, L., Flatman, S., Bierer, P., org/10.1016/s2468-2667(21)00249-8
Ames, C., Huo, Y., & Whitehead, C. (2021). Trauma- Gutek, G., & Gutek, P. (2016). Bringing Montessori to
informed care in geriatric inpatient units to improve America: S.S. McClure, Maria Montessori, and the
staff skills and reduce patient distress: a co-designed campaign to publicize Montessori education. University
study protocol. BMC Geriatrics, 21, Article 492. of Alabama Press.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02441-1 Herman, J. L. (1994). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath
Cations, M., Laver, K. E., Walker, R., Smyth, A., of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror.
Fernandez, E., & Corlis, M. (2020). The case for Pandora Press.
trauma-informed aged care. International Journal of Kramer, R. (1976). Maria Montessori: A biography.
Geriatric Psychiatry, 35(5), 425–429. https://doi. Addison-Wesley.
org/10.1002/gps.5247 Maloney, B., & Lahiri, D. K. (2016). Epigenetics
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). of dementia: Understanding the disease as a
About dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/aging/ transformation rather than a state. The Lancet
alzheimers-disease-dementia/about-dementia.html Neurology, 15(7), 760–774. https://doi.
Chandrasekar, R., Lacey, R. E., Chaturvedi, N., Hughes, org/10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00065-X
A. D., Patalay, P., & Khanolkar, A. R. (2023). Adverse Montessori, M. (1897). Contributo clinico allo studio
childhood experiences and the development of delle Allucinazioni a contenuto antagonistico [A
multimorbidity across adulthood: A national 70-year Clinical Contribution to the Study of Delusions of
cohort study. Age and Ageing, 52(4), 1–10. https:// Persecution]. Policlinico.
doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afad062 Montessori, M. (1936). The Secret of Childhood (B. B.
Corney, K. B., West, E. C., Quirk, S. E., Pasco, J. A., Stuart, Carter, Ed. and Trans.). Longmans; Green and Co.
A. L., Manavi, B. A., Kavanagh, B. E., & Williams, L. J. Montessori, M. (1964). The Montessori Method (A. E.
(2022). The relationship between adverse childhood George, Trans.). Schocken Books. (Original work
experiences and Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic published in 1912)
review. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 14. https:// Montessori, M. (1967). The Absorbent Mind (C. A.
doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.831378 Claremont, Trans). Dell. (Original work published in
Couzner, L., Spence, N., Fausto, K., Huo, Y., Vale, 1949)
L., Elkins, S., Saltis, J., & Cations, M. (2022).

78 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Montessori, M. (2013a). The white cross. AMI Journal, Geriatric Psychiatry, 25(10), 1097–1106. https://doi.
1–2, 37–41. (Original work published in 1917) org/10.1016/j.jagp.2017.05.008
Montessori, M. (2013b). The house of children, Lecture, Schickedanz, H. B., Jennings, L. A., & Schickedanz,
Kodaikanal, 1944. The NAMTA Journal, 38(1) A. (2022). The association between adverse
11–19. childhood experiences and positive dementia
Moretti, E. (2021). The best weapon for peace: Maria screen in American older adults. Journal of General
Montessori, education, and children’s rights. University Internal Medicine, 37(10), 2398–2404. https://doi.
of Wisconsin Press. org/10.1007/s11606-021-07192-8
National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., & The committee on
(2020). Connecting the brain to the rest of the psychosocial aspects of child and family health;
body: Early childhood development and lifelong Committee on early childhood, adoption, and
health are deeply intertwined. Working Paper No. dependent care; The section on developmental
15. https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/ and behavioral pediatrics. (2012). The lifelong
connecting-the-brain-to-the-rest-of-the-body-early- effects of early childhood adversity and toxic
childhood-development-and-lifelong-health-are- stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232–e246. https://doi.
deeply-intertwined/ org/10.1542/peds.2011-2663
Perry, B. D. (1999). Memories of fear: How the brain Standing, E. M. (1957). Maria Montessori: Her life and
stores and retrieves traumatic experience. In J. M. work. Plume.
Goodwin and R. Attias (Eds.), Splintered reflections: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Images of the body in trauma. Basic Books. Administration. (2014). SAMHSA’s concept
Perry, B. D. (2009). Examining child maltreatment of trauma and guidance for a trauma-informed
through a neurodevelopment lens: Clinical approach. https://ncsacw.acf.hhs.gov/userfiles/files/
applications of the Neurosequential SAMHSA_Trauma.pdf
Model of Therapeutics. Journal of Loss and Tani, Y., Fujiwara, T., & Kondo, K. (2020). Association
Trauma, 14(4), 240–245. https://doi. between adverse childhood experiences and
org/10.1080/15325020903004350 dementia in older Japanese adults. JAMA Network
Perry, B. D., & Pollard, R. (1998). Homeostasis, stress, Open, 3(2), Article e1920740. https://doi.
trauma, and adaptation: A neurodevelopmental view org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20740
of childhood trauma. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Trabalzini, P. (2011). Maria Montessori through the
Clinics, 7(1), 33–51. seasons of the “Method.” The NAMTA Journal 36(2).
Perry, B. D., & Winfrey, O. (2021). What happened to you? 1–218.
Conversations on trauma, resilience, and healing. Pan Vance, D. E., Camp, C. J., Kabacoff, M., & Greenwalt,
Macmillan. L. (1996). Montessori methods: Innovative
Phillips, S., & Phillips, B. (2015). Montessori works for interventions for adults with Alzheimer’s disease.
dementia: Everyday activities for people living with Montessori Life 8, 10–12.
dementia. CreateSpace Independent Publishing. van der Kolk, B. A. (2003). The neurobiology of
Povell, P. (2010). Montessori comes to America: The childhood trauma and abuse. Child and Adolescent
leadership of Maria Montessori and Nancy McCormack Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 12(2), 293–317.
Rambusch. University Press of America. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1056-4993(03)00003-8
Radford, K., Delbaere, K., Draper, B., Mack, H. A., van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score:
Daylight, G., Cumming, R., Chalkley, S., Minogue, Mind, brain and body in the transformation of trauma.
C., & Broe, G. A. (2017). Childhood stress and Penguin.
adversity is associated with late-life dementia in World Health Organization. (2023). Global Dementia
Aboriginal Australians. The American Journal of Observatory. http://globaldementia.org

