Ask HN: Anyone go through Montessori education until age 12 (end of grade 6)?
Am curious what peoples experiences from Montessori transitioning to other education systems was like and how they perceived the school worked or didn't for then? Have some children decisions and looking for outside opinions! Thanks!
258 comments
[ 5.8 ms ] story [ 321 ms ] threadThat being said, I would not hesitate to put my kids in one, especially over public schools which are a disaster.
But doesn’t the same variety apply for public schools? They’re not all a disaster. My kid goes to a good dual language immersion public school where in addition to academics, they’re learning collaboration and empathy with people from all walks of life, not just the ones whose parents drop them off in a Tesla. The school is underfunded, doesn’t have the resources to market itself, and teachers are burning out, but if some of the hyper-enthusiastic Montessori parents I know applied their energy to a public school, it’d kick ass. That’s the choice I made—I’m on the PTA and am building their makerspace. Others are leading gardening or composting programs. Not everyone has the time to do that, but we shouldn’t be mere consumers of education, as every parent who helps their kids do homework knows.
Just be sure you know the difference between AMS and AMI. They're pretty different in their approach to Montessori. AMI is strictly traditional Montessori, whereas AMS is a more progressive model. My mother founded an AMS school, so you can guess which one I think is better. But you have to decide which style makes more sense to you.
There was a non-verbal autistic kid there, too. I played "clap-hands" with them every day, apparently the only human interaction (apart from their parents) that they had.
We moved when I was 5, and I went to a normal school after that. I don't remember much about it (all the above is stories my parents told me later). Luckily we moved to a small village where the teacher had enough time to continue giving me the personalised attention I clearly needed. Then I got shipped off to boarding school and the rest of my schooling is a dark, terrible mess of anger and violence.
It totally worked for me. I hated school, except that one.
I say this as the parent of a kid who is right on the verge of being kicked out of preschool over that issue. I totally get it. I wish I knew how to help him. He has some great qualities, but he also requires constant attention and mentally draining correction from everyone that's involved in his life.
You got this!
One of the Montessori practices I'm a big fan of is observation. Quiet almost secret observation of the child. Ideally the child isn't aware you're there and you merely observe them act freely (in a safe environment for the child).
On the one hand, I think students in small classes can really become more confident and enthusiastic about learning in the long-term. But on the other, a shift to larger classes can be alienating (e.g. feedback from educators is less frequent). This could be mitigated by going to office hours, but there are plenty of minority experiences that stick where teaching assistants and professors are unwelcoming. The change could be less of a shock for students who went to large high schools, as they're more used to large classes.
Perhaps students who have the chance to grow up with individualized learning can opt for universities that have smaller classes, though it's not always possible when large public universities can often be much more affordable. I wonder if there is a way to prepare students from smaller schools with personalized education to do well at much larger educational institutions.
So many kids (myself included) hit university not knowing what they should be doing (or what they've been learning actually requires at the 'next leve') because you're guided to broad and narrow learning curriculum and not following their specific interests intensely.
We see the chaotic, political, competitive and ranked corporate world as 'normal' instead of a terrible, poorly organised and dysfunctional system. It's not 'the real world,' it's a bubble that reinforces itself because we train kids to fit into it throughout their education.
The gap did provide a bit of a buffer, but I nonetheless did not care for the transition. While the systems were quite different, I believe it was more the difference in the teacher quality that had the largest impact. I was fortunate to go to a small, exceptional Montessori school before such things became ridiculously expensive, while the public school, although it had a few very good teachers, also had some very marginal ones (basically, tenured and terrible).
If the quality of teaching is similar, then I expect the transition would have been much easier. As others have noted, shop around since the teaching quality, rather than the teaching structure, is ultimately what was the starkest change for me.
My oldest daughter attended private Montessori until age 12 when she transitioned to an exurb public Middle school in an extremely high income area.
Transition was easy because the Montessori middle school she was going to was new and hadn't gotten their legs yet, so had a pretty lackluster program. Adding to that the lack of extracurricular and club/team opportunities, and small class sizes, Montessori method starts be become a hindrance to learning the complex social dynamics you need to survive IRL.
