Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research
Volume 4, Issue 5, 2017, pp. 209-218
Available online at www.jallr.com
ISSN: 2376-760X
Montessori and Conventional Teaching Methods in Learning
English as a Second/Foreign Language: An Overview
Maryam Ghaffari *
Ph.D. Candidate in TEFL, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
Sara Moahmmadi Kashkouli
Ph.D. in TEFL, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
Firooz Sadighi
Professor of English Language and Linguistics, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Shiraz, Iran
Abstract
Providing a meaningful and experiential English learning environment for all students has long
created a concern for alternate ways to teach students who are reportedly demonstrating
non-mastery on standardized assessments. As the benchmark for showing successful academic
achievement increases, so does the need for discovering effective ways for students to learn
second language effectively. The Montessori teaching method has been in existence since the
early 1900s when Montessori made her discovery of the student learning process. Montessori
connected the context of the classroom to the laws of nature and the environment for
creating students who are problem-solvers with critical-thinking skills. The Montessori
Method is designed to promote independent learning and support normal development in
children. A Montessori lesson is defined as any interaction between an adult and a child; it
incorporates techniques that are defined to serve as guidance for the adult personality in
working with the child. To fully understand the Montessori Method, also known as individual
learning or progressive learning, it is necessary to trace the history and development of the
philosophy, and review the various principles and uses of the teaching methodology with
special education programs. Studies show that Montessori students tend to achieve at a
greater rate than students in traditional programs; however, critics say that the method is
insufficiently standardized, and its efficacy has not been deeply evaluated.
Keywords: Montessori education, conventional methods, second language
INTRODUCTION
Providing a meaningful and experiential learning environment for all learners in general
and L2 language learners in particular, has been a global goal of all concerned individuals.
In preparation for life, learners need education that supports their natural environment
to assure their curiosity and to promote intrinsic learning. Therefore, they can be
* Correspondence: Maryam Ghaffari, Email: M.Ghaffari2002 gmail.com
© 2017 Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research
Montessori and Conventional Teaching Methods in Learning English 210
engaged in the training of becoming self-reliant human beings. The growing emphasis on
student-centered approaches to learning has promoted a corresponding interest in the
affective dimension of the foreign language (FL) learner. In fact, scholars have been
concerned with identifying the reasons why some students feel more anxious, less
motivated and less self-efficacious in FL modules than in other subjects. They have also
been concerned with creating a learning environment that contributes to lowering
students’anxiety and fostering their motivation and self-efficacy. As Oxford )1990)
insightfully pointed out, ''the affective side of the learner is probably one of the very
biggest influences on language learning success or failure. Good language learners are
often those who know how to control their emotions and attitudes about learning'' (p.
140). Additionally, Myers (1992) point out that when students understand how they
learn best, they are likely to become more autonomous and responsible learners.
Additionally, Carrell, Prince and Astika (1996) maintained that language teachers should
recognize their students' individual differences and apply different techniques to cater
for their needs.
Researchers also assert that special attention should be paid when designing and
implementing instructional materials. Oxford (1992), for example, argues that ''if
language activities are perceived as irrelevant or uninteresting, or if they conflict with the
learner’s particular style, the learner might tune out or lower the level of involvement''
(p. 33). More recently, Pallapu (2007) points out that ''knowing the learning styles of the
learners aids the designer or instructor to develop a curriculum to address various needs
of the learners in a group or class'' (p. 34). Relatively, an effective teaching style is
required for the learning environment that offered interactive yet independent learning
opportunities. Due to the present researchers' studies, it seems that the Montessori
Method, also known as individual learning or progressive learning in comparison to
conventional methods of teaching of English language as a second language is helpful for
this purpose. Therefore, it is necessary to trace the history and development of the
philosophy, and review the various principles and uses of Montessori teaching
methodology.