Elder and Dementia Care, and Trauma-Informed Practices 79

Book Review

Powerful Literacy in the

Montessori Classroom: Aligning
Reading Research and Practice
By Susan Zoll, Natasha Feinberg, and Laura Saylor
Teachers College Press, 2023, 144 pp., 9 x 6 inches, US$31.95 (softcover), ISBN 9780807768389

Susan Feez, University of New England, Australia

Keywords: Montessori education, science of reading

Maria Montessori argued that the classroom she the corresponding sounds, learning to hold and control
established in 1907 for children under school age left a writing implement using Metal Insets, and composing
unsupervised during the day in an impoverished area of familiar words using a Moveable Alphabet. Montessori
Rome opened the way for “putting into practice those (1964) famously described how these young children
new principles of science” which were revolutionizing were soon using chalk to cover the walls and floor of
the “work of education” (Montessori, 1964, p. 1). She the classroom with familiar words before subsequently
noted that to “prepare teachers in a method of the rushing to read and act out commands written on little
experimental sciences is not an easy matter,” while, at cards.
the same time, she warned her readers of the dangers A century on, as young children in Montessori
of applying the experimental sciences to pedagogy in “a classrooms around the world continue to engage with
barren and mechanical way” (p. 7). For Montessori, a true Sandpaper Letters, Metal Insets, Moveable Alphabets,
scientific pedagogy was only possible if the classroom was and Reading Command cards, an accumulation of studies
organized as a social environment that enabled teachers into how children learn to read from across a range of
to observe children’s activity generated by materials disciplines has generated an influential body of research
and lessons that capture their interest (see, for example, evidence that has been dubbed the science of reading.
Montessori, 1964, p. 107). Lessons that captured the The science of reading is currently being used to shape
interest of the children in that first Montessori classroom education policy and mandated curriculum documents,
included tracing Sandpaper Letters and pronouncing especially in the English-speaking world. For this reason,