My other kids transitioned to US public education at 8 and 10 respectively with no issues
The most difficult transition was for the 8 year old, simply because her personality fits the more loosely structured method of Montessori better, however this faded pretty quickly
Should be noted also that my kids are extremely naturally gifted and generally live in the "AP/Honors" world, so would most likely flourish anywhere. YMMV
All children are extremely naturally gifted, it’s the world around that always manages to grind it out of most of them. I think that also represents what Montessori was aiming for when re-thinking education.
What a load of horseshit. Say that in the special education class with 8th graders that can't read or use the bathroom on their own, despite the best efforts and attention of their teachers.
Worth recognizing however that natural variability means there's going to be people with harder times in certain areas.
Our job (collectively) as educators is to make it easy to integrate the wide range of human diversity into regular life, so as to make life easier for everyone in total.
Look OP, if you think school is about your kids learning you've got it very wrong. Wikipedia and arvix are for learning. School is state subsidized daycare, and social conditioning. Industrial society requires discipline, structure and obedience. Those values are not driven into a child's head in the Montessori, model. Do your kids a favor and get these things drilled into their heads early, before you have a bunch of intellectual bums laying around your house. Don't send your kids to Montessori school.
You have to put in the effort yourself to teach them those values (if you can even call them that...) and that life is not all fun and games. That said, Montessori model schools are great for your children, even if they're just "glorified daycares" instead of school. Children need to play, it's how they learn everything, including how to enjoy life. Do not immediately throw them into a life of "discipline, structure and obedience". That's not what life is about.
There’s a pretty consistent underlying structure to the day, and the kids are taught to eg sit quietly for the class gathering (“circle time”), so I don’t think it’s accurate to say that the kids are taught no discipline. The periods that they’re asked to sit for aren’t very long, it’s preschool. But if you go an observe a class, they’re actually extremely well behaved. During their work cycles, they go and get their work, they sit individually to complete their work for a bit, then they return it to the shelf as they found it. And they’re learning relatively advanced reading, spelling, and math at 4.
One thing to be aware of is that many Montessori schools, especially nowadays, are “Montessori-inspired”, they don’t actually go through the effort (and the hiring requirements) it takes to be accredited by AMS. It’s more expensive to hire actual Montessori teachers, but the difference can be pretty incredible.
Public school taught me physics, calculus, history and a smattering of other topics I wouldn’t have delved into on my own (for example, reverse polish notation.) It did not teach me discipline, structure or obedience (I was actually spanked by a grade school teacher, which seems unfathomable now.) As such, I was wholly unprepared for higher education. Some of this stuff might require direct intervention from the parent instead of simply relying on a school to take care of it.
+ Love of learning and self-driven discovery
+ Top of class in pretty much all subjects
+ Comfortable giving presentations
+ Comfortable working in groups
+ At ease working with younger students/children and essentially mentoring them
+ Excellent handwriting
+ Respect for teachers
- Difficulty with testing that involves framing the questions in an intentionally deceptive manner
- Difficult transition to the cliques and more aggressive social dynamics of public school
- Tough for them to deal with the way many students treat their teachers and behave in general in public school
I would recommend, that a year or 2 before the kids transition they start doing standardized tests and worksheets to get acclimated to that. It's a big shock otherwise.
Overall my kids loved their time in Montessori and wish the program had gone through high school.
That being said, we have a real shortage of teachers right now and low pay combined with lack of respect is a large reason for that shortage. Maybe the solution isn't calling them stupid and disrespect them. Maybe instead we should make teaching a profession with a liveable wage where they don't have to deal with parents throwing temper tantrums when their kids don't get straight A's. Maybe if we did that, we'd have enough people still wanting to be teachers that we could go ahead and fire the shitty ones (something we can't do if we don't have replacements)
- Education is a major studied by idiots who want to party in college.
- Western society is individualistic to a fault. The reason teachers get screamed at is because grades are seen as an attack on the character of a parents child (and used to evaluate and individuals worth). Since the parents refuse to believe that their little kid might just not have a high IQ or be lazy, clearly the teacher is at fault. Everyone wants to believe their little mini-me is a special snowflake, the bell curve proves otherwise.
