Montessori Model in Primary Education: A Meta- Synthesis Study

Year 2022, , 1109 - 1142, 29.08.2022

Aygül Kartal , Serkan Çelik

https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.976284

Cited By: 1

Abstract

This paper is aimed to present the analysis of the current situation of the studies on the
Montessori Method in primary schools. This study adopted a meta-synthesis design to interpret
and evaluate the qualitative findings of the studies and to point out their similarities and
differences to make further interpretations. Data collection started on August 1, 2020 was
completed May 30, 2021. The sample consisted of 16 studies.The data were analyzed using
inductive content analysis. The studies were summarized under the headings of subject matter,
design, data collection tools, objective/significance, results and recommendations. As for subject
matters, the studies did an in-depth analysis of the Montessori Method, examined school
atmosphere, provided detailed information on learning environments, and compared the
Montessori Method to other models. The studies employed data triangulation to ensure credibility
and consistency. The samples of the studies consisted of first-grade students, teachers, and
documents. The studies did not address the Montessori Method in different branches. The
Montessori Method has something in common with other methods, which is “World Citizenship.”
The Montessori Method is based on individual assessment. The findings were discussed throughly
literature and various suggestions were made.

Keywords

Montessori, Montessori method, Primary school, Montessori primary school, Meta-synthesis

İlkokulda Montessori Modeli : Bir Meta-Sentez Çalışması

Abstract

Bu araştırmada ilkokulda Montessori modelini inceleyen çalışmaların mevcut durumunun
analizinin ortaya konulması amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada çalışmaların nitel bulgularının
yorumlanması, değerlendirilmesi, benzer, farklı yönlerinin ortaya koyulup yeni çıkarımların
yapılmasını amaçlayan meta-sentez yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Verilerin toplanmasına 1 Ağustos
2020 tarihinde başlanmış, 30 Mayıs 2021'de veri toplama süreci tamamlanmıştır. 16 çalışma veri
analiz sürecine dahil edilmiştir. Veri çözümlemesi için tümevarımsal içerik analiz yöntemi
belirlenmiş, çalışmalar konu alanları, yöntem, veri analizi, elde edilen sonuçlar ve elde edilen
sonuçlara yönelik öneriler başlıkları altında özetlenmiştir. Araştırmanın sonucunda ilkokulda
yapılan Montessori temelli çalışmaların konu alanlarında Montessori modelinin derinleştirilmesi,
okul atmosferinin incelenmesi, öğrenme ortamının detaylandırılması ve diğer alanlarla
kıyaslandığı görülmüştür. Çalışmalarda inanırlık ve tutarlılığın yüksek tutulması için veri
üçlemesine önem verildiği, çalışma gruplarının ise ilkokul 1. sınıf öğrencileri, öğretmenleri ve
dokümanın olduğu saptanmıştır. Araştırmada Montessori modelinin diğer alternatif yöntemlerle
ortak yanının “Dünya Vatandaşlığı” kavramı olması, bireysel değerlendirmelere önem verişiyle
ön planda olduğu görülmüştür. Elde edilen bulgular literatür ışığında tartışılmış ve çeşitli
önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

Montessori, Montessori Modeli, İlkokul, Meta-sentez, Montessori ilkokulu

References

• Aljabreen, H. (2020). Montessori, waldorf, and reggio emilia: a comparative analysis of alternative models of early childhood education. International Journal of Early Childhood, 52, 337–353.
• Ashrafi, A. (2021). The educational evolution in germany, the study case: Primary education (grundschule). Propósitos y Representaciones, 9, 1–7.
• Association Montessori Internationale (AMI). (2021). 01.12.2020 tarihinde https://montessori-ami.org/countries/ adresinden alındı.
• Bagby, J., & Sulak, T. (2011). Connecting Montessori practice and metacognition, Montessori Life, 23(1), 8-9.
• Basargekar A., & Lillard, A. S. (2021). Math achievement outcomes associated with Montessori 􀀁 ducation. Early Child Development and Care, 191(1), 1-12.
• Baker, C., Clayton, S., & Bragg, E. (2021). Educating for resilience: Parent and 􀀁 ontess perceptions of children’s emotional needs in response to climate change. Environmental Education Research, 27(5), 687–705.
• Ball, T. N. (2018). Examining the integrity of 􀀁 ontesso 􀀁 ontessori in a diversely populated 􀀁 ontessori public elementary school: A narrative analysis, 04.06.2020 tarihinde https://www.proquest.com/dissertationstheses/ examining-integrity-teaching-strategiesdiversely/ docview/2036850178/se-2 accountid=11248 adresinden alındı.
• Bodovski, K., & Farkas, G. (2007). Mathematics growth in early elementary school: The roles of beginning knowledge, student engagement, and ınstruction. The Elementary School Journal, 108(2), 115-130.
• Brown, K., & Lewis, C. W. (2017). A comparison of reading and math achievement for african american third grade students in montessori and other magnet schools. Journal of Negro Education, 86(4), 439–448.
• Brunold, C., & Chaminade, C.(2010). International education: the ınternational baccalaureate, montessori and global citizenship. Journal of Research in International Education, 9(3), 259-272.
• Burbank, M. D., Goldsmith, M. M., Spikner, J., & Park, K. (2020). Montessori 􀀁 ontessor and a neighborhood school: a case study of two early childhood 􀀁 ontessor classrooms. Journal of Montessori Research, 6(1), 1-18.
• Burnett, A. (1962). Montessori 􀀁 ontessor today and yesterday. The Elementary School Journal, 63(2), 71-77.
• Corrie, R. (2015). Examining a public 􀀁 ontessori school’s response to the pressures of high stakes accountability. Journal of Montessori Research, 1(1), 42-54.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Araştırma deseni. (Çev. M. Bursal). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. UK: SAGE.
• Creswell, J. W. (2018). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma deseni. Ankara: Siyasal.
• Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124-130.
• Culclasure, B. T., Daoust, C. J., Cote, S. M., & Zoll, S. (2019). Designing a logic model to ınform montessori research. Journal of Montessori Research, 5(1), 35–49.
• Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33-38.
• DeLuca, C., & Hughes, S. (2014). Assessment in early primary education: An empirical study of five school contexts. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 28(4), 441-460.
• Demiralp, S. (2014). Montessori metodu ve uygulamaları. Nobel Yayınları: Ankara.
• Dempsey, J. (2017). Turning education inside-out : confessions of a Montessori principal. USA: J.Ross Publishing.
• Denervaud, S., Knebel, J. F., Hagmann, P., & Gentaz, E. (2019). Beyond executive functions, creativity skills benefit academic outcomes: Insights from Montessori education PloS one, 14(11), e0225319.
• Dohrmann K. R., Nishida T. K., Gartner A, Lipsky, D. K., & Grimm, K. J. (2007). High school outcomes for students in a public 􀀁 ontessori program. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22(2), 205-217.
• Dogan, F., & Yucel-Toy, B. (2021). Students’ question asking process: A model based on the perceptions of elementary school students and 􀀁 eachers, Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(1), 1-16.
• Feez, S. (2013). Montessori: the Australian story. Australia: New South Publishing.
• Fraenkel, W., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
• Frierson, P.R. (2015a). Maria montessori's moral-sense theory. History Of Philosophy Quarterly, 3(23), 271-292.
• Frierson, P.R. (2015b). Maria montessori’s philosophy of experimental psychology. The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science , 5(2), 240-268.
• Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data (Vol. 6). UK: Sage.
• Glenn, C. M. (2003). The longitudinal assessment study (LAS): Eighteen year follow up. Final Report.
• Hazel, C. E., & Allen, W.B. (2013). Creating Inclusive communities through pedagogy at three elementary schools. School effectiveness and School Improvement, 24(3), 336-356.
• Hiles, E. (2018). Parent's reasons for sending their children to montessori schools. Journal of Montessori Research, 4(1), 1-13.
• Jaeger, T. (2018). The court's paradoxical montessori revolution. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 17(4), 471-472.