Journal
80 of Montessori
Journal ResearchResearch Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2
of Montessori
Fall 2023, Volume 9, Issue 2
the comparative analysis of the Montessori approach and Chapter 2 concludes by drawing attention to the
the science of reading presented in Powerful Literacy in overlapping principles that underpin both Montessori
the Montessori Classroom: Aligning Reading Research and pedagogy and instructional practices based on the
Practice will be welcomed by many Montessori educators. science of reading. This overlap embraces multisensory,
The book is organized into eleven chapters. The first systematic, explicit, and interactive teaching approaches
two chapters provide overviews of Montessori education alongside opportunities for the extended practice and
and the science of reading. Chapter 1 includes a brief repetition that lead to word recognition automaticity and
synopsis of the provenance and history of Montessori comprehension—the ultimate goal of reading instruction.
education with a focus on its early adoption in the The overview chapters are followed by two separate
United States following the first international Montessori parts of the book organized, as noted above, according to
training course. The authors review key features of the the strands of the Reading Rope framework. Including
pedagogy; these features include personalized instruction a short introduction and conclusion, “Part I: Word
and a systematic, structured learning progression across Recognition” comprises three chapters: “Phonological
all learning areas, as well as learning materials designed Awareness” (Chapter 3), “Decoding” (Chapter 4), and
to isolate difficulty and control error. This section “Sight Recognition” (Chapter 5). Similarly, “Part II:
also helpfully describes the features of the prepared Language Comprehension” has a short introduction and
Montessori environment in terms of five classroom conclusion, and five chapters: “Background Knowledge”
design elements found by Barrett et al. (2013) to improve (Chapter 6), “Vocabulary” (Chapter 7), “Language
student learning. This evaluation of the Montessori Structures” (Chapter 8), “Verbal Reasoning” (Chapter
environment through the lens of a comparatively recent 9), and “Literacy Knowledge” (Chapter 10). Each of the
evidence-based conceptual framework foreshadows chapters in Parts I and II are structured in the same way:
the use in subsequent chapters of the Reading Rope an introduction followed by a summary of the featured
taxonomy to align the Language component of the reading skill and how to teach it from the science of
Montessori curriculum with evidence emerging from reading point of view, a selection of materials and lessons
science of reading research. used in Montessori early years classrooms to address the
The overview of the science of reading in Chapter 2 skill, and, finally, exemplar activities for teaching this skill
begins by establishing what is meant by science of reading drawn from the structured literacy approach.
for the purposes of this book. This is an important step The three chapters of Part 1, mapped against
because, as the authors note, the term science of reading the word recognition strands of the Reading Rope
is interpreted in varying ways in the multiple contexts in Framework, cover knowledge and skills that, ideally, are
which it is used, including inaccurately in many popular taught systematically, are learned relatively quickly, and
contexts when the term is conflated with phonics only. are assessed comparatively easily during initial instruction
This chapter also provides an example of science of in the early years of school (Paris, 2005). In each chapter,
reading translated into practice, an acknowledgement the science of reading principles underpinning each of
that science “is one kind of thing (empirical findings these strands are reviewed in summaries that will become
and explanatory theories)” while “educational practice useful resources for teacher education programs or
is another (activities that promote learning in real world teachers wishing to refresh their knowledge. The authors
settings)” (Seidenberg et al., 2020, p. S121). ensure key terms are clearly defined while distinguishing
Chapter 2 includes a section that reviews three between commonly confused terms, for example,
seminal reports presented as the “foundations of reading phonological awareness, phonemic awareness, phoneme, and
research” (p. 34) followed by an explanation of the phonics. They also draw attention to the fact that while
Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; phonological awareness is the foundation on which
Hoover & Tunmer, 2021) and its elaboration in the sound-letter knowledge (decoding) is built, which in turn
well-known Reading Rope framework (Scarborough, supports sight recognition, as these skills develop, they
2001). The Reading Rope framework expands into reinforce each other, indicating that integrated instruction
their constituent skills the two main components of in all three is the most effective approach.
skilled reading identified in the Simple View of Reading: As the authors point out, the Montessori lessons
Word Recognition and Language Comprehension. and materials that support the word recognition
This framework is used very effectively to organize the strands of reading development are largely located in
subsequent chapters of the book. the Language area of the classroom and include iconic

Book Review 81
Montessori materials such as the Sandpaper Letters and of every dimension of reading comprehension. Relevant
Moveable Alphabet. The authors should be commended materials described in Part II include the three-part
for highlighting both sound discrimination in general classification cards and definition booklets that feature
as a skill that makes phonological awareness possible in every Montessori learning area as the culmination
and the Montessori Sensorial materials, through which of series of lessons that have their origin in concrete
children develop and refine this skill, including the experience (Table 6.1), alongside charts such as the
Sound Cylinders and the Bells. In the decoding chapter “Fundamental Needs of Humans” and the “Timeline of
(Chapter 4), the authors highlight Montessori materials, Life.” Chapter 7, “Vocabulary,” highlights morphology
specifically the Geometric Cabinet, Geometric Solids (word study) in Montessori classrooms, important
and Metal Insets, that build visual discrimination and fine because English orthography is morphophonemic,
motor skills to support the ability to distinguish between the alphabetic code not only being used to represent
and form the letters of the alphabet. They also describe sounds (phonemes), but also meaningful parts of words
in detail how, in Montessori settings for young children, (morphemes). Unfortunately, there is no mention in
the alphabetic principle—the relation between sounds this chapter of the study of etymology, which is such
and letters—is introduced during three period lessons a distinguishing feature of Montessori elementary
with the Sandpaper Letters. From this point, encoding— classrooms.
making words using the Moveable Alphabet—precedes Chapter 8, “Language Structures,” highlights another
and prepares for later decoding. distinctive feature of the Montessori curriculum: the
Chapter 5 provides an overview of the evolving series of Functions of Words and Grammar Box activities
use of the term sight words, originally used for words through which young children build both reading fluency
that are not easily sounded out but which, from the and knowledge about grammar using manipulable
science of reading perspective, is applied to all words materials. The authors could have expanded upon the
that a reader can recognize automatically on sight, role of the Montessori grammar materials as a bridge that
including high frequency words. The chapter provides leads children from decoding words to comprehending
a review of the approach for teaching writing and the meanings of connected text. They also could have
reading in English-speaking Montessori classrooms pointed out the ways interaction with the Montessori
developed by Muriel Dwyer (1977) to address the fact grammar materials support children’s development of
that sound-letter correspondence is far less consistent “Verbal Reasoning” (Chapter 9).
in English orthography than in Italian, the language By comparing the Montessori reading curriculum
used in Montessori’s first classrooms. The authors argue with instructional practices aligned with the science
convincingly that in light of science of reading evidence, of reading, the authors of Powerful Literacy in the
Montessori teachers in English-speaking classrooms may Montessori classroom have achieved their goal of helping
need to review some elements of this approach, including Montessori educators “see the familiar in a new way”
the notion of puzzle words. The original list of puzzle (p. 12). Realizing the full potential of this project,
words in Dwyer (1977, p. 14) includes words not easily however, is beyond the scope of one publication. The
sounded out such as I, the, put, was, one, are. Interestingly, matrix on Montessori Materials and science of reading
the examples used in Chapter 5 (that, them, this) can in the appendix demonstrates that there are many more
be sounded out quite easily and are better described as Montessori materials and activities to consider in terms
high frequency words, thus illustrating the shift in our of their alignment with the science of reading. Readers
understanding of sight words over recent decades, and looking forward to using this matrix should be aware that,
perhaps underscoring the need for Montessori educators unfortunately, the e-book version of this handy resource
to clarify the current use of the term puzzle words. is not easy to follow.
“Part II: Language Comprehension Overview” draws The wider Montessori community would benefit if
attention to language skills underpinning skilled reading, this book prompted further investigations into how or
skills that develop from infancy across the lifespan where Montessori pedagogy aligns with evidence-based
(Paris, 2005). As well as summarizing the five strands teaching practice. This suggestion is made with several
of language comprehension from a science of reading caveats. First, for every strand of the Reading Rope,
perspective, these chapters reveal how the knowledge- in addition to selected Montessori activities aligned
rich Montessori curriculum supports the development with that strand, the authors have provided exemplar

