Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

REVOLUTION IN EDUCATION

MONTESSORI AND ITS CRITICS (Bl" I'V.ED. I'IRANI.) .Tn last Tuesday's issuo The Dominion* published a report of a lecture by Miss Edith Howes, :uid a subsequent' discussion by members jf the Wellington ! Women Teachers' Association, on tho J principles of the Montessori system of j education and its application to our j schools, which should not be allowed to i pass without criticism, especially when n none of tiie speakers, except perhaps tho 5 lecturer, havo taught the system them- S selves or have hau much experience of l! schools where it is taught. I. do not intend to depreciate iho teaching abilities of any of the ladies referred to, and, so far as infant instruction especially is concerned, educationists are under, a debt of gratitude to Miss Howes, whose delightful essays for children have earned such a high place in their esteem. But when members prominent in a profession condemn an important innovation in their special sphere it is apt to discourage those who rre more humble 1 1 seekers after truth in_tlie same domain. J Those X have met who condemn the Montessori system have only a nodding acquaintance with it, gained from ]>ooks, which, however lucid, cannot possibly provide the human equation necessary to furnish a considered judgment. I admit it is difficult to criticise a lecture from a very much condensed report, but so far as it is possible to judge I should not think any of the ladies have Fern the system in operation in New Zealand, correlated with our State system, und if that be the case it seems a pity that their knowledge should be based only upon information available in "works on tho subject, a very faulty source when the raisnn d'etre of the lecture was to deal with the system as applicable to our own educational progress. far as the speakers who followed Miss Howes are concerned, their references to tho evstem would be laughable if it were not 50 lamentable to find folk believed' to be experts discussing a system of which they know comparatively nothing, although only seven hours' journey from them it is being carried on with extraordinary success. , Montessori and Our System. No system of education—and in this connection I mean by "education" the instruction, of pupils in tho art of how to gain knowledge—has yet been found perfect, and in considering Montessori relative to our State education system wo can only" ascertain its adaptability to that bogey of educationists, "tho syllabus," which may be dismissed with tho observation that the objoct of its framer seems to have been designed to cramp and confine the freedom of iho individual to instruct pupils in tho best manner likely to ensure good results relative, to the individual pupil. But before I endeavour to show how adaptable Montessori is to our education system, let m» briefly outline the objections formulated by those expert lady teachers to its in-' troductiou into our State schools. Objections to the System. Miss Howes's catalogue oi difficulties, iu tlie introduction ol tho system may briefly be described as:—Dearth of MonUsisun apparatus; the maimer in wliidi our schools are Duilt; the ..oise oaussd by moving tno requisite tables and i-iiairs, lvich-'resultaiic wearing' cliecc upon (.the teachers', .L presume j nerves; cue impossibility ot procuring ciiiiipiuent at the present" time \oxcept the liitlo teachers would maio themselves); btor'aga places tor tho equipment used; freedom 01 teaching to t lve tho children, movement; cultivation uf the right spirit in tuaciiers; ana supplying the right environment, physically and moutaiiy. ' Tub utliers wuo took part 111 tne discussion found fault nuth the use of tho system because; 'l'ho enilaren did not oi.'piy the knowledge tliey Had gained, too)' nccdeu to be more creative (Idiss Kuey); tne Montessori methods are not! altogether suitable to the needs, of tiio ] cnuureh in mis country, for one thing Madam Montessori did a great deal 01 ! wont among sub-normal children tlliss Ai'yursj; it was discreditable to the educational authorities uero that so littlo was Known ot tho system, and tcacuers should be sent to Australia, to study tno system In ere (Aliss Uoivdeswell). The Objections Answered. Are these objections teiuiblo. l ' I say . emphatically, "Mo." Their ioiution is tlie simplest thing possible, Let me take tno lecturer first. 1 know it is a common lallacy amongst many teaoners'wno know little or iiotuing ol the metliod to i believe that material is. everything, i'et all tlie apparatus necessary can be obtained iu i\e«r Zealand, and much of it made at a trifling cost by the teaclier.i themselves if tuey are fjithusiastio enough in their v.'orx, -to per iiW pupils being ample to meet tlie iusli outiay, outsuio oi iurniture; t-cnool t.ccoiuiuouation lor Montessori methods is no greater than is really needed ior health requirements, viz., la square :eet per pupil, und it tlie system is oniy utilised ior infants— thai is, up to and including Standard i—tno bUte could easily linu I tho money; noise ufiectiug nerves is mostly a matter of temperament, and I have known folk go almost crazy with the tearing of a piece of calico or tho ' crackling of a newspaper, but our experience has proved tuat ihore is no moro lioiso ol moving lurnitiu'o in a properly conducted Montessori class than, wiiero desks with jointed seats are used, and "nervy" teachers should ceruiiuiy havo nothing to do with sat ant classes. Freedom of teaching, the I'lgiit spirit m teacnors, and a good environment are exactly what ono will fimi in our Montessori school. .In regard to tho objections of the other speakers. The children do uppiy the knowledge gained, and they are creative—when properly lauglit; the , methods can easily bo adapted to tho needs of children in this country; and there is. not the slightest need to send teachers to Australia to obtain a knowlougo of the system best adapted to our needs. . livery contradiction made here is amply borne out by the experience of .the sys-. tem during the last two and a half years at the Central infants' School, WangaWhat We Claim for the System.