- This narcissism and individualism, is also a feature of teachers. Hence, the constant self-aggrandization of being a glorified daycare worker by everyone in the profession.
- Teachers unions make it difficult to fire shitty teachers, even if there isn't a shortage of teachers. Just like cops, teachers look out for themselves.
- Good teachers get poached by private schools, that offer higher wages.
Institutional/Cultural problems that make education shitty:
- Property taxes fund schools. Rich suburban areas have well funded schools, poor inner city areas have underfunded schools that are falling apart. Guess which one attracts better teachers?
- The US is a large and very diverse country. Some populations here value education A TON, others do not. This is a reality that has to be acknowledge, and the standards of say, Silicon valley should not be applied to rural Texas. (my siblings took AP US history in Texas and they didn't even learn about the civil war)
- College is pushed on ALL students, and funding is partially determined by college admittance. Needless to say this is wasteful and partially contributed to many of the issues around student debt and credential inflation.
- Standardized testing is also a terrible mechanism for determining school funding. Teachers end up wasting a ton of time trying to teach to some arbitrary standardized test, and the students hate it as well.
Idk I could probably list more issues with education but those are a few off the top of my head.
In math the kids definitely leveraged the binomial/trinomial tools, beads and other tactile methods to have a better understanding of the concepts of mult/div/exponentials/roots long before they would have approached in the standard US arithmetic methods. They were also doing algebra and geometry by the end of Montessori.
Montessori also spends a lot of time working on holistic views with regards to science and history and then give the kids the freedom to do their own research and projects on the topics. The normal school models tend to take more of a cause-effect + memorize the dates method as that's what tracks the testing. It's not generally till university that they then go back to something that usually requires critical thinking.
On critical thinking there's an emphasis there in Montessori on involving the kids in asking more questions and then building a model to analyze and defend their position. Public school is optimizing for learn by rote and it's a culture shock going to Uni where they back to something that's utilizing critical analysis.
My older child is in IB at the moment and they're using much of this as it's taught in more of Uni style.
I also like that philosophy is compulsory, I feel that the humanities are under served in our current school systems.
While the atmosphere wasn't toxic like I hear people say about public school, few of my peers were interested in learning, excelled academically, etc.
A non-negligible portion of the kids in my school were the ones kicked out of the public school for grades or troublemaking. I think they did better at my school, but that population affected the academic experience. My brother went to another nearby religious school and it was the same.
My school was caught in a loop of poor funding -> sub-par teachers -> less enrollment -> less funding.
I expect a school focused specifically on self-actualization and skill-building to have better results than an arbitrary private school.
If you just throw kids together and expect the syllabus/curriculum to prevail, you'll quickly find the Lord of the Flies elements of public school social dynamics come into play and for a child often are more important than academics. At that point, simply being "private" has no advantage.
Based on the experience given above as well as my own experience, I'm going to guess the poster was talking about Catholic parochial schools. Catholic parochial schools were the original public schools in North America and still operate as such today, except obviously no public funding in the United States (they do in some provinces of Canada).
Either way, they'll accept basically anyone. However, they do consistently give better results anyway, even adjusting for income and social status. Actually, the effect is most pronounced in the lowest incomes. The richer you are, the less difference parochial v public makes (of course going to super cushy private schools puts you at an advantage).
Am I naive in thinking that the aggressive social dynamics of public school adds no value whatsoever to a child's or teenager's development?
Like, _why_ would anyone want to put their children through that? Is it _really_ integral to a person's social development to understand how to interact with bullies (worst case)?
I admit that I am rather nihilistic about public schooling, but I'm open to changing my mind.
I am genuinely questioning whether public school makes children socially mature rather than only being a traumatic experience for many pupils, for no other reason than that public schooling is the default choice.
It's the choice that everyone goes through. So unless you want your children to be unable to adapt to the people that were shaped through that horrible system, you will need to introduce them to that system in some capacity. Sports are not really enough. School is like day job for kids until they're 18. Everyone goes through the same standardized garbage, and they will have to live their lives with other people who went through the same standardized garbage.
Your only choice is to pay exorbitantly so they don't go through that garbage, but will face adulthood with 99% of the population that did, which can have mixed results.
