article montessori presentation

Not logged in

• Create account

Page actions

• View source

In this activity the child is introduced to the concept of articles.

• 1 Presentation
• 2 Points of Interest
• 3 Control of Error
• 4 Variations and Extensions
• 5.1 Make Your Own
• 5.2 Where to Buy

Presentation

In this example, the objects are 2 rocks, 3 buttons, 1 pinecone, and 1 spool. Just about anything could be used as long as the words begin with consonants.

Points of Interest

Control of error, variations and extensions.

• If the child knows the difference between consonants and vowels, you could make a version in which every object is either 'a' something or 'an' something.

One inch wide strips seems to be a good width for the paper labels.

Make Your Own

Free printable Grammar Symbols (black outlines, print on the appropriate color of cardstock and cut out):

Grammar Symbols

Grammar symbols could be cut out of card-stock, craft foam, or plastic (maybe from plastic lids).

• 3D printable version by jbnimble on Thingiverse
• Where to Buy

Prices and links checked: 23 January 2022

• Make your own
• Printable Materials
• Montessori Books
• Books for Children
• Recent changes
• Random page
• Practical Life
• Social Studies
• Montessori Theory
• Special pages
• Cite this page

User page tools

• What links here
• Related changes
• Printable version
• Permanent link
• Page information

• This page was last edited on 26 January 2022, at 20:08.
• Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike unless otherwise noted.
• Privacy policy
• About Montessori Album
• Disclaimers

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 27 October 2017

Montessori education: a review of the evidence base

• Chloë Marshall 1  

npj Science of Learning volume  2 , Article number:  11 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

340k Accesses

60 Citations

248 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

The Montessori educational method has existed for over 100 years, but evaluations of its effectiveness are scarce. This review paper has three aims, namely to (1) identify some key elements of the method, (2) review existing evaluations of Montessori education, and (3) review studies that do not explicitly evaluate Montessori education but which evaluate the key elements identified in (1). The goal of the paper is therefore to provide a review of the evidence base for Montessori education, with the dual aspirations of stimulating future research and helping teachers to better understand whether and why Montessori education might be effective.

Similar content being viewed by others

Learning to teach through noticing: a bibliometric review of teacher noticing research in mathematics education during 2006–2021

Yicheng Wei, Qiaoping Zhang, … Min Chen

Exploration of implementation practices of Montessori education in mainland China

A meta-analysis to gauge the impact of pedagogies employed in mixed-ability high school biology classrooms

Malavika E. Santhosh, Jolly Bhadra, … Noora Al-Thani

Introduction

Maria Montessori (1870–1952) was by any measure an extraordinary individual. She initially resisted going into teaching—one of the few professions available to women in the late 19th century—and instead became one of the very first women to qualify as a medical doctor in Italy. As a doctor she specialised in psychiatry and paediatrics. While working with children with intellectual disabilities she gained the important insight that in order to learn, they required not medical treatment but rather an appropriate pedagogy. In 1900, she was given the opportunity to begin developing her pedagogy when she was appointed director of an Orthophrenic school for developmentally disabled children in Rome. When her pupils did as well in their exams as typically developing pupils and praise was lavished upon her for this achievement, she did not lap up that praise; rather, she wondered what it was about the education system in Italy that was failing children without disabilities. What was holding them back and preventing them from reaching their potential? In 1907 she had the opportunity to start working with non-disabled children in a housing project located in a slum district of Rome. There, she set up her first 'Casa dei Bambini' ('children’s house') for 3–7-year olds. She continued to develop her distinctive pedagogy based on a scientific approach of experimentation and observation. On the basis of this work, she argued that children pass through sensitive periods for learning and several stages of development, and that children’s self-construction can be fostered through engaging with self-directed activities in a specially prepared environment. There was international interest in this new way of teaching, and there are now thousands of Montessori schools (predominantly for children aged 3–6 and 6–12) throughout the world. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4

Central to Montessori’s method of education is the dynamic triad of child, teacher and environment. One of the teacher’s roles is to guide the child through what Montessori termed the 'prepared environment, i.e., a classroom and a way of learning that are designed to support the child’s intellectual, physical, emotional and social development through active exploration, choice and independent learning. One way of making sense of the Montessori method for the purposes of this review is to consider two of its important aspects: the learning materials, and the way in which the teacher and the design of the prepared environment promote children’s self-directed engagement with those materials. With respect to the learning materials, Montessori developed a set of manipulable objects designed to support children’s learning of sensorial concepts such as dimension, colour, shape and texture, and academic concepts of mathematics, literacy, science, geography and history. With respect to engagement, children learn by engaging hands-on with the materials most often individually, but also in pairs or small groups, during a 3-h 'work cycle' in which they are guided by the teacher to choose their own activities. They are given the freedom to choose what they work on, where they work, with whom they work, and for how long they work on any particular activity, all within the limits of the class rules. No competition is set up between children, and there is no system of extrinsic rewards or punishments. These two aspects—the learning materials themselves, and the nature of the learning—make Montessori classrooms look strikingly different to conventional classrooms.

It should be noted that for Montessori the goal of education is to allow the child’s optimal development (intellectual, physical, emotional and social) to unfold. 2 This is a very different goal to that of most education systems today, where the focus is on attainment in academic subjects such as literacy and mathematics. Thus when we ask the question, as this review paper does, whether children benefit more from a Montessori education than from a non-Montessori education, we need to bear in mind that the outcome measures used to capture effectiveness do not necessarily measure the things that Montessori deemed most important in education. Teachers and parents who choose the Montessori method may choose it for reasons that are not so amenable to evaluation.

Despite its existence for over 100 years, peer-reviewed evaluations of Montessori education are few and they suffer from a number of methodological limitations, as will be discussed in Section 3. This review has three aims, namely to (1) identify some key elements of the Montessori educational method, (2) review existing evaluations of Montessori education, and (3) review studies that do not explicitly evaluate Montessori education but which evaluate the key elements identified in (1). My goal is to provide a review of the scientific evidence base for Montessori education, with the dual aspirations of stimulating future research and helping teachers to better understand whether and why Montessori education might be effective.