BACKGROUND AND SETTINGS
In the early 1900's, Italian educator and physician Maria Montessori developed an
innovative teaching methodology for children that left an indelible mark on education
curricula throughout the world. Montessori education is a sensory-based pedagogy that
is based on the belief that children learn at their own pace through manipulation of
objects (Lopata, Wallace, and Finn, 2005). Montessori (1996) initially devised her
teaching philosophy in 1896 while working with special needs children in the Psychiatric
Department at the University of Rome. Although her patients were diagnosed as mentally
deficient and unable to learn, within two years of Montessori's (1996) instruction, the
children were able to successfully complete Italy's standardized public school exams
(International Montessori Index, 2006). Through her research and study in the field,
Montessori (1996) observed that in this ''educational playground'' children could choose
from a variety of developmental activities that promoted learning by doing. Montessori
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2017, 4(5) 211
(1996) believed that it was necessary to train the senses before training the mind
(Lopata, Wallace and Finn, 2005). By using this ''self-directed'' individual learning
approach, Montessori's students were able to teach themselves through critical
interaction in a 'prepared environment' containing interconnected tasks which gradually
required higher levels of cognitive thought. This method was designed to create a task-
oriented student who is ''intrinsically motivated to master challenging tasks'' (Rathunde
& sikszentmihalya, 2005, p. 345). The Montessori Method was a radical philosophy at the
time which contradicted and challenged many of the existing beliefs about ‘whole-class
learning’ the acquisition of knowledge and the development of early human cognition.
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
In preparation for life, students need education that supports their natural environment
to ascertain their curiosity and to promote intrinsic learning and also to foster
independence among learners. It seems that comparing Montessori methods of teaching
and conventional methods be helpful for introducing an effective environment to
teachers and curriculum developers. Therefore, the present study hopes to challenge
many teachers of the existing beliefs and direct them toward focusing on individual
learning and critical thinking which are the major goals of Montessori methods.
MONTESSORI METHOD AND ITS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Montessori (1996) believed that children were not a blank slate and that the traditional
learning methods such as recitation, memorization and conditioning failed to develop
necessary life skills and individual abilities. She believed that each learner is a unique
being, and he/she can surprise us with unique and unseen potential. In order to fully
develop that unseen, she insisted that instructors must give learners freedom of choice
to explore their environment. Teachers can assist them with sensory-based teaching
methodology, also, this method promotes independent learning and self-discovery.
Montessori teaching provided the conceptual framework for the study. The International
Montessori Society (IMS) illustrated 20 protocols that ''provide a contextual control of
error for conducting experimental interactions with children'' (Havis, 2006a, p. 15). The
Montessori protocols are: 1) well-being of total environment; 2) least amount of adult
involvement; 3) present moment; 4) no negative attention to misbehavior; 5) don’t
correct child; 6) basis of interest (ask; touch/look); 7) model good behavior; 8) eye
contact before talking; 9) don’t interrupt concentration; 10) be friendly – get acquainted;
11) enhance independence; 12) no rules for children; 13) emphasize main points isolate
variable; 14) child watching; 15) same routines all the time; 16) take out everything; 17)
from the shelf; 18) lay out randomly; 19) simplify complexity – hint; 20) confirm
accuracy – clarify/expand (Havis, 2006a, p. 28-30).
TRADITIONAL TEACHING METHODS IN COMPARISON TO MONTESSORI
METHODS
The Montessori self-directed and independent way of learning through peace with the
environment contradicts the traditional method of instruction, which is teacher directed
Montessori and Conventional Teaching Methods in Learning English 212
and leaves little for a child to learn naturally. She acknowledged a child's natural
eagerness to learn and supports that desire with a carefully prepared environment which
results in students who are grounded in self-discovery and trusting of their own abilities
(Black, 2011). It is the Montessori belief that a prepared environment for learning allows
children to learn when they want to learn; therefore, enabling a trained teacher to match
the curriculum to the child instead of the child to the curriculum, as done in traditional
schools (Miller, 2009). Also, when students are seated in rows and listen to lectures, as
in traditional methods, they are deprived of the opportunity to discover learning on their
own. In addition to lecture style seating arrangements, ''Learning in traditional schools
comes largely from books, even during years when children in traditional schools are not
yet particularly good readers'' (Lillard, 2005, p .13). Lillard (2008) reported:
The very structure of schools, from physical arrangements to schedules to the ubiquitous
use of textbooks and tests, supports behaviorist techniques and thereby leads teachers
to take a fundamentally behaviorist approach. If the teacher has a desk in front of a
blackboard at the front of the classroom and students are seated in rows facing the
teacher, small group or individual work is unnatural (p. 13).