But I don't think school is what makes them mature as much as it's the adults that they look up to and emulate that shape that. And whether it traumatic can depend on how they're able to internalize it.
Kids are cruel to each other because they do not yet know any better. They are still developing empathy and have not yet learned social skills. Kids in mixed-age environments can (and do) take their cues from older children and adults; kids who are isolated into the bizarre, historically nonexistent single-age environments found in the modern school system do not have that advantage, and accordingly tend to brutalize each other. Outside of prison there is nothing like it in adult life.
I do not see that kindness at the airport or the grocery store, or most other instances that are closer to a random sampling of the US adult population.
No, you learn maladaptive patterns. Your options are artificially constrained. Most of the ways a grown adult would deal with e.g. bullies are just not available to you.
Take physical violence for example. As an adult, if you're threatened with physical violence you have the options to:
- Get out of there. But kids can't do this because they're physically confined to the same classroom with the same people, every day. And obviously you're not allowed to just leave the school when you want to.
- Fight back. Risky, but you at least won't be punished by the courts if you can argue self-defense. But kids can't do this because "zero tolerance" policies punish both the aggressor and victim, by design, if the victim fights back
- Call the police. Kids can't do this, police don't care about schoolyard disputes. Snitching to a teacher just gets you bullied even more.
- Talk the person down. Maybe this works, but in a school they'll be back again the next day, and you'll have to do it again, and again, and again. Adult interactions are not so predictably repeated, unless in some other highly institutionalized setting like the military or a prison (guess which places also have problems with violent bullying).
Adults can, well, solve their problems like adults. Schoolkids literally aren't allowed to solve their problems like adults. Fuck, they're not even allowed to go to the toilet without asking someone first.
Is there any wonder they develop behavioral pathologies to cope: passivity, social withdrawal, self-harm, proactive aggression, self-sabotage, etc etc.
And I wonder how much of adult suffering comes down from not un-learning bad behavioral patterns learned in school? How many people have put up with being treated like garbage for years (at work, in a relationship, etc), because they haven't internalized that they don't need to ask an authority figure to be allowed to leave?
At some point I had to defend myself from a bully (that probably had a awful home life, since that guy managed to come home to school 7:00 in the morning already drunk, multiple times) by bashing the guy with a metal table and then threatening to kill him with a knife. Only then, he stopped bothering me.
Also I knew more than one guy that admired Columbine guys, their reason is that it was a good way (in their minds of course) of both getting out of their shitty life and taking revenge at same time.
Thankfully, now that I am adult, all problems so far I could solve by just talking to people, no tables, knives, planks or chains necessary.
Note: I went to "good" private schools, thus nobody died or got seriously injured, but I have friends that went to public schools, and one of them for example was forced to cause serious injury when 3 older students ambushed him right outside the school, and the only thing he had to defend himself was his skateboard, so he proceeded to hit them with the metal axis where you attach the wheels, broke half of the teeth of one guy, caved in one of the temples of another, and broke the shoulder and one knee of the third, after that the school started to have the police patrol near the school to prevent a repeat of this. Also that school banned skateboards, yoyos, long rulers (specially a particular metal ruler distributed as souvenir during a political campaign, that people found out you could sharpen and use as a decent machete) and spinning tops (specially those with metal tip, one kid made a hole in another kid head with one).
I went to a rough inner-city school and there was literally nothing like this. The fights were all between people who were already involved.
I went to a pretty rough school (repeated fights, people I went to school with murdering people, etc.) and I basically was never even once threatened with violence. All the bullying is through words and making fun of people, etc.
Is physical bullying of this sort actually that common or more media depiction?
- work-life balance. we expect kids to do "homework", but we don't expect adults to do work outside of actual working hours. we call those places "toxic working environments" and avoid them if we have any sense. I actually have more time to myself as an adult than I did as a kid.
- doing things only so that they can be graded for the approval of some authority figure, rather than because they are intrinsically worthwhile or enjoyable
- a peer group artificially constrained to be only of kids within a year of your age. interacting with kids a few years older or younger is out of the norm, friendships between year groups are rare. that's not how adult life works. I have a pet theory that so much bad behavior in schools is caused by this age stratification.
Lack of exposure is a massive factor and even with good intentions it does not really make up for it.