Some key elements of the Montessori educational method

The goal of this section is to isolate some key elements of the Montessori method, in order to better understand why, if Montessori education is effective, this might be, and what elements of it might usefully be evaluated by researchers. These are important considerations because there is considerable variability in how the Montessori method is implemented in different schools, and the name, which is not copyrighted, is frequently used without full adherence. 5 , 6 Nevertheless, some elements of the method might still be beneficial, or could be successfully incorporated (or, indeed, are already incorporated) into schools that do not want to carry the name 'Montessori' or to adhere fully to its principles. Pinpointing more precisely what—if anything—about the Montessori method is effective will enable a better understanding of why it works. Furthermore, it has been argued that there might be dangers in adopting wholesale and uncritically an educational method that originated over 100 years ago, in a world that was different in many ways to today’s. 7 If the method is to be adopted piecemeal, which pieces should be adopted? As outlined previously, two important aspects of Montessori’s educational method are the learning materials, and the self-directed nature of children’s engagement with those materials. Some key elements of each of these aspects will now be considered in turn.

The learning materials

The first learning materials that the child is likely to encounter in the Montessori classroom are those that make up the practical life curriculum. These are activities that involve pouring different materials, using utensils such as scissors, tongs and tweezers, cleaning and polishing, preparing snacks, laying the table and washing dishes, arranging flowers, gardening, doing up and undoing clothes fastenings, and so on. Their aims, in addition to developing the child’s skills for independent living, are to build up the child’s gross and fine motor control and eye-hand co-ordination, to introduce them to the cycle of selecting, initiating, completing and tidying up an activity (of which more in the next section), and to introduce the rules for functioning in the social setting of the classroom.

As the child settles into the cycle of work and shows the ability to focus on self-selected activities, the teacher will introduce the sensorial materials. The key feature of the sensorial materials is that each isolates just one concept for the child to focus on. The pink tower, for example, consists of ten cubes which differ only in their dimensions, the smallest being 1 cm 3 , the largest 10 cm 3 . In building the tower the child’s attention is being focused solely on the regular decrease in volume of successive cubes. There are no additional cues—different colours for example, or numbers written onto the faces of the cube—which might help the child to sequence the cubes accurately. Another piece of sensorial material, the sound boxes, contains six pairs of closed cylinders that vary in sound from soft to loud when shaken, and the task for the child is to find the matching pairs. Again, there is only one cue that the child can use to do this task: sound. The aim of the sensorial materials is not to bombard the child’s senses with stimuli; on the contrary, they are tools designed for enabling the child to classify and put names to the stimuli that he will encounter on an everyday basis.

The sensorial materials, are, furthermore, designed as preparation for academic subjects. The long rods, which comprise ten red rods varying solely in length in 10 cm increments from 10 cm to 1 m, have an equivalent in the mathematics materials: the number rods, where the rods are divided into alternating 10 cm sections of red and blue so that they take on the numerical values 1–10. The touchboards, which consist of alternate strips of sandpaper and smooth paper for the child to feel, are preparation for the sandpaper globe in geography—a globe where the land masses are made of rough sandpaper but the oceans and seas are smooth. The touchboards are also preparation for the sandpaper letters in literacy and sandpaper numerals in mathematics, which the child learns to trace with his index and middle fingers.

Key elements of the literacy curriculum include the introduction of writing before reading, the breaking down of the constituent skills of writing (pencil control, letter formation, spelling) before the child actually writes words on paper, and the use of phonics for teaching sound-letter correspondences. Grammar—parts of speech, morphology, sentence structure—are taught systematically through teacher and child-made materials.

In the mathematics curriculum, quantities 0–10 and their symbols are introduced separately before being combined, and large quantities and symbols (tens, hundreds and thousands) and fractions are introduced soon after, all through concrete materials. Operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, the calculation of square roots) are again introduced using concrete materials, which the child can choose to stop using when he is able to succeed without that concrete support.

Principles running throughout the design of these learning materials are that the child learns through movement and gains a concrete foundation with the aim of preparing him for learning more abstract concepts. A further design principle is that each piece of learning material has a 'control of error' which alerts the child to any mistakes, thereby allowing self-correction with minimal teacher support.

Self-directed engagement with the materials

Important though the learning materials are, 8 they do not, in isolation, constitute the Montessori method because they need to be engaged with in a particular way. Montessori observed that the young child is capable of concentrating for long periods of time on activities that capture his spontaneous interest. 2 , 3 , 4 There are two features of the way that children engage with the learning materials that Montessori claimed promoted this concentration. The first is that there is a cycle of activity surrounding the use of each piece of material (termed the 'internal work cycle ' 9 ). If a child wishes to use the pink tower, for example, he will have to find a space on the floor large enough to unroll the mat that will delineate his work area, carry the ten cubes of the pink tower individually to the mat from where they are stored, then build the tower. Once he has built the tower he is free to repeat this activity as many times as he likes. Other children may come and watch, and if he wishes they can join in with him, but he will be able to continue on his own if he prefers and for as long as he likes. When he has had enough, he will dismantle the pink tower and reassemble it in its original location, ready for another child to use. This repeated and self-chosen engagement with the material, the lack of interruption, and the requirement to set up the material and put it away afterwards, are key elements aimed at developing the child’s concentration. 10

The second feature which aims to promote concentration is that these cycles of activity take place during a 3-h period of time (termed the 'external work cycle' 9 ). During those 3 h children are mostly free to select activities on their own and with others, and to find their own rhythm of activity, moving freely around the classroom as they do so. One might wonder what the role of the teacher is during this period. Although the children have a great deal of freedom in what they do, their freedom is not unlimited. The teacher’s role is to guide children who are finding it hard to select materials or who are disturbing others, to introduce new materials to children who are ready for a new challenge, and to conduct small-group lessons. Her decisions about what to teach are made on the basis of careful observations of the children. Although she might start the day with plans of what she will do during the work cycle, she will be led by her students and their needs, and there is no formal timetable. Hence the Montessori classroom is very different to the teacher-led conventional classroom with its highly structured day where short timeslots are devoted to each activity, the whole class is engaged in the same activities at the same time, and the teacher instructs at the front of the class.

In summary, there are two aspects of Montessori classrooms that are very different to conventional classrooms: the learning materials themselves, and the individual, self-directed nature of the learning under the teacher’s expert guidance. All the elements described here—the features of the learning materials themselves (e.g., each piece of material isolates just one concept, each contains a control of error that allows for self-correction, learning proceeds from concrete to abstract concepts) and the child-led manner of engagement with those materials (e.g., self-selection, repeated and active engagement, tidying up afterwards, freedom from interruption, lack of grades and extrinsic rewards) might potentially benefit development and learning over the teaching of the conventional classroom. We will return to many of the elements discussed here in the following two sections. (This has necessarily been only a brief survey of some of the most important elements of the Montessori method. Readers wanting to find out more are again directed to refs. 2 , 3 , 4 ).

Evaluations of Montessori education

There are few peer-reviewed evaluations of Montessori education, and the majority have been carried out in the USA. Some have evaluated children’s outcomes while those children were in Montessori settings, and others have evaluated Montessori-educated children after a period of subsequent conventional schooling. As a whole this body of research suffers from several methodological limitations. Firstly, few studies are longitudinal in design. Secondly, there are no good quality randomised control trials; most researchers have instead tried to match participants in Montessori and comparison groups on as many likely confounding variables as possible. Thirdly, if children in the Montessori group do score higher than those in the non-Montessori group on a particular outcome measure, then assuming that that effect can be attributed to being in a Montessori classroom, what exactly is it about Montessori education that has caused the effect? Montessori education is a complex package—how can the specific elements which might be causing the effect be isolated? At a very basic level—and drawing on two of the main aspects of Montessori education outlined above—is the effect due to the learning materials or to the self-directed way in which children engage with them (and can the two be separated)? Fourthly, there are presumably differences between Montessori schools (including the way in which the method is implemented) that might influence children’s outcomes, but studies rarely include more than one Montessori school, and sometimes not more than one Montessori class. Fifthly, and relatedly, there is the issue of 'treatment fidelity'—what counts as a Montessori classroom? Not all schools that call themselves 'Montessori' adhere strictly to Montessori principles, have trained Montessori teachers, or are accredited by a professional organisation. A sixth, and again related, point is that children’s experiences in Montessori education will vary in terms of the length of time they spend in Montessori education, and the age at which they attend. Finally, the numbers of children participating in studies are usually small and quite narrow in terms of their demographics, making generalisation of any results problematic. These methodological issues are not limited to evaluations of Montessori education, of course—they are relevant to much of educational research.

Of these, the lack of randomised control trials is particularly notable given the recognition of their importance in education. 11 , 12 Parents choose their child’s school for a host of different reasons, 13 and randomisation is important in the context of Montessori education because parents who choose a non-conventional school for their child might be different in relevant ways from parents who do not, for example in their views on child-rearing and aspirations for their child’s future. This means that if a study finds a benefit for Montessori education over conventional education this might reflect a parent effect rather than a school effect. Furthermore, randomisation also controls for socio-economic status (SES). Montessori schools are often fee-paying, which means that pupils are likely to come from higher SES families; children from higher SES families are likely to do better in a variety of educational contexts. 14 , 15 , 16 A recent report found that even public (i.e., non-fee-paying) Montessori schools in the USA are not representative of the racial and socioeconomic diversity of the neighbourhoods they serve. 17 However, random assignment of children to Montessori versus non-Montessori schools for the purposes of a randomised control trial would be very difficult to achieve because it would take away parental choice.

Arguably the most robust evaluation of the Montessori method to date is that by Lillard and Else-Quest. 18 They compared children in Montessori and non-Montessori education and from two age groups—5 and 12-year olds—on a range of cognitive, academic, social and behavioural measures. Careful thought was given to how to overcome the lack of random assignment to the Montessori and non-Montessori groups. The authors’ solution was to design their study around the school lottery that was already in place in that particular school district. All children had entered the Montessori school lottery; those who were accepted were assigned to the Montessori group, and those who were not accepted were assigned to the comparison (other education systems) group. Post-hoc comparisons showed similar income levels in both sets of families. Although group differences were not found for all outcome measures, where they were found they favoured the Montessori group. For 5-year olds, significant group differences were found for certain academic skills (namely letter-word identification, phonological decoding ability, and math skills), a measure of executive function (the card sort task), social skills (as measured by social reasoning and positive shared play) and theory of mind (as measured by a false-belief task). For 12-year olds, significant group differences were found on measures of story writing and social skills. Furthermore, in a questionnaire that asked about how they felt about school, responses of children in the Montessori group indicated that they felt a greater sense of community. The authors concluded that 'at least when strictly implemented, Montessori education fosters social and academic skills that are equal or superior to those fostered by a pool of other types of schools'. 18

Their study has been criticised for using just one Montessori school, 19 but Lillard and Else-Quest’s response is that the school was faithful to Montessori principles, which suggests that the results might be generalisable to other such schools. 20 That fidelity might impact outcomes has long been of concern, 21 and was demonstrated empirically in a further, longitudinal, study, 6 that compared high fidelity Montessori classes (again, from just one school), 'supplemented' Montessori classes (which provided the Montessori materials plus conventional activities such as puzzles, games and worksheets), and conventional classrooms. Children in these classes were 3–6 years old, and they were tested at two time-points: towards the beginning and towards the end of the school year. Although the study lacked random assignment of children to groups, the groups were matched with respect to key parent variables such as parental education. As in Lillard and Else-Quest’s earlier study, 18 outcome measures tapped a range of social and academic skills related to school readiness (i.e., children’s preparedness to succeed in academic settings). There were two research questions: firstly, do preschool children’s school readiness skills change during the academic year as a function of school type, and secondly, within Montessori schools, does the percentage of children using Montessori materials in a classroom predict children’s school readiness skills at the end of the academic year? Overall, the answer to both questions was “yes”. Children in the high-fidelity Montessori school, as compared with children in the other two types of school, showed significantly greater gains on measures of executive function, reading, math, vocabulary, and social problem-solving. Furthermore, the degree to which children were engaged with Montessori materials significantly predicted gains in executive function, reading and vocabulary. In other words, treatment fidelity mattered: children gained fewer benefits from being in a Montessori school when they were engaged in non-Montessori activities.

This study does not demonstrate definitively that the Montessori materials drove the effect: there might have been other differences between the high and lower fidelity classrooms—such as the teachers’ interactions with their pupils—that were responsible for the difference in child outcomes. 6 In a move to explore the role of the Montessori materials further, a more recent experimental study 22 removed supplementary materials, to leave just the Montessori materials, from two of the three classrooms in a Montessori school that served 3–6-year olds. Over a period of 4 months children in the classrooms from which supplementary materials were removed made significantly greater gains than children from the unchanged classroom on tests of letter-word identification and executive function, although not on measures of vocabulary, theory of mind, maths, or social problem-solving. The authors acknowledge weaknesses in the study design, including the small number of participants (just 52 across the three classrooms) and the short duration. Nevertheless, the study does provide a template for how future experimental manipulations of fidelity to the Montessori method could be carried out.

Fidelity is important because variation in how faithful Montessori schools are to the 'ideal' is likely to be an important factor in explaining why such mixed findings have been found in evaluations of the Montessori method. 6 For example, two early randomised control trials to evaluate Head Start in the USA did not find any immediate benefit of Montessori preschool programmes over other types of preschool programmes. 23 , 24 In both programmes, only 4-year olds were included, whereas the ideal in Montessori preschool programmes is for 3–6 year olds to be taught in the same class in order to foster child-to-child tutoring. 6 Furthermore, in one of the programmes 23 the ideal 3-h work cycle was reduced to just 30 min. 6 A more recent study of older children compared 8th grade Montessori and non-Montessori students matched for gender, ethnicity and socio-economic status. 25 The study found lower scores for Montessori students for English/Language Arts and no difference for maths scores, but the participating Montessori school altered the “ideal” by issuing evaluative grades to pupils and introducing non-Montessori activities. 6

These same limitations then make it difficult to interpret studies that have found 'later' benefits for children who have been followed up after a subsequent period of conventional education. In one of the studies discussed earlier, 23 social and cognitive benefits did emerge for children who had previously attended Montessori preschools and then moved to conventional schools, but these benefits did not emerge until adolescence, while a follow-up study 26 found cognitive benefits in Montessori males only, again in adolescence. Although such 'sleeper effects' have been widely reported in evaluations of early years interventions, they may be artefacts of simple measurement error and random fluctuations. 27 Importantly, if the argument is that lack of fidelity to the Montessori method is responsible for studies not finding significant benefits of Montessori education at younger ages, it is not logical to then credit the Montessori method with any benefits that emerge in follow-up studies.

Some studies report positive outcomes for certain curricular areas but not others. One, for example, investigated scores on maths, science, English and social studies tests in the final years of compulsory education, several years after children had left their Montessori classrooms. 28 Compared to the non-Montessori group (who were matched for gender, socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity and high school attended), the Montessori group scored significantly higher on maths and science, but no differences were found for English and social studies. What might explain this differential effect? The authors suggested that the advantages for maths might be driven by the materials themselves, compared to how maths is taught in conventional classes. 28 Alternatively, or perhaps in addition, children in Montessori classrooms might spend more time engaged in maths and science activities compared to children in conventional classes, with the amount of time spent on English and social studies not differing. However, the authors were unable, within the design of their study, to provide details of exactly how much time children in the Montessori school had spent doing maths, science, English and social studies, in comparison to the time that children in conventional classes were spending on those subjects.

Just as knowing what is going on in the Montessori classroom is vital to being able to interpret the findings of evaluations, so is knowing what is going on in the comparison classrooms. One of the earliest evaluations of Montessori education in the USA 29 speculated that Montessori would have found much to appreciate in one of the non-Montessori comparison classes, including its 'freedom for the children (moving about; working alone); its planned environment (innovative methods with tape recorder playback of children’s conversations; live animals, etc.); its non-punitive character (an “incorrect” answer deserves help, not anger; original answers are reinforced, but other answers are pursued); and its emphasis on concentration (the children sustained activity without direct supervision for relatively long periods of time)'. In some evaluations, the differences between Montessori and conventional classrooms might not actually be so great, which might explain why benefits of being educated in a Montessori classroom are not found. And even if the Montessori approach to teaching a particular curriculum area is different to those used in conventional classrooms, there are likely to be different, equally-effective approaches to teaching the same concepts. This is a suggested explanation for the finding that although children in Montessori kindergartens had an advantage relative to their conventionally-educated peers for base-10 understanding in mathematics, they did not maintain this advantage when tested 2 years later. 30

While most evaluations are interested in traditional academic outcomes or factors related to academic success such as executive functions, a small number have investigated creativity. For example, an old study 31 compared just 14 four and five-year-old children who attended a Montessori nursery school with 14 four and five-year olds who attended a conventional nursery school (matched for a range of parental variables, including attitudes and parental control). In a non-verbal creativity task, involving picture construction, they were given a blank sheet of paper, a piece of red gummed paper in the shape of a curved jellybean, and a pencil. They were then asked to think of and draw a picture in which the red paper would form an integral part. Each child’s construction was rated for originality, elaboration, activity, and title adequacy, and these ratings were then combined into a 'creativity' score. The group of conventionally-schooled children scored almost twice as high as the Montessori group. A second task involved the child giving verbal descriptions of seven objects: a red rubber ball, a green wooden cube, a short length of rope, a steel mirror, a piece of rectangular clear plastic, a piece of chalk, and a short length of plastic tubing. Each description was scored as to whether it was functional (i.e., focused on the object’s use) or whether it was a description of the object’s physical characteristics (i.e., shape, colour, etc.). Like the non-verbal creativity task, this task differentiated the two groups: whereas the conventionally educated children gave more functional descriptions (e.g., for the cube: “you play with it”), the Montessori children gave more physical descriptions (e.g., “it’s square, it’s made of wood, and it’s green”). A third task, the Embedded Figure Test, involved the child first being presented with a stimulus figure and then locating a similar figure located in an embedding context. Both accuracy and speed were measured. While the two groups did not differ in the number of embedded figures accurately located, the Montessori group completed the task significantly more quickly. The fourth and final task required children to draw a picture of anything they wanted to. Drawings were coded for the presence or absence of geometric figures and people. The Montessori group produced more geometric figures, but fewer people, than the conventional group.

The authors were careful not to cast judgement on the performance differences between the two groups. 31 They wrote that 'The study does, however, support the notion that differing preschool educational environments yield different outcomes' and 'Montessori children responded to the emphasis in their programme upon the physical world and upon a definition of school as a place of work; the Nursery School children responded on their part to the social emphasis and the opportunity for spontaneous expression of feeling'. They did not, however, compare and contrast the particular features of the two educational settings that might have given rise to these differences.

Creativity has been studied more recently in France. 32 Seven to twelve-year olds were tested longitudinally on five tasks tapping different aspects of creativity. 'Divergent' thinking tasks required children to (1) think of unusual uses for a cardboard box, (2) come up with ideas for making a plain toy elephant more entertaining, and (3) make as many drawings as possible starting from pairs of parallel lines. 'Integrative' thinking tasks required children to (1) invent a story based on a title that was provided to them, and (2) invent a drawing incorporating six particular shapes. Their sample was bigger than that of the previous study, 31 comprising 40 pupils from a Montessori school and 119 from two conventional schools, and pupils were tested in two consecutive years (no information is provided about whether pupils from different schools were matched on any variable other than age). For both types of task and at both time-points the Montessori-educated children scored higher than the conventionally-educated children. Again, the authors made little attempt to pinpoint the precise differences between schools that might have caused such differences in performance.

None of the studies discussed so far has attempted to isolate individual elements of the Montessori method that might be accounting for any of the positive effects that they find. There are several studies, however, that have focused on the practical life materials. A quasi-experimental study 33 demonstrated that the practical life materials can be efficacious in non-Montessori classrooms. More than 50 different practical life exercises were introduced into eight conventional kindergarten classes, while five conventional kindergarten classes were not given these materials and acted as a comparison group. The outcome measure was a fine motor control task, the 'penny posting test', whereby the number of pennies that a child could pick up and post through a one-inch slot in a can in two 30 s trials was counted. At pre-test the treatment and comparison groups did not differ in the number of pennies posted, but at post-test 6 months later the treatment group achieved a higher score than the comparison group, indicating finer motor control. A nice feature of this study is that teachers reported children in both groups spending the same amount of time on tasks designed to support fine motor control development, suggesting that there was something specific to the design of the practical life materials that was more effective in this regard than the conventional kindergarten materials on offer. And because the preschools that had used the practical life activities had introduced no other elements of the Montessori method, the effect could be confidently attributed to the practical life materials themselves.

An extension of this study 34 investigated the potential benefits of the practical life materials for fine motor control by comparing 5-year olds in Montessori kindergarten programmes with 5-year olds in a conventional programme (reported to have similarities in teaching mission and pupil background characteristics) on the 'flag posting test'. In this task, the child was given a solid hardwood tray covered with clay in which there were 12 pinholes. There were also 12 paper flags mounted on pins, six to the right of the tray and six to the left, and the child’s task was to place the flags one at time in the holes. The child received three scores: one for the amount of time taken to finish the activity, one for the number of attempts it took the child to put each flag into the hole, and one for hand dominance (to receive a score of 1 (established dominance) the child had to consistently use the same hand to place all 12 flags, whereas mixed dominance received a score of 0). Children were pre-tested at the beginning of the school year and post-tested 8 months later. Despite the lack of random assignment to groups, the two groups did not differ on pre-test scores, but they did at post-test: at post-test the Montessori group were significantly faster and significantly more accurate at the task, and had more established hand dominance. However, no attempt was made to measure how frequently children in both groups engaged with materials and activities that were designed to support fine motor control development. Furthermore, the children in the Montessori classrooms were at the age where they should also have been using the sensorial materials, some of which (for example, the 'knobbed cylinders' and 'geometric cabinet') are manipulated by holding small knobs, and whose use could potentially enhance fine motor control. At that age children would also have been using the 'insets for design', materials from the early literacy curriculum designed to enhance pencil control. Therefore, although the results of this study are consistent with the practical life materials enhancing fine motor control, the study does not securely establish that they do.

A further study 35 introduced practical life exercises into conventional kindergarten classes, while control kindergarten classes were not given these materials. 15 min were set aside in the experimental schools’ timetable for using the practical life materials, and they were also available during free choice periods. This time the outcome measure at pre-test and post-test was not fine motor skill but attention. There were benefits to attention of being in the experimental group, but only for girls—boys showed no such benefits. The differential gender impact of the practical life materials on the development of attention is puzzling. Girls did not appear to engage with the materials more than boys during the time that was set aside for using them, but no measure was taken of whether girls chose them more frequently than boys during the free choice periods. Similarly, there were no measurements of the time that children in both the experimental and control groups spent engaged in other activities that might have enhanced fine motor control. Nor is it clear whether it was the fine motor practice directly or rather the opportunity to select interesting activities (the teachers in the experimental schools commented on how interesting the children found the practical life activities) that was responsible for the benefits to attention that were recorded for girls.

Finally, it has been found that young adolescents in Montessori middle schools show greater intrinsic motivation than their peers in conventional middle schools (matched for an impressive array of background variables, including ethnicity, parental education and employment, home resources, parental involvement in school, and number of siblings). 36 The authors did not establish exactly which elements of the Montessori method might be responsible for this finding, but they did speculate that the following might be relevant: “students were provided at least 2 h per day to exercise choice and self-regulation; none of the students received mandatory grades; student grouping was primarily based on shared interests, not standardised tests; and students collaborated often with other students”. The authors did not evaluate the Montessori and non-Montessori groups on any measures of academic outcomes, but given the links between academic success and motivation at all stages of education (they provide a useful review of this literature), this link would be worth investigating in Montessori schools.

This section has discussed studies that have evaluated the Montessori method directly. To date there have been very few methodologically robust evaluations. Many suffer from limitations that make it challenging to interpret their findings, whether those findings are favourable, neutral or unfavourable towards the Montessori method. However, while randomised control trials could (and should) be designed to evaluate individual elements of the Montessori method, it is difficult to see how the random assignment of pupils to schools could work in practice (hence the ingenuity of the study reported in ref. 18 ). Nor could trials be appropriately blinded—teachers, and perhaps parents and pupils too, would know whether they were in the Montessori arm of the trial. In other words, although random assignment and blinding might work for specific interventions, it is hard to see how they could work for an entire school curriculum. Furthermore, given the complexity of identifying what it is that works, why it works, and for whom it works best, additional information, for example from observations of what children and teachers are actually doing in the classroom, would be needed for interpreting the results.

Evaluations of key elements of Montessori education that are shared with other educational methods

This final section examines studies that have not evaluated the Montessori method directly, but have evaluated other educational methods and interventions that share elements of the Montessori method. They, together with our growing understanding of the science underpinning learning, can add to the evidence base for Montessori education. Given the vast amount of research and the limited space in which to consider it, priority is given to systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

One of the best-researched instructional techniques is the use of phonics for teaching children to read. Phonics is the explicit teaching of the letter-sound correspondences that allow the child to crack the alphabetic code. Montessori’s first schools were in Italy, and Italian orthography has relatively transparent one-to-one mappings between letters and sounds, making phonics a logical choice of method for teaching children the mechanics of reading and spelling. English orthography is, however, much less regular: the mappings between letters and sounds are many-to-many, and for this reason the use of phonics as a method of instruction has been challenged for English. 37 Nevertheless, there is overwhelming evidence of its effectiveness despite English’s irregularities. 38 , 39 , 40 At the same time, great strides have been made in elucidating the neural mechanisms that underlie early reading and reading impairments, and these too demonstrate the importance to successful reading of integrating sound and visual representations. 41

As always in education, the devil is in the detail. Importantly, phonics programmes have the greatest impact on reading accuracy when they are systematic. 39 , 40 By 'systematic' it is meant that letter-sound relationships are taught in an organised sequence, rather than being taught on an ad hoc as-and-when-needed basis. However, within systematic teaching of phonics there are two very different approaches: synthetic phonics and analytic phonics. Synthetic phonics starts from the parts and works up to the whole: children learn the sounds that correspond to letters or groups of letters and use this knowledge to sound out words from left to right. Analytic phonics starts from the whole and drills down to the parts: sound-letter relationships are inferred from sets of words which share a letter and sound, e.g., \(\underline{h}\) at , \(\underline{h}\) en , \(\underline{h}\) ill , \(\underline{h}\) orse . Few randomised control trials have pitted synthetic and analytic phonics against one another, and it is not clear that either has the advantage. 40

The Montessori approach to teaching phonics is certainly systematic. Many schools in the UK, for example, use word lists drawn from Morris’s 'Phonics 44'. 42 , 43 Furthermore, the Montessori approach to phonics is synthetic rather than analytic: children are taught the sound-letter code before using it to encode words (in spelling) and decode them (in reading). One of the criticisms of synthetic phonics is that it teaches letters and sounds removed from their meaningful language context, in a way that analytic phonics does not. 44 It has long been recognised that the goal of reading is comprehension. Reading for meaning requires both code-based skills and language skills such as vocabulary, morphology, syntax and inferencing skills, 45 and these two sets of skills are not rigidly separated, but rather interact at multiple levels. 46 Indeed, phonics instruction works best where it is integrated with text-level reading instruction. 39 , 40 The explicit teaching of phonics within a rich language context—both spoken and written—is central to the Montessori curriculum. No evaluations have yet pitted phonics teaching in the Montessori classroom versus phonics teaching in the conventional classroom, however, and so whether the former is differentially effective is not known.

Research into writing supports Montessori’s view that writing involves a multitude of component skills, including handwriting, spelling, vocabulary and sentence construction. 47 , 48 Proficiency in these skills predicts the quality of children’s written compositions. 49 , 50 In the Montessori classroom these skills are worked on independently before being brought together, but they can continue to be practised independently. A growing body of research from conventional and special education classrooms demonstrates that the specific teaching of the component skills of writing improves the quality of children’s written compositions. 51 , 52 , 53 , 54

With respect to teaching mathematics to young children, there are many recommendations that Montessori teachers would recognise in their own classrooms, such as teaching geometry, number and operations using a developmental progression, and using progress monitoring to ensure that mathematics instruction builds on what each child knows. 55 Some of the recommended activities, such as 'help children to recognise, name, and compare shapes, and then teach them to combine and separate shapes' 55 map exactly on to Montessori’s sensorial materials such as the geometric cabinet and the constructive triangles. Other activities such as 'encourage children to label collections with number words and numerals' 55 map onto Montessori’s early mathematics material such as the number rods, the spindle box and the cards and counters. The importance of conceptual knowledge as the foundation for children being able to understand fractions has been stressed. 56 The Montessori fraction circles—which provide a sensorial experience with the fractions from one whole to ten tenths—provide just such a foundation, as do practical life exercises such as preparing snacks (how should a banana be cut so that it can be shared between three children?) and folding napkins.

Finally in this section, it is worth returning to the sustained attention and self-regulation that have been argued to characterise children’s engagement with the learning materials in the Montessori classroom. 2 , 3 , 4 These are important parts of the complex cognitive construct of executive functions (EFs), which also include inhibition, working memory and planning. Put simply, EFs are the set of processes that allow us to control our thoughts and actions in order to engage in motivated, goal-directed behaviour. That EFs are critical for academic success is backed by a wealth of research evidence. 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 Given this key role, EFs have become the target for a number of individually-administered interventions, full curricula, and add-ons to classroom curricula, such as CogMed (Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ), Tools of the Mind, 62 PATHS (PATHS Training LLC, Seattle, WA), music, yoga and martial arts. A review study compared these, including Montessori education, and concluded that compared to interventions such as CogMed that solely target EFs, 'school curricula hold the greatest promise for accessibility to all and intervening early enough to get children on a positive trajectory from the start and affecting EFs most broadly'. 63

Conclusions

Montessori education has been in existence for over a hundred years. Such longevity could well be due, at least in part, to its adaptability. 6 However, by its very nature, of course, greater adaptability means lower fidelity. This paper has discussed evidence that children may benefit cognitively and socially from Montessori education that is faithful to its creator’s principles, but it is less clear that adapted forms—which usually result in children spending less time engaged with self-chosen learning materials—are as effective. Nevertheless, studies suggest that the practical life materials can be usefully introduced into non-Montessori classrooms to support the development of young children’s fine motor skills and attention, and there is ample evidence from the wider educational literature that certain elements of the Montessori method—such as teaching early literacy through a phonic approach embedded in a rich language context, and providing a sensorial foundation for mathematics education—are effective. It has not been possible in this paper to give an exhaustive discussion of all the elements of Montessori education that might be beneficial, for example the lack of extrinsic rewards, the reduced emphasis on academic testing and lack of competition between pupils, the 3-year age-banding that fosters cross-age tutoring, or the presence of a trained teacher in the early years classroom.

Where does this leave Montessori education more than 100 years after its birth, and more than 60 years after the death of its creator? As others have noted, Montessori was a scientist who truly valued the scientific method and would not have expected her educational method to remain static. 64 Yet Montessori teachers often feel fear or uncertainty about being able to apply Montessori’s theories in new and innovative ways while still adhering to her underlying philosophical principles. 65 Ultimately, only empirical research, undertaken by teachers and researchers working together, can be our guide, because the questions that need answering are empirical in nature. Neuroscientific research—using neuroimaging methods which were not available in Montessori’s day—might also play a guiding role. For example, Montessori was prescient in her views that adolescence was a special time in development where the individual required a specially-designed form of education to address their needs. 66 Recent neuroimaging evidence points to adolescence as indeed being an important period for neural development, particularly for areas involved in executive functions and social cognition. 67 , 68 Montessori did not fully develop her ideas for the education of 12–18-year olds during her lifetime, but it is an area where current Montessorians might be able to take over the reins. Although some Montessori schools take pupils up to the age of 18, they are few and far between, and to my knowledge there are no published evaluations of their effectiveness. Developing a Montessori education for this age group in conjunction with the best of our current knowledge of developmental cognitive neuroscience has the potential to make a very positive contribution.

Nor did Montessori consider using her method with the elderly. In the context of a rapidly aging population and increasing numbers of elderly adults with acquired cognitive impairments such as those that result from Alzheimer’s disease, 69 it is interesting to note that the Montessori method is now being adapted for use with dementia patients, with the aim of improving functioning in activities of daily living, such as feeding, and in cognition. There is strong evidence for a reduction in difficulties with eating, weak evidence for benefits on cognition, and mixed evidence for benefits on constructive engagement and positive affect. 70 However, the quality of studies varies across domains; those evaluating effects on cognition have been of rather poor quality so far, and they have not yet examined whether there might be long-term effects. Nevertheless, given the challenges to developing successful medication for patients with Alzheimer’s disease despite a detailed knowledge of changes in their neurobiology, it would be sensible to continue the search for successful behavioural interventions alongside that for medical interventions. 71 One method for delivering Montessori-based activities to the elderly is via inter-generational programmes, whereby older adults with dementia are supported in teaching Montessori-based lessons to preschool children. Benefits have been reported for the adults involved, 72 but whether the children also benefit in particular ways from such inter-generational teaching has not been evaluated. Nor is it known whether a Montessori education in childhood or Montessori-based activities experienced in later life can protect the executive control circuits of the brain, as has been proposed for bilingualism. 73 A lifespan approach to the evaluation of the Montessori method involving both behavioural and neuroimaging methods might be valuable.

In sum, there are many methodological challenges to carrying out good quality educational research, including good quality research on the Montessori method. Arguably the most obvious challenge to emerge from the literature reviewed here is the practical difficulty of randomly allocating pupils to Montessori and non-Montessori schools in order to compare outcomes. The majority of studies have relied instead on trying to match pupils and teachers in Montessori and non-Montessori schools on a number of different variables, with the concomitant danger that unidentified factors have contributed to any difference in outcomes. Even if randomisation is achievable, studies need to be conducted on a large enough scale to not only allow generalisations to be made beyond the particular schools studied, but to also allow investigation of which children the Montessori method suits best. On a more optimistic note, recent experimental studies—whereby features of existing Montessori classrooms are manipulated in some way, or features of the Montessori method are added to non-Montessori classrooms—hold promise for investigating the effectiveness of particular elements of the Montessori method. The evidence base can be strengthened yet further by drawing on research of educational interventions with which it shares certain elements, and by drawing on related research in the science of learning. National and regional education systems are beset by regular swings of the pendulum, for example towards and away from phonics, 74 and towards and away from children working individually. 75 This means that elements of the Montessori method will sometimes be in vogue and sometimes not. It is therefore particularly important that Montessori teachers understand the evidence base that supports, or does not support, their pedagogy.

Foschi, R. Science and culture around Montessori’s first “children’s houses” in Rome (1907–1915). J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 44 , 238–257 (2008).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Montessori, M. The Discovery of the Child (Clio Press, Oxford, UK, 1912/1988).

Polk Lillard, P. Montessori: A Modern Approach (Schocken Books, New York, NY, 1972)

Standing, E. M. Montessori: Her Life and Work (New American Library, New York, NY, 1957)

Daoust, C. J. An Examination of Implementation Practices in Montessori early childhood education . Doctoral thesis, University of California, Berkeley (2004).

Lillard, A. S. Preschool children’s development in classic Montessori, supplemented Montessori, and conventional programs. J. School Psychol. 50 , 379–401 (2012).

Article   Google Scholar  

McDermott, J. J. in Montessori: Her Life and Work (ed Standing, E. M.) (New American Library, New York, NY, 1957).

Lillard, A. S. How important are the Montessori materials? Montessori Life 20 , 20–25 (2008).

Google Scholar  

Cossentino, J. Big work: goodness, vocation and engagement in the Montessori method. Curric. Inq. 36 , 63–92 (2006).

Montessori, M. The Secret of Childhood (Ballantine Books, New York, NY, 1966).

Goldacre, B. Building evidence into education . https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193913/Building_evidence_into_education.pdf (2013).

Torgerson, C. J. & Torgerson, D. J. The need for randomised controlled trials in educational research. Br. J. Educ. Stud. 25 , 129–143 (2001).

Schneider, M., Marschall, M., Teske, P. & Roch, C. School choice and culture wars in the classroom: what different parents seek from education. Soc. Sci. Quaterly 79 , 489–501 (1998).

DeGarmo, D. S., Forgatch, M. S. & Martinez, C. R. Parenting of divorced mothers as a link between social status and boys’ academic outcomes: unpacking the effects of socioeconomic status. Child. Dev. 70 , 1231–1245 (1999).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Okpala, C. O., Okpala, A. O. & Smith, F. E. Parental involvement, instructional expenditures, family socioeconomic attributes, and student achievement. J. Educ. Res. 95 , 110–115 (2001).

Sirin, S. R. Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a metaanalyticreview of research. Rev. Educ. Res. 75 , 417–453 (2005).

Debs, M. C. Racial and economic diversity in U.S. public Montessori schools. J. Montessori Res. 2 , 15–34 (2016).

Lillard, A. S. & Else-Quest, N. Evaluating Montessori education. Science 313 , 1893–1894 (2016).

Linderfors, P. Letter to the editor: studying students in Montessori schools. Science 315 , 596 (2007).

Lillard, A. S. & Else-Quest, N. Response to Lindenfors and MacKinnon. Science 315 , 596–597 (2007).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Pitcher, E. G. An evaluation of the Montessori method in schools for young children. Child. Educ. 42 , 489–492 (1966).

Lillard, A. S. & Heise, M. J. Removing supplementary materials from Montessori classrooms changed child outcomes. J. Montessori Res. 2 , 16–26 (2016).

Karnes, M., Shewedel, A. & Williams, M. A. in As the Twig is Bent: Lasting Effects of Preschool Programs (ed. Consortium for Longitudinal Studies) (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1983).

Miller, L. B. & Dyer, J. L. Four preschool programs: Their dimensions and effects. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev . 40 , 1–170 (1975).

Lopata, C., Wallace, N. V. & Finn, K. V. Comparison of academic achievement between Montessori and traditional education programs. J. Res. Child. Educ. 20 , 5–13 (2005).