According to the National Research Council (2000), a division of the National Academy of
Sciences, “traditional education limits students’ opportunities to understand or decipher
what is taught because many curricula emphasize memory rather than understanding.
Students are assessed on their abilities to remember facts that have been memorialized”
(pp. 8-9). Lopata, Wallace, and Finn (2005) described the traditional teaching method as
one where teachers were in control of the environment and the students. The purpose of
instruction was to develop academic and social skills. Instruction was provided primarily
through lecture. Evaluation of learning usually consisted of written assignments, and
tests were often multiple choice, fill in the blanks, and written essays. Greater emphasis
was placed on dispensing and delivering information in the traditional method.
Competition rather than cooperation among students was prevalent.
Research suggested that ''teacher lecture was the methodology most often used to teach''
(Cuban, 1993, p. 37). That method of teaching and learning indicated students recited
what they memorized, textbook assignments made by the teachers, teachers asked
questions, and the teachers provided explanations. That form of teaching and learning
constituted the standard methodology of teaching and learning in classrooms. If the
criterion of learning was factual information only then that methodology of teaching
lecture and discussion was effective (Kulik and Kulik, 1980). This method is ''teacher-
centered with students providing answers to questions asked by the teachers'' (Cuban,
1993, p. 37).
While the Montessori Method of teaching was completely different. The teaching method
in Montessori was constructed to produce flexibility for the students, to foster
individuality, and to provide opportunity to explore, develop, and grow which in turn
produced learning. The prepared environment was the first stage in the education
process (North American Teachers' Association, 2006). The classroom environment
provided for maximum independent learning and exploratory learning activities by
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2017, 4(5) 213
children. The prepared environment was designed to enhance exploration and stimulate
learning. The prepared environment consisted of the classroom space, class size, work
centers, indirect preparation, and processing of learning. Children’s natural propensity
for learning evolved in prepared environments that produced continuous learning
passages called a continuum.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
Students are assigned their own personal workstations designed with educational items
that correspond to the daily lesson plans and activities. Students are responsible for
setting up the work area, choosing the learning activity, applying the physical materials,
and returning the materials back to the shelves (Pickering, 2004). Children are always
free to move around the room and are not given deadlines for the various learning tasks.
The amount of teachers in the classroom varies based on class size, but usually two
teachers are used for sections. Montessori (1996) stated that '' an adult environment is
not a suitable environment for children'' (p. 109) .She believed that little children should
not have to live in an adult environment, instead, there should be an environment
specially prepared for them.
Additionally, Montessori (1912) stated that in order for children to develop properly it is
necessary to reduce all obstacles around them to a minimum. The office sized furniture
pieces originally placed in the traditional classes were too big and too heavy for the little
children. The children could not reach the high shelves nor could they move the large
chairs. Dr. Montessori designed and had manufactured little furniture such as chairs,
tables, washstands and cupboards that preschool children could use easily. Hooks on the
walls were placed low so that children could reach them without any assistance from
adults. The small chairs were light enough for a child to lift and carry to another location.
In the Montessori environment, Orem (1965) stated that the furniture fits the child
because it is small just like the child. The educational décor is simple yet attractive. In
Montessori classes simple pictures hang on the walls above the shelves where the
learning tools are placed. Montessori (1996) kept the objects in the ''Children's House''
organized; there was a place for everything. Everything was marked (a simple outline of
the object was drawn directly under the object) so the children could easily put away
every tool they used. In the ''Children's House'' there were different types of workspaces
such as: a chair by a small table or a carpeted floor .Everything was designed so it would
be the best for the child. The outdoors of the class was also carefully designed. For the
outdoors Montessori designed playgrounds and gardens with varieties of trees and
flowers. There were pathways for children to take walks, small benches to sit on, and
objects such as hoops to play with. Originally a medical doctor, Montessori, took great
considerations for the child's physical as well as mental development.