Most of the kids I went to school with were oblivious about poverty or even just being mindful of different socieconomic circumstances. stuff like
"yeah, let's just have all of our friends go out to a fancy restaurant and split the bill for every single one of our birthdays"
The problem is when the degree of conflict escalates past that safe, low-stakes level (which it does for some people, in some schools). We don't have everyone spend a month in prison, as part of their education, for instance, because it wouldn't be safe, or low-stakes, and would permanently damage people.
Kids who go through Montessori, Waldorf, etc, have a much better foundation for dealing with damaged people. If you start from a place of self-respect and expect the same of others, you can recognize when others aren't going to reciprocate and you can cope with that.
I'll throw in a side of "Americans are often 'stuck' in high school on some developmental level." I couldn't necessarily say the same about people in Europe or anywhere else.
Except in the most generic sense that there are lots of people and occasionally there are petty disputes.
I suspect transitioning out may be slightly different depending on a large variety of factors but maybe how children are raised to socialize in a traditional sense. To be fair its been many years since I've been in school but there's probably still a bit of a lean for activity based socializing for boys vs girls but hopefully that's changed.
One thing we learned is that Montessori isn't for every child. My oldest did OK but he much prefers traditional schools and is thriving at his middle school (a public magnet). My youngest, on the other hand, loves the self-guided learning and pace. He's more organized and self-motivates better than my oldest which makes a big difference. He reads like crazy and finishes books in a week that would take me a month at least, not sure where that came from but he gets a lot of free time at school when his "works" are finished. Both kids are diagnosed with ADHD and so am I (my poor wife heh).
Another thing, the Montessori we attend is public so it still has to meet district and state testing requirements. That put it in an awkward spot where it could never be pure Montessori because of the district and state mandated testing. It also puts the teachers in an awkward spot because they're rated on testing results which contradicts the Montessori method. My wife got fed up and left last year and no teaches at a traditional public high school.
I live in DFW and the Montessori i'm referring to Mata Elementary. DISD is a notorious hellhole of a district but Mata is hanging in there. It's not perfect by any stretch but they're hanging in there and doing their best with what they have. https://www.dallasisd.org/mata
You probably need both to be well adapted because the public system teaches you to defend yourself, which us necessary IRL. Montessori teaches you collaboration and thinking outside of zero sum mindset.
One thing that may also be a factor is any learning differences in the child. Montessori teaching is rigid in its own way and not the best for children with dyslexia/dysgraphia (though neither are standard public school curricula). Although early Montessori math is friendlier for dyscalculia with all the use of physical objects. Depending on the school and individual guides, things like ADHD, autism may also lead to issues with the school. Thought that could be said of any private school.
The biggest thing we saw with people pulling their children out of Montessori schools were fears about academic progress and measuring their children against their neighbors' kids in public school. That's on the parent though: some needed constant feedback and validation via grades to feel like their kids were competitive with public schools.
i didn't mention this in my comment but this point is true in my experience as well. My oldest has both dyslexia and dysgraphia and really struggled with reading the way Montessori teaches it. We had to get outside specialists and basically do a very intense summer school to get him up to speed and things figured out. Once we understood what was happening we were able to get state required accommodations at his Montessori which really helped. He's now at a public middle school magnet and doing pretty well. His reading and writing are, by far, his hardest subjects because he's basically got one hand tied behind his back because of the dyslexia/dysgraphia but the kid knows how to work and he gets through it.
edit: If i may brag, i've seen that kid of mine do things grown adults would run from. That summer school was 4 hrs a day of intense work and an absolute struggle many days ended in tears/frustration but he did it and beat dyslexia down to something he could manage. I've never seen anyone work like he did, when i'm getting lazy and phoning it in I think about him and pick up the pace.
- mixed aged group classrooms. So in one year of the 3 year cycle, he is the younger child (and receives mentorship from his older buddies), and in year 3 of each cycle, he is the older buddie mentoring younger pupils. Since he has no siblings, this is a benefit to his development.
- Montessori follow the state curriculum, however they allow children to manage their own time. So if he wants to do math all day, he can, and the teacher is there more for project management and giving him assistance than to drive him by a strict 45 minute schedule. At the end of the week, he is supposed to accomplish the assigned work (regardless of which order he wants to do it in). This will help him in the future with his own project management and prioritising work loads (we hope).