From the results obtainod we claim tlnit the adaptation of the Jlontsssori system brightens dull or backward children, removes the handicap clever children ar© under where class teaching _enliidv prevails, produces good writing, splendid composition, sound arithmetic, accurate spelling, wonderful freehand drawing, teaches them to be quiet, gentle, helpful, considerate for othei*. aud_ inculcates the acme of discipline, while they are passed through Standard 1 equipped with knowledge a year m advance of children of similar age taught under the ordinary system. Their creative work especially is remarkable, iou can select any child who has been two vears at the school, say seven years of 'n"C and be or she will limn a picture 011 the blackboard in coloured chalk, with a short composition about it, superior to the average pupil of 12 yearß. One great advantage discernible 111 the system seems to be the help it would be lo teachers in charge of "sole-teacher school®." The primer classes could be occupied with Montessori or self-teaching, needing little attention from the teacher, while the higher standards are being taught, and thus one of the greatest problems to teachers in such schools would be easily solved. How Did We Do It? It, has been a rule 011 the Wanganui Education Board-ami i. can speak with 21 years' experience—never to bo daunted by difficulties, but to believe they only exist to be surmounted, ff money is required, woitv the Minister of Education;'if ho fails to respond (and he generally* does) appeal lo the residents. If the yareslow in coming to the scratch, in-I crease the overdraft (ours was over JCSOOO a few years ago). A study of the Monteasori system showed there was something in it, but. to run it, successfully teachers acquainted with the system, suitable buildings, and the necessary apparatus wcro necessary. First, our Chief Inspector (Mr. G. D. Braik) was enconragod to go to Australia, the board paying a portion of his expenses, to investigate Montessori and agricultural education,

and his returned an enthusiastic advocate of bolji. Tho sum .of was required to build and equip a suitable schoolit was provided, but not by the UovernlnenU. Teachers acquainted with the system were required. Miss Alexander (now Jlrs. Hawk) was sent to Mi6s Simpeon's school at Sydney for six weeks to study tho system. Misses Blemierhassett ■alia Hall-Jones (assistants) going willi her at their own expense with the same object. Every assistance was given theni •there, end they returned full of enthusiasm i'o& the task of co-relating Montessori with our own education systc-ni. Somo of tho appartus was bought, a great deal mads by the teachers and pupil j teachers, and the special furniture was provided by the board. The problem to i be solved then was how best to adapt ; the system to our requirements without ! violating tho "syllabus fetish." Fortunj .ately Mr. Braik and Miss Alexander were j equally enthusiastic in desiring a satis- ' factory result, and they evolved an l| adaptation of the system, going so far I even as to include "freedom of teaching 1 so as to give the children movement," as Miss Howes expresses it, without disturbing the teacher's nerves. Nothing but success has resulted from the experimemt. The teachers are kindly, considerate, and attentive to the children from the moment the latter. enter tho gates to the time they leave. The attendance is about 300. Punishment is a thing alj most unknown, and the difficulty some- ! times is to persuade the children lo stop ; l work when the clock says so. We gfct I no special consideration from tho Minister or Education Department, only tho .oritinary capitation for children over 5 years—we admit them at 4 years—.md Aalk;, which "cuts no ice," although »he tttliool is largely utilised for the instruction of teachers in our district engaged in infant work, as well as Sisters of tli<9 Catholic schools, and teachers frim Auckland, Hnwke's Bay, \Canterbury, Otitgi), and Wellington (Ifarori, Island Bay 1 , and Berhampore Schools), who have all liven made welcome and every facility aQ'orded for studying our methods. Mrs, Hawk remained in charge of the school until tho system 'had been thoroughhr established, and Miss Blennerhassetfi is now efficiently carrying otttthe system inaugurated at the school. Wiii?)3 the Central Infants' Sch >ol is tho onljy one specially built and idapted for the' Montessori work, it would be unfair to numerous other teachers in this district to refrain from mentioning tho fact that they have devoted time and money fcc the system, and are doing a great deal', of efficient work in the samo direction, tat are hampered by the obstacles put I ', in the way of sufficient building accomodation by the Central Department and tlie National Government, even when local residents subscribe half the cost; moner being ( lavished -on nlmost every description of public building except educational ones, with, the hand cf a spendthrift, even in these war f ; mes. Certainly Montessori was recognised on the Government Estimates last year by the voting of a sum of JKOO (!) towards tho work for tho whole "Dominion, tat careful in/|uiry has not revealed any school indebted to such liberality as vet.

Vrobablv the Education Department is cogitating over the framing of regulations in regard to that venturesjmo Surely the duty of tho S'tato Inwards the rising generation necessitates this question bring dealt with immediately 011 n comprehensive basis, and -while it, mnv be that fossilised educationists disliko tlie introduction of anything likely to interfore with their restfuluess, if in a decided reflection 011 Parliament and the peo•nle they represent that, a question of such immense importance as education should be relocated to the siilnnli'nte position it now occupies in the* body politic.-

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19170827.2.61

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3174, 27 August 1917, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,967

REVOLUTION IN EDUCATION Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3174, 27 August 1917, Page 6

REVOLUTION IN EDUCATION Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3174, 27 August 1917, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert