I had an occasion to visit a Montessori school today; Oldest Boy is going to need to transfer out of the local Steiner School and go secondary soon. Where did the time go? Oh, yeah, I was doing a PhD.
The differences between Montessori and Steiner are like those between Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses — virtually indistinguishable to outsiders, but adherents to either system think they’re almost opposites. We liked Montessori, but we were put off by the focus on doing the tasks the right way. And in fact, whenever Oldest Boy’s Montessori friends would come over, they wouldn’t just play with toys, they’d sit down and very concertedly play with the toys until they had finished playing with the toys. Eventually we plumped for Steiner, but it was close.
To help you sort out the two, I present the facts about both systems, pulled from their own pamphlets.
| Montessori | Steiner | |
| This system of education was founded by | Maria Montessori, | Rudolf Steiner, |
| an amazing genius of the early 20th century whose work was inspired by | her work in science and medicine, and Catholicism | esoteric Christian mysticism, and Catholicism |
| and whose other contributions include | being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. | starting homeopathic farming. |
| Our style of education is designed to help the development of the “whole child”, especially their | intellect. | creativity and spiritual development. |
| On a typical day, students may learn about | syntax and math | painting and knitting, world myths and legends |
| by | choosing ‘jobs’ to do individually. | working as a group and playing in lots of water. |
| They may also | learn Italian | learn German |
| and engage in | abstract thinking | playing the recorder |
| while learning about | science. | gnomes. |
| Reading is | taught at the child’s own pace, preferably as soon as the eyes can focus | held off till age 7 or later, when the child has acquired his or her etheric body |
| and computers are | available in classrooms for students to do research. | evil. |
| Our classrooms differ from those of other schools in that they | are stacked from floor to ceiling with trays of cubes and marbles | are whittled from a solid block of wood, and are swathed in literally miles of pink gauze, for that ‘womb-like’ effect |
| and visitors will notice that the walls of classrooms feature | posters about science and nature. | pictures of Mary. |
| We are in a constant state of renovation because | state funding for alternative schools in Australia is pathetic. | state funding for alternative schools in Australia is pathetic. |
19 June 2006 at 10:10 pm
I’m really intrigued that a rationalist like yourself is opting for Steiner schooling – etheric bodies?! Not that I have anything against Steiner schools, just that I wouldn’t have imagined reading a post by you that included homeopathy and gnomes!!
One thing about Montessori is that she started her schools to cater for Italian street children; the poorest communities. That is why they are so rigid – specially designed to help chaotic children who have no structure. I find it somewhat ironic that it is largely middle class families who pay large sums of money to have their children schooled in Montessori methods nowadays. Funny old world.
Are Australian state schools really that bad?
10 April 2014 at 5:04 pm
It's funny because a lot of people in the UK think Montessori schools are too free. It depends on the teacher and the environment to be frank. The name isn't patented, so anyone can call themselves Montessori and do pretty much anything they want!!
20 June 2006 at 12:30 am
Dear Daniel,
I realise that this is a light hearted look.
I know of one eminent doctor who talked to gnomes. But he also wrote scientific studies on animals and human beings. In short he was a scientific thinker when it came to the natural world. (The late Dr. Karl Koenig.)
So yes, Waldorf is open to all science and should be based on science.
I know a man who has a doctorate in mathematics for ANU. He also sees fairies and lectures on the subject.
You may think is a bit “brilliant mind” but nature beings exist or they don’t. Histories of all cultures around the world suggest that nature beings exist.
Steiner expected everything he said to be sujected to scientific testing- if possible:
There are many professional scientists who have worked on this over the years-
http://www.anth.org.uk/Science/history.htm
They still discuss this on the
‘anthropos-science’ list.
You left out the banks, hospitals, qualified doctors and other therapists, communities for the disabled, the Weleda and Dr. Hauschka companies- all based on Dr. Steiner’s work.
Pictures of maps and other scientific subjects are suggested for later years.
Many Waldorf Alumni have ended up working with computers- sheilding children at a young age is a help not a hinderance.
There are state funded Steiner schools in Australia.
-Bruce
20 June 2006 at 1:25 am
Hey, snowy.
State schools in Australia are great — it’s just that alternative schools seem to get lumped in with ‘private’ schools, and then they get underfunded because they think, “Oh, private! That’s those posh schools. They don’t need any funding — they’re doing fine.”
And yes, some Steiner schools are state-funded.
Which brings me to Bruce.
Hello, Bruce.
Um.
I do appreciate your input.
Um.
Are you saying you believe in gnomes?
20 June 2006 at 11:39 am
Of course I believe gnomes, Daniel. They believe in you so why wouldn’t you want to believe in them? As I said, I know of some brilliant people who believe in gnomes, and dottty ones too.
And yes I have some statues in the garden as well.
That should have been:
“You may think it is a bit “brilliant mind” but nature beings exist or they don’t.” You know, Russell Crowe….
Oh, and Marjorie Spock, the daughter of the child-rearing expert, Dr. Benjamin, also believes in gnomes.
Miners of course, often came across gnomes in their work. That is where we get the names Cobalt (Kobold or gnome) and Nickel (nixies).
Didn’t you know that? (or gnome that)
The word Gnome originates from the Greek word “gnome” meaning knowledge and intelligence. That is why only exceptionally intelligent people see them.
20 June 2006 at 2:52 pm
I applaud your blog!
Dissident JW member speaks out.
The core dogma of the Watchtower organization is that Jesus had his second coming ‘invisibly’ in the year 1914.Their entire doctrinal superstructure is built on this falsehood.
Jehovah’s Witnesses door to door recruitment is by their own admission an ineffective tactic. They have lost membership in all countries with major internet access because their false doctrines and harmful practices are exposed on the modern information superhighway.
There is good and valid reasons why there is such an outrage against the Watchtower for misleading millions of followers.Many have invested everything in the ‘imminent’ apocalyptic promises of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and have died broken and beaten.
—
Respectfully,Danny Haszard http://www.dannyhaszard.com
20 June 2006 at 3:24 pm
OK Dan,
I take back the leaving space for magic in life. If this is where it leads people I guess we just have to fall back on reason again.
20 June 2006 at 3:44 pm
The word Gnome originates from the Greek word “gnome” meaning knowledge and intelligence. That is why only exceptionally intelligent people see them.
Ah, that explains why I’ve never seen them. I confess I am not exceptionally intelligent. That’s why I demand a high standard of evidence so I don’t get fooled by every belief that comes down the pike.
So if you have any adequate evidence of the little guys, please provide a link. That means physical evidence that anyone can observe and examine, not testimonials or appeal to prevailing belief. Otherwise, I’ll have to lump it on the pile with fairies, gods, or the FSM.
20 June 2006 at 4:47 pm
So what does skepticism + optimism =?
20 June 2006 at 5:46 pm
A pretty good outlook + a difficult balancing act.
20 June 2006 at 6:29 pm
I see a linear equation. Let me see if I can simplify.
20 June 2006 at 7:12 pm
Well, now we are getting somewhere. Daniel, are your boys allowed to believe in gnomes? If so, this is extremely good news. I had a healthy belief in gnomes and faeries into adolescence, and it didn’t stop me from eventually becoming a scientist and atheist, so no harm done. It may have caused me to retain my “purity” longer than my peers, but now I’ve got a kid, so no harm done there either.
Speaking of kids, we are also thinking about Montessori for our little dear, but are afraid that he’ll either a) be encouraged to sensitively retreat into his own world, or b) tear their ordered world to shreds during his high-energy phases. There’s a part of me that doesn’t think it’s right for little kids (boys) to be so studious so early. Dan Savage had that issue with many preschools – the boys weren’t allowed to be boys. Looking at the pictures in Montessori books, I see no jumping, no fits of anger, no running around, no energy of any kind other than mental, and I think that ignores a pretty basic part of my son. Maybe the men present can comment on my insensitive gender stereotyping?
For Jeff: it’s L. But both B and I are living in Seattle. You too? However, I’m moving to Portland in about 2 months.
From the Marine Reserve from last Thursday: Don’t underestimate the impact of a Cousteau. Jacques is the initial reason I got into oceanography in the first place. But here’s why I think he was able to protect this place: it’s far away. It’s pristine because people don’t use it, so it costs nothing to give it up. He seems to have made the decision quickly – the “gut” thing again – so pretty pictures didn’t hurt. Also, I heard anything about it until NOAA gave the announcement, so it didn’t seem like caving in to or compromising with an established environmental cause.
20 June 2006 at 9:15 pm
I was hoping that was you L. I’m in Olympia so you’ll just be moving from my right to my left. (Head west young man)
Listening to some NPR it sounds like it was actually Clinton that wanted to do this first but couldn’t make the deal go through because of fishing industry concerns. So he made it a sanctuary instead allowing for localfishing concerns. Recently the governer of the islands got back on the National Park bandwagon and made a deal with parties involved. So, I think all Bushie had to do was sign a peice of paper.
21 June 2006 at 2:14 am
Dear Daniel,
I never make it a practice to try and do another man’s thinking for him.
A dangerous practice indeed!
And frowned upon by gnomes everywhere.
23 June 2006 at 5:02 am
OK, I just couldn’t keep my Montessori mouth shut…WE ARE NOT RIGID!! We believe in “FREEDOM WITHIN STRUCTURE” which in today’s permissive parenting environment, is a very important concept. Yes, there must be boundaries so that children feel (emotionally and physically) safe, but a good Montessori school allows for a wide freedom of choice within those boundaries. Plenty of modern Montessori schools also provide ample time for creativity and dramatic play in addition to working with the amazingly beautiful and stimulating traditional materials. And you also left out the Montessori focus on peace education and the “Cosmic Curriculum” which is a conerstone of our philosophy. I respect your choice of schools, but I hate seeing Montessori portrayed in such a biased way.
Also, for dobbins remarking about “boyish” energy–the Montessori method is not meant to repress energy, but simply to direct it into constructive outlets. For example, instead of just aimlessly running around in the classroom (which is entirely appropriate during outdoor time) we direct the children to certain tasks that incorporate large muscle movement, such as walking the “labyrinth”, builing the “pink tower” hammering nails, etc. Children often behave “wildly” when they are bored, and believe it or not, children have a natural desire for “work” (read: productive endevors) that just needs an outlet.
23 June 2006 at 6:55 am
Fantastic! Thanks for the extra information. I was hoping a Montessori person would show up.
About the ‘rigid structure’ — whenever I’ve been to a Montessori school, I’ve noticed that children do get to choose what they want to do to a great extent (which I think I mentioned). What do you say about the idea that there’s a ‘right way’ to do the jobs? Would that be a misrepresentation?
Sounds like you’ve heard the ‘rigid’ argument a few times, btw.
10 April 2014 at 5:17 pm
Hi Daniel, I am a Montessori teacher, and I switched from being an Engineer to be a Montessorian while I was looking for ways to best parent my own children. I loved the philosophy, but interestingly one of the first things that bothered me about Montessori was the freedom. In fact, I was very skeptical as to how this would work out in a classroom setting. Now that I've worked in a Montessori school for long, I can see how there is a perfect balance of freedom and structure. The goal is freedom, but within boundaries. And the boundaries are only for the sake of safety and well-being of the whole classroom. Like I said, since Montessori didn't patent her method, just about anyone can call their school 'Montessori' and do anything they want in it.
Montessori believed that the ultimate goal of each child was independence. "Help me to do it myself", and she was for supporting this inner drive to self-construct and form oneself. Her pedagogy was a scientific one that was built on years of observing children.
In a real Montessori school, you don't correct a child while he using the material, unless he is destroying it or causing harm to someone else.
So much to say, but if you're interested in a scientific discourse, check out the book "Montessori: The Science Behind the Genius" by Angeline Lillard.
31 March 2008 at 4:16 am
Yeah some of the more purist Montessori schools do give the impression that to wipe a table can only be done if all the wipes are in the same direction etc….. However, through my work as a Montessori teacher I think that the key differences between these two methods is that one prepares the child for independence and the real world, while the other tries to wrap them up and protect them from ever entering it. In a Montessori classroom the child will learn how to pour, cut, glue, spoon, button, zip etc etc. They learn how to look after themself and learn all the preparatory exercises for schooling. My children leave the classroom at age 5 or 6 knowing how to multiply, read, write, add and subtract. They can make choices, can sit and concentrate and already have a deep understanding of the world around them. We have to prepare our children for the real world or how can we later turn to them and ask them to be a functional, contributing member of society. Oh and there are not shelves to the ceiling in a Montessori classroom stacked with trays of marbles and cubes. Maria Montessori was the first person to theorise that we should have child sized furniture in the classroom and based on that the shelves in such a class would not be higher than the child can reach. Furthermore, each tray has a well set out job on it for the child to do because Montessori believed that in a well prepared environment the child could teach himself without constant interference from adults. Many of the jobs are self-correcting so that the teacher does not have to tell the child they are doing it wrong. If you think about that it makes sense because we would all much prefer to correct ourself rather than have someone tell us “no you have done it all wrong, let me tell you how to do it”….
In relation to state schools in Australia i would say they are great but not before about year 2. A pre primary class (age 4/5)tends to learn a letter a week, in my Montessori classroom they tend to know how to read three letter words by the time they turn three!
30 April 2008 at 11:45 pm
Hello… i don’t know about gnomes (only found them in Enid Blyton’s story books) but I definitely wouldn’t encourage reading of storybook characters in such a realistic manner. Not at least till they are much older.
I remember many years ago, i had a five year old child who refused to participate in a fire drill because he watched a tv series on this man (it was a chinese fantasy character who spouted fire from his mouth). He was afraid to have fire come out of his mouth as well.
The school had to cancel the fire drill because of that.(it was a small school anyways).
14 May 2008 at 8:54 am
Thanks for the book leads, and I’m glad to see that a post inspired you to create your own Blogger profile. Hope that doesn’t mean we’ll never hear from you again.
Regardless of how much you like Steiner’s work, you need to look at
a) the claims he made, and
b) the evidence for those claims.
I’ll give you a clue.
a) pages and pages of weird stuff, and
b) jack.
That’s why I detest anthroposophy’s scientific pretensions. It purports to be a kind of ‘spiritual science’, while offering nothing in the way of real empiricism.
Since you mention homeopathic farming, I’ll thank you to mention any evidence for its efficacy over and above organic farming. I’m not saying it doesn’t have satisfied customers. I’m saying no data I know of backs it up.
I would suggest you are, in a strange sort of way, unconsciously preparing your children to get you beyond the inevitable dead end to which the materialist mind leads.
A road isn’t a dead end just because it doesn’t take you to your preconceived conclusions. What else are you going to use? The supernaturalist mind? Now that’s worth a laugh.
14 May 2008 at 3:58 pm
You’ve got me in a fug with all the laugher about supernatural roads but anyway…I’ll press on regardless. Just remember my friend I’m trying to inspire you in what I like to think are your best interests,- rather than prove you wrong…that can’t be done. Lets just assume thats a ‘preconceived conclusion’. So…
Yo bruva you stickin hard to your ground…fair enough. Someone once accused Dawkins et al of promulgating a jealous monotheism. As Dawkins admits somewhere, he is only interested in a particular playing field-controllin the argumentative turf so to speak- remember Ockham!! Since its evidence you want- I order you God, yes, you over there whatever you are, to now dance on this wee stage I’ve built- why not leave Steiner out of it an take a different road. (I am not myself an anthroposophist – they don’t tend to get into these gentle cross blows as they believe people should be given complete freedom to arrive when, an if, at their own conclusions (or dead ends)…So…
I once asked a guy I know with 3 phds in Biophysics, anthropology and something else (also an inititiated shaman who has worked around the world in a myriad of diverse cultural situations) I said, “Ralph, I’m very tired of tryin to figure out how come those in this crusade don’t see the blindily obvious. You ran the Dept of Psychical Research at Duke for 20 years and now you’ve got a posting leading a Dept at Stanford or somewhere. Where’s the evidence for all this supernatural hokus pokus in a one fat ol cracker of a book? Its got to have mountains of peer reviewed scientific evidence”. An he says”:try ‘Irreducible Mind'”. I’d lend you my copy and give further details but I lent it to a Curtin lecturer…(similar debate though one of his field’s is Romanticism so he’s got a few potential inroads lying fallow)
Not sure if you’ll ever be real interested in untying all the good work you’ve been doing for your church out there in whatever groundless space contains these bits of words. But maybe you will one day be interested to walk down a road less travelled with an open, even sympthetic mind.
Or….even try the site address supplied by 888 above…some will find there jack others genius…
Bless you and you good works Dr Daniel.
28 June 2008 at 6:06 am
You said that you dont like Montessori because children have to do the jobs the right way. That is ridiculous!! We teach the children to respect what they are working with, to do something the way it is inteded to be done. What use is it if the child doesnt learn the right way to do it. That is like teaching the child algebra but saying you dont need to make it actually work or do it the right way, lets just mess around and make letters represent numbers but not really! 2b + 4 = 10, b must be 40!. Read Montessori: The Science Behind the Genius by Angeline Stoll Lillard and you will learn a mass of information to inform you when you are making important decisions for your child’s future. Furthermore, you will learn that the child learns far more effectively if the materials they are learning to gain a concept are not toys that they are allowed to mess around with.
1 November 2009 at 6:26 am
I'm very late to this table, but about the topic of gnomes….I'm interested in Waldorf education, although I'm not anti-vaccination, and I don't want to hold my enthusiastic children back from reading til 7(this may not be Steiner's original intention, but I've noticed many schools doing this). In fact, I'd be careful in a Steiner school. From people I've spoken to, some of them wind up being abusive. Not all. And I don't believe that is Steiner's original intention. Its a kind of social poison that grows in some of these places.
Anyhow, about gnomes. I think Steiner meant them to be etheric spirits. Making them 'gnomes' makes it possible to make stories about them. My kids love them, and they seem to get that they aren't literally real, but can be real on a level. Its a surprising thing to watch, since I've never explained this.
Working with some homeschool materials, its been obvious that the material leads us on a journey. I'm never sure where its going to go. We just finished Michaelmas, and we decided that we liked dragons. Not all dragons are nice, some are evil, some dragons like to fight, and its all good fun, some just need a hug. My oldest son says that every dragon is different. He posits this in such a way that I know he is not speaking literally about it. He is grasping the idea of metaphors in an enjoyable way. And, I'm not entirely sure that these things don't exist, in a way inside of us. Americans aren't so good with ritual and myth, and its abilities to transform. We don't even have much language to describe it.
I'm an atheist, (I'm searching, and finding it limiting right now–but I don't believe I can be christian) and a trained scientist. I evaluate everything, but I do have a strong intuition that I listen to. I think Waldorf can be a kind of abusive cult, at its worst. At its best, when people are allowed to be individuals with it, its a pedagogy that speaks to the 'soul'. That is good thing, and very rare theses days.
(I don't homeschool, but I do use the materials to school at home, if that makes sense)
kate
2 June 2011 at 12:20 pm
Your 'Smackdown' had me whooping with laughter and it has helped me to make my decision.
Thank you.
28 January 2013 at 3:28 pm
I couldn't stop laughing reading your comparison. Thank you so much for taking the time to share!
My husband and I are members of the Baha'i Faith, which promotes science and religion as both tools to advance us further. (See http://www.bahai.org )So we are naturally leaning towards the Montessori side, but I am sure that there's a place for both methods depending on the family.
Thanks again! I was getting overwhelmed with the information, and actually, I am from Australia now living in the US, so its good to hear about how its going on over there!
28 January 2013 at 3:43 pm
As someone seriously considering both, I couldn't stop laughing at your comparison. Thank you for making it light and interesting!
On top of that, the other people who commented might be interested in looking into the Baha'i Faith.
http://www.bahai.org You might be interested to see how science and religion go hand in hand in a logical no-nonsense kind of way.
Thanks Again!
P.s this is my second post because I am almost certain my 'evil' computer deleted the last attempt haha
24 August 2013 at 6:12 am
I bring again the leaving space for magic in living. If this is where it leads people I guess we just have to fall back on rationale all over yet again.
Montessori Schools In Indiranagar bangalore