MONTESSORI TEACHING MATERIALS VERSUS CONVENTIONAL METHODS
The second phase of the Montessori learning was the materials. Unlike traditional
methods materials which were books, notebooks or ultimately video tapes, the materials
Montessori and Conventional Teaching Methods in Learning English 214
were arranged attractively and purposefully on open shelves to isolate one quality so the
concept that the student was to learn was evident (North American Teachers'
Association, 2006). Work centers were arranged based upon subject matter and the
students were allowed to move freely and work on an existing task without time
limitations. A student worked with the materials as long as the interest was maintained
and when the student was finished with the material he returned it to its correct place.
Materials were designed to be self-correcting and induced students to use logical
deductive reasoning to solve the problem which minimized teacher direct involvement
or teacher correction (North American Teachers' Association, 2006). As exploratory and
discovery skills were mastered, ongoing materials interrelated and built upon the next
level or concept. Order and discipline were required behaviors in the prepared
environment which produced discipline. The process of independent problem solving
created self-confidence and critical thinking skills.
THE MONTESSORI TEACHER
The primary role of a Montessori educator is to carefully observe while creating a
cooperative and supportive setting that is well organized and aesthetically pleasing to the
learners. The teacher performs the ''overseer role'' by directing the ''spontaneous''
actions of the students (Ruenzel, 1997). According to Montessori, “education is not
something which the teacher does, but rather a natural process which develops
spontaneously in the human being” (cited in Weissglass, 1999, p. 45). Montessori
teachers introduce materials with a brief lesson and demonstration and then passively
guide the audience through a period of student-centered inquiry. The objective of the
instructor is to motivate students, ''allowing them to develop confidence and inner
discipline so that there is less and less of a need to intervene as the child develops''
(Edwards, 2002, p. 6). On average, the most teachers spend less than one hour of the
daily class on group instruction (Lopata, Wallace and Finn, 2005). Curriculum topics are
strategically linked by the teacher so that no subject is taught in isolation. When
introducing new subjects instructors use demonstration lessons that increase in
complexity as the students are able to advance in the sequence of self-correcting
problems and tasks (Humphryes, 1998). Lessons at school settings cover an eclectic mix
of disciplines such as geometry, sensory development, language acquisition and
expression, literature, science, history, government and life skills.
Also, the teacher's role as intervener and rather than the central point in the learning
process or as the direct disseminator of knowledge was pivotal in the learning stages in
Montessori education (North American Montessori Teachers’ Association, 2005). The
exception was the 0-3, 3-6, and 6-9 years of age planes of development, wherein the
teachers had more active roles by demonstrating how to use the resources and present
activities based on each student’s assessment and needs.
This differentiation was a very important distinction between teachers' roles in
Montessori education and traditional classrooms and traditional teaching environments
(North American Montessori Teachers’ Association, 2005). Also, it allows teachers to use
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2017, 4(5) 215
a variety of teaching methods to teach according to the students’ learning styles, to meet
the students’ needs, and to accomplish requirements to increase academic achievement.
THE MONTESSORI CURRICULUM
In Montessori schools, students spend the majority of their time participating in different
sessions of uninterrupted activities that last approximately three hours. These projects
consist of independent and group problem-solving tasks and other sensory activities
related to math, science, language, history, geography, art, music and nature. The
integrated curriculum follows a chronological order based on Montessori’s Five Great
Lessons: the story of the universe, the timeline of life, the story of language, the story of
numbers, and the timeline of civilization. According to Montessori, from birth to age 3 the
child learns primarily through the ''unconscious absorbent mind''. During education in
the first three years, Montessori believed that it was necessary for the parents to develop
in the role of unobtrusive educator; there to protect and guide without infringing on the
child’s right to self-discovery (Crain, 2004). This early developmental model enabled
children to learn their own skills at their own pace. During the ages of 3 to 6 the child
begins to utilize the “conscious absorbent mind” which prompts students to participate
in creative problem-solving consisting of wooden and metal objects of various sizes and
shapes, personally designed by Montessori. If a problem becomes too difficult or
overwhelming for the student, the teacher delays the project for a future day. Children
also engage in practical work consisting of household tasks and personal maintenance. In
both developmental mindsets, ''the child seeks sensory input, regulation of movement,
order, and freedom to choose activities and explore them deeply without interruption in
a carefully prepared environment that helps the child choose well'' (Edwards, 2002, p. 6).