• Jones, S. J. (2017). Technology in the montessori classroom: teachers’ beliefs and technology use. Journal of Montessori Research, 3(1), 16–29.
• Jones, S.J. (2017). Technology in montessori classroom: teacher's beliefs and tecnology use. Journal of Montessori Research, 3(1), 16-29.
• Kayılı, G. (2018). The effect of montessori method on cognitive tempo of kindergarten children. Early Child Development and Care, 188(3), 327-335.
• L’ecuyer, C., & Murillo, J. (2020). El enfoque teleológico de la educación Montessori y sus implicaciones - Montessori’s teleological approach to education and its implications. Revista Española De Pedagogía, 78(277), 499-518.
• Laski, E. V., Jor’dan, J. R., Daoust, C., & Murray, A. K. (2015). What makes mathematics manipulatives effective? Lessons from cognitive 􀀁 ducati and 􀀁 ducation􀀁 􀀁 ducation. SAGE Open, 5(2), 2158244015589588.
• Lazerick, B. (2000). Montessori mathematics. Teaching Children Mathematics, 6(8), 501-501.
• Lillard, A. S. (2012). Preschool children’s development in classic Montessori, supplemented Montessori, and conventional programs. Journal of School Psychology, 50, 379-401.
• Lillard, A. S. (2020). Montessori as an alternative early childhood education. Early Child Development and Care, 190(1), 1-12.
• Looijenga, A., Klapwijk, R., & De Vries, M.J. (2015).The effect of iteration on the design performance of primary school children. Technol Des Educ, 25(1), 1-23.
• Macià-Gual, A., & Domingo-Peñafiel, L. (2021). Demands in early childhood education: Montessori pedagogy, prepared environment, and teacher training. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 7(1), 144-162.
• McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2009). Research in 􀀁 eachers􀀁 : Evidence-based inquiry (7th edt.). London: Pearson.
• Jabar, M. A. (2020). Qualitative inquiry on parental involvement in children’s 􀀁 eachers􀀁 : 􀀁 eachers􀀁 ves of parents, children, and 􀀁 eachers in select elementary schools in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 40, 1-15
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). UK: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Szczygieł, M., & Pieronkiewicz, B. (2021). Exploring the nature of math anxiety in young children: Intensity, prevalence, reasons. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 23, 1-19.
• Montessori, M. (1952). 10.06.2021 tarihinde https://esfforchildrensrights.com/unescospeech adresinden erişildi.
• Montessori, M.(1981). The secret of childhood. New York: Ballantine.
• Montessori, M., & Yücel, G. (1975). Çocuk eğitimi: montessori metodu. İstanbul:Sander.
• Murray, A. K., Daoust, C. J., & Chen, J. (2019). Developing ınstruments to measure 􀀁 eaching􀀁 i 􀀁 eaching􀀁 i􀀁 al practices. Journal of Montessori Research, 5(1), 50–74.
• Palmer, L. (1912). Montessori and froebelian materials and methods. The Elementary School Teacher, 13(2), 66-79.
• Patton, M.Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park, CA:Sage
• Povell, P. (2009). Montessori comes to America: The leadership of maria 􀀁 eaching􀀁 i and nancy mccormick rambusch. US: University Press of America.
• Ross, S., (2012). The 􀀁 eaching􀀁 i method: the development of a healthy pattern of desire in early childhood. Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture, 19, 87-122.
• Schonleber, N. S. (2011). Hawaiian culture-based 􀀁 eaching􀀁 and the 􀀁 eaching􀀁 iapproach: overlapping 􀀁 eaching practices, values, and worldview. Journal ofAmerican Indian Education, 50(3), 5-25.
• Sönmez, N., & Özcan, B. (2020). Türkiye’de ilkokulda kaynaştırma eğitimiyle ilgili yapılan lisansüstü tezlerin betimsel incelemesi. Yaşadıkça Eğitim, 34(1), 1-27.
• Spillane J. P., Seelig J. L., Blaushild N. L., Cohen D. K., & Peurach D. J. (2019). Educational 􀀁 ontes building in a changing educational sector: enviroment, organization and the technical core. Educational Policy, 33(6), 846-881.
• Szostkowski, A. H. (2017). “It’s what we use as a community”: Exploring students’ STEM characterizations in two 􀀁 ontessori elementary classrooms. 10.06.2020 tarihinde https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/what-we-use-ascommunity-exploring-students-stem/docview/1964262465/se- 2?accountid=11248 adresinden erişilmiştir.
• Tebano, E. M., & Gynther A. P. (2020). Teaching in the montessori classroom: ınvestigating variaton theory and embodiment as a foundation of teachers development. Journal of Montessori Research, 6(1), 33-45.
• Tesch, R. (2013). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software. London:Routledge.
• Underwood, J. (2018). Defining the least restrictive environment. The Phi DeltaKappan, 100(3), 66-67.
• Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta‐synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204-211.
• World Economic Forum (WEF) (2020). Schools of the future defining new models of education for the fourth ındustrial revolution. 10.12.2020 tarihinde https://www.weforum.org/reports?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=education erişilmiştir.
• Yıldırım, A. (1999). Nitel araştırma yöntemlerinin temel özellikleri ve eğitim araştırmalarındaki yeri ve önemi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 112, 1-13.