82 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

teaching activities from conventional classrooms that “a moving target” (Seidenberg et al., 2020, p. S121).
“might be considered for adaptation in Montessori Science of reading evidence, as is inevitable in the
classrooms to further support learning” (p. 49). Careful research space, continues to be reviewed, debated, and
consideration needs to be given to how these exemplars contested (for example, Castles et al., 2018; Shanahan,
might be adapted for Montessori classrooms given the 2020; Thomas, 2022; Wyse & Bradbury, 2022). In
study results reported in Lillard (2012) and Lillard and contrast, Montessori pedagogy remains a still point in
Heise (2016). This evidence suggests that high-fidelity the evolving history of educational practice, a history
Montessori programs result in significantly better student characterized by competing research agendas. Powerful
outcomes than Montessori programs supplemented with Literacy in the Montessori Classroom successfully aligns
conventional materials and activities. the science of reading evidence with Montessori practice
As an example, the question can be raised whether it and provides compelling evidence of Montessori efficacy
is necessary to supplement Montessori reading materials in the Preface (e.g., Culclasure et al., 2018; Lillard et
with commercial decodable readers of the type listed by al., 2017). Combining these factors with the resilience
the authors in Chapter 4. The Montessori curriculum of the pedagogy over more than a century suggests
already provides many opportunities for teachers to that Montessori education—when implemented with
provide individual children with tailor-made decodable fidelity—can provide mainstream education with models
text. For the Object Boxes and Word Reading activities, of effective practice worth emulating. For this reason,
Reading Commands, Functions of Words, Reading Montessori educators should not feel they must always
Analysis, and Grammar Boxes, rather than relying on measure themselves against current trends, but instead
generic, commercially available cards and labels, teachers might look for opportunities to demonstrate to those
can write their own, customizing the text to provide in the wider education community the effectiveness of
practice with decoding the specific letters and sounds Montessori practice, which has defied obsolescence for so
individual children have already learned while also long.
making meanings that reflect their current interests and
experience. Montessori teachers in earlier times prepared Author Information
cards and labels by cutting out and writing them by Susan Feez is an adjunct associate professor on
hand. With the advent of computer technology, it is now the Faculty of Humanities, Arts, Social Sciences and
much less time consuming to ensure children will always Education at University of New England, New South
find something new, personalized, interesting, perhaps Wales, Australia. She can be reached at sfeez@une.edu.au.
even humorous, and decodable to read in the baskets https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0977-2640
and boxes that house the Language materials on the
classroom shelves. In addition, Montessori teachers have References
traditionally made Little Books (Dwyer, 1977), created Barrett, P., Shang, Y., Moffatt, J., & Kobbacy, K. (2013).
especially for those in the class just starting to read. These A holistic multi-level analysis identifying the impact
Little Books, sometimes called First Books, are in effect of classroom design on pupils’ learning. Building and
decodable readers, even though they have been used Environment, 59, 678–689.
in Montessori classrooms from long before the term Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the
decodable gained currency. reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to
Aligning science of reading evidence to Montessori expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19,
practice should also account for the global reach of 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618772271
Montessori education. Many children in Montessori Culclasure, B., Fleming, D., & Riga, G. (2018). An
schools around the world are learning to write and read evaluation of Montessori education in South Carolina’s
in non-European, non-alphabetic orthographies. For this public schools. The Riley Institute at Furman
reason, Montessori educators need to be aware that the University.
science of reading research agenda, based as it is on the Dwyer, M. I. (1977). A key to writing and reading for
alphabetic principle, has been described as potentially English. Association Montessori Internationale.
insular and Anglocentric (Share, 2021). Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding,
Finally, looking past the science of reading reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special
foundation documents reviewed in Chapter 2, it is worth Education, 7(1), 6–10.
noting that the science of reading research agenda is

Book Review 83
Hoover, W. A., & Tunmer, W. E. (2021). The primacy of (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy (pp.
science in communicating advances in the science of 97–110). Guilford Press.
reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 57(2), 399–408. Seidenberg, M. S., Borkenhagen, M. C., & Kearns, D. M.
https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.446 (2020). Lost in translation? Challenges in connecting
Lillard, A. S. (2012). Preschool children’s development reading science and educational practice. Reading
in classic Montessori, supplemented Montessori, and Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S119–S130. https://doi.
conventional programs. Journal of School Psychology, org/10.1002/rrq.341
50(3), 379–401. Shanahan, T. (2020). What constitutes a science of
Lillard, A. S., & Heise, M. J. R. (2016). An intervention reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly,
study: Removing supplemented materials from 55(S1), S235–S247. https://doi.org/10.1002/
Montessori classrooms associated with better child rrq.349
outcomes. Journal of Montessori Research, 2(1), Share, D. L. (2021). Is the science of reading just the
16–26. https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v2i1.5678 science of reading English? Reading Research
Lillard, A. S., Heise, M. J. R., Eve, M., Tong, X., Hart, A., Quarterly, 56(S1), S391–S402. https://doi.
& Bray, P. M. (2017). Montessori preschool elevates org/10.1002/rrq.401
and equalizes child outcomes: A longitudinal study. Thomas, P. (2022). The science of reading movement:
Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/ The never-ending debate and the need for a different
fpsyg.2017.01783 approach to reading instruction. National Education
Montessori, M. (1964). The Montessori Method. Shocken Policy Center. https://nepc.colorado.edu/
Books. publication/science-of-reading
Paris, S. G. (2005). Reinterpreting the development of Wyse, D., & Bradbury, A. (2022). Reading wars or
reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), reading reconciliation? A critical examination of
184–202. robust research evidence, curriculum policy and
Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language teachers’ practices for teaching phonics and reading.
and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, Review of Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/
theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson rev3.3314

84 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Rediscovering the Child: Review
of Montessori Action Research
Studies 2022–2023
Kateri Carver1 and Sarah Hassebroek2
1
University of Wisconsin-River Falls; 2St. Catherine University

Keywords: Montessori research, action research, graduate education

Abstract: Action research is the term used for investigations done in the field, often by practitioners, and typically
with a pragmatic rather than theoretical purpose (Willis & Edwards, 2014). This type of research is a key part of
many Montessori teacher education programs, but the value of this important work is often lost to the field because
the papers reside in separate institutional repositories with limited indexing. The Journal of Montessori Research is
introducing a new annual review article series which features selected graduate student action research studies. The
authors of this recurring series of articles represent Montessori teacher preparation programs and other university-
based research roles. They will select studies that they believe are particularly high quality and relevant to the journal’s
readers. We are calling this series of articles “Rediscovering the Child” to honor Maria Montessori’s seminal work
and to acknowledge that all Montessori teachers engage in an ongoing process of rediscovering the children in their
classrooms. When this process is formalized, action research is the result. This article is the first in the series and
highlights six studies from University of Wisconsin-River Falls and St. Catherine University. In the coming issues, we
will likely refine some aspects of our selection and review processes and expand the programs represented.

