Editorial

To Maria Montessori it was self-evident that her approach to education had a scientific base: it clearly shows from the title of her first book on pedagogy (1909), which termed her work as Pedagogia Scientifica*; moreover, if we realize that she had been trained for many years as a physician, scientist and anthropologist, we will know that she “grew up” on empirical methods. Empirical research bases its findings on direct or indirect observation to help describe and interpret reality.

Methodical observation is the pivotal element, and the key to science—the gathering of empirical knowledge. The researcher and scientist attempt to describe as faithfully as possible what interactions, what behaviours, what phenomena are being observed. Montessori always argued that she did not test preconceived ideas, but rather deducted her ideas from what was observed again and again. On the other hand, she emphasized that she would not have been able to understand the observed phenomena without her theoretical training**. In her early years she preferred the classical methods of exact measuring. Later she more and more turned to methods of understanding observation. She would encourage the new teachers to be scientists: the teacher should not lay a matrix over a classroom and expect the children to fit snugly into a mould. Instead, observation and interpretation of the individual child should always be the basis for the teacher’s work with the children, and they should be guided by practical experience on the basis of a theoretical training.

Empirical methods, observation and research are the main themes that run through this issue of Communications. The various articles provide insightful arguments concerning their importance, tell of research past and present, and make a connection to Montessori practice historical and topical.

Our first theme article “Montessori and Empirical Research—an Introduction” details how Maria Montessori set up an early research project at three Roman schools which was mainly anthropologically driven— it includes vivid descriptions of how Montessori implemented the methodology learnt from her anthropological studies, and demonstrates how she applied her training in the science of observation, measuring and noting facts and how this basic attitude continued to impact and direct her further thinking. The article also shows the change in Montessori’s way of thinking after her experiences in the Children’s House in San Lorenzo. She more and more recognized that pedagogy cannot be built on empirical research alone, but also needs other ways of obtaining knowledge as it is done in the wide field of humanities especially by hermeneutic methods.

In “Some Suggestions and Remarks upon Observing Children” Montessori provides the “proof” of her guiding principle. The article is the synthesis of two lectures that she gave on observation during her 1921 London course. It combines profound philosophical reflections on the value of observation, the fundamental points underlying it, whilst also giving some very concrete and practical examples.

“Researching Montessori: What Matters and Why” perceptively outlines how Montessori and her co-workers passed on her findings mainly through an oral tradition: by giving courses and public lectures. Jacqueline Cossentino traces some key trends in the history of research on Montessori and reviews two recent studies, advocating rigorous Montessori research across various disciplines. Clara Tornar argues along the same lines in her “Report on Recent Empirical Research on Montessori Education in Italy.” The author observes that after many years of neglect by Italian universities, the academic research of Montessori pedagogy has in recent years made a healthy come-back. The article pays particular attention to some pilot projects that have been concluded, and makes a vigorous plea for broadening the horizons of exploration.

Similarly “Recent Empirical Research on Montessori Education in Germany” sketches quite comprehensively the current “state” of Montessori research, whilst making some useful links to history. The main research project discussed here is VERA 2004, a comparative research project that tested the levels of 9 to 10-year-olds in the fields of Mathematics and German. The article also includes a summary of a recent empirical study carried out on furthering creativity through Montessori education.

The second contribution by Clara Tornar is “The Scientific Topicality of the Montessori Model” a lecture she gave last year at a Centenary Conference in Stockholm. She offers a precise description on the how’s and why’s of the Montessori model, and provides four main charts that show how—at various levels—input generates output in a Montessori setting.

In our Question and Answer Section, Kay Baker joins the ranks of the authors in this issue who address the importance of observation, and discusses how to use this tool in the Elementary classroom. Taking a very broad outlook, outlining the purpose of observation, she asks many pertinent questions and provides clear answers. The article offers a helpful and detailed insight into the practice of observation, and shows the teacher how she can observe her own role and self-monitor her work.

In our series “Cosmic Education lectures from the archives,” we are bringing you the fourth lecture that Maria Montessori gave in the winter extension of the 21st training course. She continues her descriptions of the interconnectedness of all organisms on earth, however small, and revels in the wonder of coral reefs and their creation.

In “Montessori and Tools for Life” the reader will meet Dutch mathematical logician Henk Barendregt, who from 4-17 attended Montessori schools. In this interview he shares his deep appreciation of Montessori education, and links some of the crucial “conquests” in Montessori to his love of Mathematics and Buddhism.

In conclusion, in “The Absorbent Mind” Paul Pillai sketches some of the cosmic elements of Montessori’s achievements. Similarly to her argument that all is connected and everything works in the service of our world, Pillai writes that Montessori’s ideas, methods and philosophy were fed by the society in which she grew up, and by the scholars and scientists that went before her. His argument culminates in his description of the power of the human mind.

We hope you will enjoy this issue and would be very glad of your feedback. You can contact the editorial board via [email protected].

* Il metodo della pedagogia scientifica applicato all’educazione infantile nelle Case dei Bambini (Città di Castello, 1909)
** Cf. Montessori, Maria, “The Two Natures of the Child” (1933) in Communications 4 (1995) pp. 4-9