- the parents sending their kids to Montessori are not of the Elitist breed. I wont explain what I mean by that here. Its better than Steiner type schools (my personal opinion).
Other than the above, there wasn't anything particular about Montessori compared regular State run schools.
I think that will depend on the school. My daughter went to two, on opposite sides of the country: one was filled with super nice parents, the other had a lot more pretension.
I went to a Montesorri school from 1st through 4th grade. I enjoyed the atmosphere. In recent years I've read about Montessori and found that my Montessori experience was different, but much the same wrt a gentle focus on practical individual learning.
Non Montessori school was a process of checking boxes and actual thinking inbetween, while Montessori was a cycle of thinking through problems for yourself, sometimes as a group.
One thing I didn't appreciate until later school years is that Montessori blends different ages and skill levels together. I neither felt the need to keep up nor to excel, just to figure stuff out. For example, I remember a a classmate writing an essay using movable letters on a mat, but he didn't space them out so it was hard to read. I asked why he was doing it like that and the teacher responded that he had chosen to do it that way, I felt it was wrong, but instead of letting me get on a high horse, the teacher drew my attention to what I was already on my way to do. He continued to write without spaces, and I continued to think someone should correct him. Lo and behold, he learned to use spaces, all without someone, teacher nor child, scolding him, with words or with red marks. That's hard to do in typical bureaucratized classroom.
If I were pressed to find fault in Montessori itself, I'd say, it cannot succeed at all without good teachers/emotion/energy conductors, while a common classroom can get ok enough outcomes with an authority figure and good textbooks.
I agree that it did well to set my up academically. I ended up going to middle/high schools that were relatively average academically, so I was pretty strong in all subjects in comparison to my peers. Ultimately I went to a very prestigious college and now work in a wonderful finance job I love. However in the many years of therapy I’ve had as an adult, I continue to identify Montessori school as a foundational contributor to my social anxiety, and ultimately my ensuing clinical depression over a lack of social life which haunted most of my college years.
My Montessori school had about 15-25 kids / class year. Some of the larger years were split into two groups with separate teachers. Every year, maybe one or two kids left to go to other schools and one or two new kids joined, but for the most part I grew up with the same core set of children for seven years. I honestly believe this had a permanent negative effect on my ability to socialize and form new friendships that I am only barely beginning to correct over a decade later. Admittedly I did not participate in any extracurricular outside of Montessori school (particularly because it had its own after-school programs). So when I transitioned to a public school for middle/high school, it was a sharp culture shock and I definitely struggled to fit in.
I think Montessori schools are worthwhile academically, but you should be careful to keep your children in contact with other kids outside the Montessori bubble.
> school had about 15-25 kids / class year. Some of the larger years were split into two groups with separate teachers. Every year, maybe one or two kids left to go to other schools and one or two new kids joined, but for the most part I grew up with the same core set of children for several years.
seems perfectly normal from a UK primary school perspective (up to age 11 or 12 depending on the area). I'm surprised to hear that kids younger than that age would be expected to have larger peer groups in the US.
For context, in the US many public middle/high schools are like two orders of magnitude larger per class year. Many schools have like 1000 kids / class year.
Secondary school (11-16) is more commonly around 30 per class, 7-12 classes per year, 5 year groups in the school - so 1000-1500 kids. 16-18 can either be at the school (which would then be a smaller cohort than the 15-16 year group due to some people going elsewhere), or an external college which is highly variable in size.
1000 kids / class year is unheard of. That seems huge to me to the point I can’t understand how it would work. I knew mostly everyone in my class year up to high school and even then I probably knew more than half. Might explain why the social scene is far less brutal here than in the US.
1000 kids / class year is quite unusual!
https://highschoolguide.org/624/top-100-largest-high-schools...
Could it be that the social life at the 'prestigious college' was just rubbish, e.g. geared towards extraverted mba-types with 'default' social activities being clubbing and drinking?
So I think this varies quite a lot across the US. I tend to feel that large cities have more crowded classes than rural areas, but I have no data for that.
The local public school seems to be fine (this is elementary/middle grades). Thinking about going from there to a more elite private high school though, biggest downside being that it will require a bit of a commute.
I wish you could load this all up into a world simulator and see which option worked out best 10 years into the future :-)
but most of all, i do not believe that children can not learn to get along over time. so any issue with kids not getting along is going to be temporary.
even if your child makes friends easily, large classes allow the class to split into multiple subgroups, cliques that stick together. the smaller the class, the less likely this should happen. at least that is what my intuition suggests. i would put the limit for that to 10-15 kids though. any more than that is an invitation to form subgroups.
but we also must not forget the montessori aspect here, which has a strong influence on the group dynamics and individual childrens behavior.
for one, i believe that the montessori approach is driving and motivating children in a way that they simply don't show as much negative behavior as they would exhibit in a traditional class.
Edit to add: the whole school would have significantly more people, typically around 5-10 30-pupil classes for each of the 8-9 years. So perhaps the difference is the total number of children in the same school - though typically interaction between different classes, even of the same year, was far less than within-class.
I appreciated that change of social dynamics every time.
Sports was usually one thing that was more inter-class, but that was it.
uuh this is how regular school is in Sweden...
You have a class of people in grade 1-6, then grade 7-9 is a new school, then high school is a new school.
But I guess we all have anxiety so ur right xD
While I believe your experience to be entirely legitimate, what you are describing is the norm throughout most of Europe and I can assure you that most of us are socially adjusted (or at least somewhat socially adjusted).
There were several young people who I later transferred in HS back into their district and remembered.
Lots of little learning puzzles and nap time. LOTS Of stories. In fact I would say the curriculum, and this is a long time ago, was primarily fables besides what was self-directed and puzzles. The teachers were mostly kind.
The main difference was how much more challenging Montessori education was. The teachers really observed me and how I performed on assignments, and they could tell when I needed more of a challenge, and assign something to me that was just at the edge of what I was able to do. In the traditional education, if I consistently just did the bare minimum expected of everyone, I was a double-plus A plus student.
I was also allowed to explore subjects that interested me in greater depth, as long as it didn't come at the expense of subjects I found less interesting. I learned a lot of English and maths in the first few years!
If I had a disagreement with a Montessori teacher, we would sit down together and have a mature conversation about it and reach some sort of mutually beneficial solution (yes, even when I was under the age of 10!) In the more traditional education, there was the assumption that if I disagreed with the teacher, I was wrong and should shut up. (I ended up not passing a few classes in the traditional school because of disagreements with the teacher – I simply stopped attending the class at that point. Didn't seem productive to go on.)
I also had a lot more spare time in the Montessori school. As long as I did well on the work assigned to me and didn't bother my classmates, the teachers didn't really care how I spent my time. I could sit in a corner and read or do long multiplication, or go out and kick around a soccer ball. I would like to think this helped me learn independence.
On the other hand, I also have a notable lack of respect for authority figures. I like to think this is good, but it has also gotten me into trouble for disagreeing with hardline managers, refusing to do things I think are unethical, etc. I think some of this can be attributed to the Montessori school, where respect was based on fact, rational argument, and patient listening, rather than who should be commanding whom.
I went through "classical" education system (with lots of aggression, as somebody else already mentioned in another thread here) - and can tell I also obtained no respect for authority figures. School taught me to survive school by tricking those teachers who had no respect to pupils. Give them what they want and you'r going to be fine - even if you don't learn anything useful. Same when it comes with relationships with other pupils, especially those aggressive ones. I observe my kids who I send to Montessori and can definitely tell they are not easy when it comes to disagreements - and I like it that way, it keeps reminding me that I have no right not to treat them with respect even when I'm tired or in hurry. I see teachers putting lots of attention to mutual respect as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_education_movement
Notice the use of quotes.
Is anyone here talking about this other educational system you're referencing? Have there been any mentions of it?
I went through something similar through the end of high school. I did, however, go through public school for elementary.
My experiences mirror a lot of what others on here have already written. The transition to back to traditional education (university) wasn't an issue.
If you are already motivated, going from a low to moderately more rigorous style of learning is easy.
The issue is going in the other direction, which is why so many first year university students fail.