In the first chapters of Discovery of the Child, unlearned. But since we are constantly hampered
Montessori (1967) recounts the experiences leading by our habits and prejudices, I never thought of
up to her most noteworthy work in the first Casa dei applying these same methods on preschool children.
Bambini. After explaining that she was a student of The opportunity of doing so came to me by pure
philosophy and took courses in experimental psychology, chance. (p. 33)
she stated,
Reading like a personal journal, she described the ideal
I wanted to experiment with the various methods opportunity that the San Lorenzo housing project
used successfully by Seguin with children when they presented to develop a scientific method for discovering
first came to school at the age of six untrained and the child. She continued,

Journal of Montessori Research Rediscovering the Child 85

Fall 2023, Volume 9, Issue 2
This ambitious idea of being able to help in man’s the new Montessori Teacher Education Program that
development through scientific methods of education during she founded at the University of Wisconsin-River Falls
that period of life in which his intelligence and character are (UWRF; Ward & Miller, 2019). Today, Ward, who is
being molded had not struck me despite my keen interest in also the recipient of the American Montessori Society
this question…[but] chance played its part. As a matter (AMS) 2024 Living Legacy Award, continues to support
of fact, chance, that is, a peculiar set of circumstances, must UWRF students with their action research projects.
almost always provide the spark to an intuition. (p. 34) These projects represent the culmination of the Master
of Science in Education (MSE) program that includes
Thus, long before the term action research was coursework to earn AMS Montessori credentials for ages
introduced, Montessori was engaged in systematic efforts 3–6, 6–9, and 6–12.
of experimentation and observation to support children’s UWRF explains the relationship between its focus
learning. on current research and Montessori coursework in the
Today, Mertler (2020) describes action research as MSE program by using the analogy of building the Pink
“grassroots efforts to find answers to important questions Tower. Starting with the largest cube, the foundational
and to foster change” (p. 11). In educational research, coursework commences with Montessori Philosophy
action research is particularly valuable since it offers and Pedagogy but then, immediately, the next “cube”
teachers an opportunity to reflect on and improve their of coursework integrates a research perspective and
practice. Action research is typically characterized by practicing research skills. In other words, all throughout
a few key features (Mertler, 2020). First, it most often the UWRF MSE Montessori program, students are
employs qualitative research methods, which emphasize constructing their own towers including both research
the unique context and circumstances under study rather and credentialing content. The entire master’s program
than generalizability to a larger population. The practitioner- builds and develops the action research skills needed
researcher employing action research methods also deeply for the final paper which more than meets AMS’s
considers their own participation in the classroom dynamic yearlong teaching practicum project requirement for
because they are both a practitioner and a participant. the credential. For example, in their first course, UWRF
Finally, action research necessarily includes reflection so graduate students gain familiarity and fluency with
that educators “critically think about their actions and American Psychological Association standards for
interactions, confirm or challenge ideas, and take risks” scholarly writing, Montessori philosophy and pedagogy,
(Miller, 2011, as cited in Mertler, 2020, p. 16). In Montessori and read contemporary neuroscience research. In the
teacher preparation programs, formal action research serves second semester, the observation course addresses the
two main purposes: a) to inform the practitioner of the role of self-reflection as it pertains to both action research
research question under consideration and b) to inform methodology and the Montessori Method. In this
other practitioners who may have similar circumstances and same course, graduate students design a qualitative or
contexts. quantitative instrument to measure an identified need in
The authors of this article represent two university- their classrooms. Then, they use the instrument, code the
based Montessori teacher preparation programs in the data, and confront the decisions of how to best represent
United States, and we are pleased to feature a small number this data. Through specifically designed and carefully
of the excellent studies completed by students in our sequenced assignments like these, the UWRF MSE
programs over the past two academic years that we believe Montessori program intersperses research skills, critical
will be of particular interest to the readers of this publication. inquiry, and current literature throughout the Montessori
Each of the sections below provides overviews of the credential graduate school experience. During the 2020
purpose and role of action research in the respective graduate revision of the UWRF MSE Montessori program’s
program and of the design and results from three individual mission, vision, and values, the tagline the intersection of
studies performed by students. authentic Montessori and research emerged and will be
used in informational materials in the future.
University of Wisconsin-River Falls The three papers featured here represent well-
designed and executed action research projects done at
In 2012, Gay Ward, professor of children’s literature, three different levels: 3–6, 6–9 and 9–12.
chose to integrate the action research methodology into