Students between the ages of 6-18 are required to complete a series of small group tasks
in their surrounding communities as well as the classroom. During this age grouping,
''children are expected to explore a wider world and develop rational problem solving,
cooperative social relations, imagination, aesthetics, and complex cultural knowledge'' in
order to ''reconstruct themselves as social beings'' and ''humanistic explorers, real-world
problem solvers, and rational seekers of justice'' (Edwards, 2002, p. 6). Principles taught
in the K-12 programs: self-discovery, sensory learning, independent growth, and
individual learning (Pickering, 2004). Montessori’s pedagogy has also been successful in
the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia (Bruck, 2001).
ASSESSMENT METHODS
Holfester (2008) stated that in a Montessori classroom concepts such as textbooks,
grades, exams, punishment, rewards, and homework are rarely embraced or applied.
Unlike traditional methods of instruction, the progressive approach focuses on
cooperation rather than competition and personal growth rather than peer evaluation.
Students are assessed based on a descriptive summary of the child's daily interactions
and performance on independent and collaborative tasks. A child’s individual and group
creations are organized into a portfolio and progress report for parents to evaluate
during specific periods of the year. It is the responsibility of the teacher to individually
Montessori and Conventional Teaching Methods in Learning English 216
assess each student through critical observation so that individual plans can be devised
to help students overcome specific areas of deficiency.
ADVANTAGES OF MONTESSORI METHODS IN COMPARISON TO
CONVENTIONAL ONES
Montessori classrooms produced results that were found to be academically and socially
superior to traditional programs. Montessori students were also better at ''controlling
their attention during novel tasks, solving social problems and playing cooperatively''
(Bower, 2006 p. 212) Upon the completion of kindergarten, Montessori students scored
higher than their peers in public and private schools on standardized math and reading
tests. Upon completion of elementary school the Montessori students were able to write
essays with more imagination and depth than their peers in public and private school
(cited in Bower, 2006, p. 212).
Research indicated that Montessori students performed well on standardized tests and
demonstrated higher levels of learning than their peers when tested later in life
(Schapiro, 1993). Recent empirical data suggested that some young Montessori children
were able to master reading and writing before age 6 (Edwards 2002). Furthermore, a
comprehensive evaluation of middle school programs in the U.S. showed that,
''Montessori students reported greater affect, potency, intrinsic motivation, flow
experience and undivided interest while engaged in activities during school'' (Rathunde
and Csikszentmihalya, 2005, p. 363).
Moreover, the Montessori philosophy and education have broad foundations that were
predicated on the premise that each child developed naturally and that naturalness
promoted learning, growth, and self-development in uninhibited environments
(American Montessori Society, 2005). According to it, the Montessori philosophy of
education purported that children learned in part from their interests and independent
of assistance from adults. The primary purpose of Montessori education was to assist
each child with the development task of inner self growth from childhood to adulthood
(American Montessori Society, 2005) which was one of the reasons for the success of
Montessori education. The education approach was a methodology of observation that
supported children's natural development. The Montessori philosophy enabled the
naturalness of the child to progress with unrestrictive freedom. The education approach
enabled children to learn how to solve problems, developed social responsibility, time
management skills, and become fulfilled adults within their time (North American
Teachers' Association, 2007). According to Marsha Enright with the Atlas Society through
its Objectivist Center (2005), Montessori education advocated the presentation of
knowledge as an integration of the learning process, emphasized conceptual
relationships between the different learning planes, and placed historical knowledge in
perspective.
Montessori education has been identified as a form of differentiated instruction that
enabled children to learn how to solve problems, develop social responsibility, and time
management skills (American Montessori Society, 2005). Therefore in comparison to
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2017, 4(5) 217
conventional methods, Montessori stage two constructs which were designed to help
students to process information, develop an understanding of concepts through work,
experimentation, and creation. Montessori stage three constructs were designed to help
students (a) demonstrate understanding through the ability to pass assessments with
confidence, (b) develop the ability to teach other students, and (c) communicate
confidently and comfortably to others what had been mastered (American Montessori
Society, 2005).