86 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

Moats, E. (2023). Together in one spirit: The effects of Kruchten, M. (2023). Student experiences during
a Montessori classroom team’s spiritual preparation unstructured play periods [Master’s paper, University
on classroom harmony [Master’s paper, University of of Wisconsin-River Falls].
Wisconsin-River Falls]. http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/84609
http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/84590 In an urban charter school with a significant
Moats, an Early Childhood teacher, and her team population of children with special needs, Kruchten
came to powerful conclusions about their teaching examined the implementation of “choice play time” at the
practice through an action research project. Moats, who end of the day in her Lower Elementary classroom. Her
set out to study the spiritual development and its impact study challenged existing beliefs about allowing figurines
on the learning environment, aimed to identify traits from home and play items such as sunglasses and play
and behaviors of leaders and colleagues that support the phones in a Montessori classroom. Kruchten made
healthy spirituality necessary for a harmonious classroom. some surprising and important conclusions about items
Through an innovative collection of instruments such as brought from home: they were clear supports for self-
pre/post surveys, an interactive video journal application regulation, community building, and meeting the needs
called Marco Polo, classroom observations, and a photo of individuals. This action research project concluded that
journal, she concluded that her connection to colleagues, in this teacher-researcher’s population, a play period with
children, and families increased through intentional tangible objects aided social emotional skill development,
communication, both in times of ease and flow as well as was therapeutic, and promoted self-regulation skills.
in times of challenge. Acceptance of cycles of joyful and
difficult times also contributed to the development of the St. Catherine University
team’s shared spirituality.
The Montessori Education and Leadership program
Bladow, J. L. (2022). Supporting evidence-based writing (formally, AM2) at St. Catherine University was created
in the Upper Elementary Montessori classroom: The to support teachers earning a Montessori credential by
interplay of the dynamic guide and original materials awarding university credits for Montessori coursework,
[Master’s paper, University of Wisconsin-River Falls]. which could then be applied to a Master of Arts in
http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/83423 Education (MAEd) degree. The program leverages the
Bladow, an Upper Elementary Montessori teacher deep learning and comprehensive nature of teacher
in a public Montessori setting, witnessed her students education programs accredited through Montessori
struggle with both the Wisconsin Fast Forward exam Accreditation Council for Teacher Education (MACTE).
and state standard of evidence-based writing. This Graduate students complete their degrees with 16
participant-researcher designed an extensive series of additional credits built on the tenets of the Montessori
Montessori materials with color coding, modeling, Method as they pursue what Montessori educators
and self-correcting/self-monitoring components that call preparation of the adult ( Jendza, 2023), which
were used as tools in the 12-week action research includes courses on holistic practices, critical analysis
study. While the research was highly formative to of Montessori education, and educational leadership.
this Montessori teacher who was not new to teaching Students complete the program with a series of action
but rather new to Montessori, one of the greatest and research courses.
unexpected take-aways of the action research was that Action research was a clear choice for the research
her students’ self-perceptions as a “writer” or “not a methods requirement for the Montessori Education
writer” tangibly influenced mastery of the steps needed and Leadership program because Montessorians are
for successful evidence-based writing on a standardized trained in the art of observation. The intentionality of
test. After completing this paper, Bladow continued the action research elevates observation practice for graduate
iterative process of action research in her classroom the students who begin by creating an intervention starting
subsequent year and saw evidence of positive results on from an inquiry statement. They continue by articulating
standardized tests for this writing skill. a supporting theory and conducting background research
followed by implementing an intervention. The action
research process occurs alongside acknowledgment of
personal biases and a critical examination of current
practices and systems.

Rediscovering the Child 87

 Recent shifts in the action research approach at St. the study, but resilience wavered and declined over the
Catherine include moving away from a primary focus on a six-week period. Findings suggest that the effort to inform
problem statement to a new centering on areas of inquiry. and create new lessons can increase perceived efficacy, but
This shift allows a research process that is more open to systems are needed to better support teachers of color in
potential areas of study that are not necessarily rooted in engaging in this demanding work.
a negatively viewed problem. Transitioning away from a
problem orientation aligns with an asset mindset in the Anderson, D. (2022). The impact of discourse on math
classroom, which is rooted in the strengths of students, learning in Upper Elementary [Master’s thesis, St.
families, and communities. Finally, the action research Catherine University].
process supports Montessori educators in developing https://sophia.stkate.edu/maed/460/
their own grounding theory as education professionals. Anderson’s inquiry investigated the complexity
The studies highlighted here represent examples that of the Montessori mathematics curriculum in
illustrate the importance of practitioners articulating a Upper Elementary through exploring the efficacy of
theory that weaves throughout the research process. differentiating discourse methods to support math
learning through the lens of constructivism. This
Keller, K. (2023). Breaking bread: Co-creating mindful intervention encouraged students to apply discourse
eating practices in Lower Elementary [Master’s thesis, strategies and to engage in mathematical modeling. The
St. Catherine University]. research data measured the impact on student mindset,
https://sophia.stkate.edu/maed/503/ behavior, and participation in the subject. Findings
In this study, Keller began with a foundation of Social suggested that students’ engagement in discourse
Cognitive Theory and an inquiry statement about the positively impacted their mindsets toward engaging in
impact of multicultural culinary food on fear of trying math. However, Anderson noted that additional research
new foods in a Montessori Lower Elementary classroom. is required to quantify gains over an extended period.
The research involved food preparation and mindful Anderson’s research sheds light on the complexity of the
eating strategies with repeated exposure. The findings content area and the need to support critical thinking.
indicate that student involvement in food preparation The findings from this study indicate that differentiation
and educational activities minimized fear of trying new of discourse strategies to increase vocabulary, assist
foods in this setting. Keller’s work provides guidance in in problem-solving, and utilize visualizations or peer
best practices to introduce new foods while connecting support to assist in the cuing process help to aid learning
food to culture. However, Keller also provides clear with concrete manipulatives in this setting.
connections to grounding all our work in the student’s
cultures and interests and creating an environment that Conclusion
values new experiences to benefit all learners.
While we have provided links to the studies reviewed
Torres, K. (2022). Finding roots in the Montessori in this article on the respective institutions’ websites, the
social studies curriculum [Master’s thesis, St. Catherine American Montessori Society also includes submitted
University]. https://sophia.stkate.edu/maed/489/ Montessori action research projects in its online
This action research project used the culturally Research Library (2023). Although the library’s action
sustaining theory and antibias, anti-racist frameworks. research content is not comprehensive, the searchable
The aim was to determine if the teacher-researcher database benefits those who want to learn from existing
learning about her own culture followed by an equity research studies, especially their instruments, designs,
audit of a Montessori social studies curriculum conclusions, and study limitations. Finally, authors of
impacted her feelings of self-efficacy and resilience. comprehensive and well-designed action research often
The intervention was conducted over the course of six submit their studies for consideration for the Journal
weeks and included the researcher studying her own of Montessori Research or for poster sessions at major
history and culture as a Puerto Rican with ties to the Montessori conferences and events. The selection process
Taino Indigenous people and then creating culturally for acceptance at these venues is competitive so that only
sustaining lessons to augment the Montessori social strong studies are included. Consequently, these avenues
studies curriculum. The data collected suggested that the benefit both the researcher who is able to share further
teacher-researcher’s self-efficacy was strong throughout details about their work and for practitioners to learn

88 Journal of Montessori Research Fall 2023 Vol 9 Iss 2

about the challenges and solutions of other educators References
while they network, ask clarifying questions, and meet
other Montessori researchers from around the world. We American Montessori Society. (2023). Montessori research
encourage you to read further about the action research library. https://amshq.org/Research/Research-
studies featured in this article and to explore action Library
research available through other avenues. The next edition Jendza, J. (2023). Adult formation to transformation. In
of Rediscovering the Child is planned for the fall 2024 A. Murray, E.-M. T. Ahlquist, M. McKenna & M.
issue of the Journal of Montessori Research. Debs (Eds.), The Bloomsbury handbook of Montessori
education (p. 167–176). Bloomsbury Academic.
Author Information Mertler, C. (2020). Action research: Improving schools and
empowering educators. Sage.
†Corresponding Author Montessori, M. (1967). The discovery of the child. Fides
Kateri Carver†, PhD, is an assistant professor Publishers.
and teaches in and directs both the combined MSE & Ward, G., & Miller, M. (2019). Action research: A tool for
Montessori Teacher Education program and the EdD transformation. Montessori Life 31(3), 38–43.
in Montessori Studies at University of Wisconsin-River Willis, J. W., & Edwards, C. (Eds.). (2014). Action
Falls. She can be reached at kateri.carver@uwrf.edu. research: Models, methods, and examples. IAP.
Sarah Hassebroek, EdD, is an assistant professor
and director of the MAEd Program at St. Catherine
University.

Rediscovering the Child 89