LIMITATIONS
Although the Montessori Method has been largely embraced, its pedagogical principles
have never been formally accepted by administrators and policymakers in
traditional/mainstream school systems. Due to its lack of academic assessment, it is
largely neglected by scholars. Programs are also restricted due to the lack of trained
Montessori professionals, the costs of implementing and maintaining new programs and
the reluctance of administrators to embrace an ideology that deviates so far from
traditional subject-based pedagogy. Other limitations result from Maria Montessori’s
belief that she was the only person who was qualified to train other Montessori
educators, and that learning tools must be limited to the original objects she designed
(Crain, 2004). Despite these limitations, Montessori programs continue to flourish in all
levels of private and public schools systems in different education centers.
CONCLUSIONS
Socializing among students requires more work, and discipline is still an issue of
concern . Surely, the Montessori Method of teaching/learning offers us some help
especially in L2 learning context. Especially, when one of our purposes is to enhance our
understanding of individual differences among English learners by considering
environmental factors. In any case, more changes are needed to be brought about if we
are to improve our educational system and through it our society. Our children are our
future which everyone must recognize. As Montessori so beautifully stated, ''Intelligence,
a balanced personality and the unity of all mankind as a single organism are man's wealth.
What is therefore needed today is an education that will lead the human personality to
recognize man’s grandeur'' (Montessori, 1972, p.118).
Montessori Method as described above has the potential to bring about some positive
changes not only to our education system but also to society at large. The question then
remains, if the Montessori Method offers such a potential for success why is it not used
in every school across the world? One very simple answer is that not every educator is
familiar with the Montessori Method.
REFERENCES
American Montessori Society, Inc. v. Association Montessori Internationale, 155 U.S.P.Q.
591, 592 (1967). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montessori _in_the_
United_ States (12, June, 2017).
Montessori and Conventional Teaching Methods in Learning English 218
Black, B. (2011). The first time. Montessori Life. Retrieved from
www.amshq.org/~/media/001EE668A3C5403A89BCADC280E5F2C2 (12, June,
2017).
Bower, B. (2006). Montessori learning aid. Science News, 170(14), 212.
Bruck, L. (2001). Montessori comes to dementia care. Nursing Homes: Long Term Care
Management, 50(8), 33-35.
Carrell, P. L., Prince, M. S., & Astika, G. G. (1996). Personality types and language learning
in an EFL context. Language Learning Journal, 46(1), 75–99.
Crain, W. (2004). Montessori. Encounter, 17(2), 2-4.
Edwards, C. (2002). Three approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori and Reggio
Emilia. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 4 (1).
Havis, L. (2009). Ims technology of Montessori teaching. International Montessori society
workshops and seminars, Malaysia.
Humphryes, J. (1998). The developmental appropriateness of high-quality Montessori
programs. Young Children, 53(5), 4-16.
Lillard, A. S. (2005). Montessori: The science behind the genius. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Lopata, C., Wallace, N. & Finn, K. (2005). Comparison of academic achievement between
Montessori and traditional educational programs. Journal of Research in Childhood
Education, 20(1), 5-13.
Miller, J. (2009). Testing: A Montessori perspective. Montessori Australia, 4, 1-3.
Miller, L. B. & Bizzell, R. P. (1984). Long term effects of four pre-school programs; ninth
and tenth grade results. Child Development, 55(4), 1570-1588.
Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori Method. New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company.
Myers, I. B. (1992). Introduction to Type. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Orem, R. C. (1965). A Montessori Handbook. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New
York, NY: Newbury House.
Oxford, R. L. (1992). Who are our students? A synthesis of foreign and second language
research on individual differences with implications for instructional practice. TESL
Canada Journal, 9(2), 30–49.
Pallapu, P. (2007). Effects of visual and verbal learning styles on learning. Institute for
Learning Styles Journal, 1, 34–39.
Pickering, J. S. (2004). The at risk child: How the Montessori classroom enhances learning.
Montessori Life, 16(2), 8-12.
Ruenzel, D. (1997). The Montessori Method. Teacher Magazine, 8(7), 30-36.
Schapiro, D. (1993). What if Montessori education is part of the answer? Education Digest,
58(7), 40-44.
The international Montessori index (2006). Retrieved June 12, 2017, from
http://www.montessori.edu
Weissglass, J. (1999). Curriculum and society. Education Week, 18(32), 45-47.