Miller, L. B. & Bizzell, R. P. Long-term effects of four preschool programs: ninth- and tenth-grade results. Child. Dev. 55 , 1570–1587 (1984).

Clarke, A. D. B. & Clarke, A. M. “Sleeper effects” in development: fact or artefact? Dev. Rev. 1 , 344–360 (1981).

Dohrmann, K., Nishida, T., Gartner, A., Lipsky, D. & Grimm, K. High school outcomes for students in a public Montessori program. J. Res. Child. Educ. 22 , 205–217 (2007).

Banta, T. J. The Sands School Project: First Year Results (Department of Psychology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 1968)

Laski, E. V., Vasilyeva, M. & Schiffman, J. Longitudinal comparison of place-value and arithmetic knowledge in Montessori and non-Montessori students. J. Mont. Res. 2 , 1–15 (2016).

Dreyer, A. & Rigler, D. Cognitive performance in Montessori and nursery school children. J. Educ. Res. 62 , 411–416 (1969).

Besançon, M. & Lubart, T. Differences in the development of creative competencies in children schooled in diverse learning environments. Learn. Ind. Diff. 18 , 391–399 (2008).

Rule, A. & Stewart, R. Effects of practical life materials on kindergartners’ fine motor skills. Early Child. Educ. J. 30 , 9–13 (2002).

Bhatia, P., Davis, A. & Shamas-Brandt, E. Educational gymnastics: the effectiveness of Montessori practical life activities in developing fine motor skills in kindergartners. Early Educ. Dev. 26 , 594–607 (2015).

Stewart, R. A., Rule, A. C. & Giordano, D. A. The effect of fine motor skill activities on kindergarten student attention. Early Child. Educ. J. 35 , 103–109 (2007).

Rathunde, K. & Csikszetnmihalyi, M. Middle school students’ motivation and quality of experience: A comparison of Montessori and traditional school environments. Am. J. Educ. 111 , 341–371 (2005).

Dombey, H. in Phonics: Practice, Research and Policy (eds Lewis, M. & Ellis, S.) (Paul Chapman Publishing, London, UK, 2006).

Hattie, J. Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement (Routledge, Abingdon, UK, 2008).

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction: Reports of the Subgroups . NIH Publication no. 00–4754 (US Government Printing Office, Washington, 2000).

Torgerson, C. J., Brooks, G. & Hall, J. A Systematic Review of the Research Literature on the Use of Phonics in the Teaching of Reading and Spelling (Department for Education and Skills, Sheffield, UK, 2006)

Dehaene, S. et al. How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language. Science 330 , 1359–1364 (2010).

Morris, J. Phonics 44 for initial literacy in English. Reading 18 , 13–24 (1984).

Morris, J. The Morris-Montessori Word List (London Montessori Centre, London, UK, 1990).

Wyse, D. & Styles, M. Synthetic phonics and the teaching of reading: the debate surrounding England’s ‘Rose Report’. Literacy 41 , 35–42 (2007).

Gough, P. B. & Tunmer, W. E. Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial Spec. Educ. 7 , 6–10 (1986).

Rumelhart, D. Toward an interactive model of reading. Technical Report No. 56 . (San Diego Center for Human Information Processing, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, 1976).

Hayes, J. & Flower, L. in Cognitive Processes in Writing (eds Gregg, L. & Steinberg, E.) (Erlbaum, London, UK, 1980).

Berninger, V. W. & Swanson, H. L. in Children’s Writing: Toward a Process Theory of the Development of Skilled Writing (ed Butterfield, E. C.) (JAI Press, Bingley, UK, 1994).

Berninger, V., Nagy, W. & Beers, S. Child writers’ construction and reconstruction of single sentences and construction of multi-sentence texts: contributions of syntax and transcription to translation. Read. Writ. 102 , 151–182 (2011).

Medwell, J. & Wray, D. Handwriting - a forgotten language skill? Lang. Educ. 22 , 34–47 (2008).

Andrews, R. et al. The effect of grammar teaching on writing development. Br. Educ. Res. J. 32 , 39–55 (2006).

Duin, A. H. & Graves, M. F. Intensive vocabulary instruction as a prewriting technique. Read. Res. Quaterly 22 , 311–330 (1987).

Graham, S. & Santangelo, T. Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Read. Writ. 27 , 1703–1743 (2014).

Wolf, B., Abbott, R. D. & Berninger, V. W. Effective beginning handwriting instruction: multi-modal, consistent format for 2 years, and linked to spelling and composing. Read. Writ. 30 , 299–317 (2017).

Frye, D. et al. Teaching math to young children: a practice guide (NCEE 2014-4005). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://whatworks.ed.gov (2013).

Siegler, R. et al. Developing effective fractions instruction for kindergarten through 8th grade: A practice guide (NCEE #2010-4039). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED512043.pdf (2010).

Blair, C. & Razza, R. P. Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child. Dev. 78 , 647–663 (2007).

Cragg, L. & Gilmore, C. Skills underlying mathematics: the role of executive function in the development of mathematics proficiency. Trends Neurosci. Educ. 3 , 63–68 (2014).

Gathercole, S. E., Pickering, S. J., Knight, C. & Stegmann, Z. Working memory skills and educational attainment: evidence from national curriculum assessments at 7 and 14 years of age. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 18 , 1–16 (2004).

Locascio, G., Mahone, E. M., Eason, S. E. & Cutting, L. E. Executive dysfunction among children with reading comprehension deficits. J. Learn. Disabil. 43 , 441–454 (2010).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Shaul, S. & Schwartz, M. The role of executive functions in school readiness among preschool-age children. Read. Writ. 27 , 749–768 (2014).

Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. J. Tools of the Mind: The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education 2nd edn (Merrill/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2007)

Diamond, A. & Lee, K. Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old. Science 333 , 959–964 (2011).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Elkind, D. Montessori education: abiding contributions and contemporary challenges. Young. Child. 38 , 3–10 (1983).

Malm, B. Constructing professional identities: Montessori teachers’ voices and visions. Scand. J. Educ. Res. 48 , 397–412 (2004).

Montessori, M. From Childhood to Adolescence: Including Erdkinder and the Function of The University (Schocken books, New York, NY, 1973).

Blakemore, S. Imaging brain development: the adolescent brain. Neuroimage 61 , 397–406 (2012).

Paus, T. Mapping brain development and cognitive development during adolescence. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9 , 60–68 (2005).

Ferri, C. P. et al. Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study. Lancet 366 , 2112–2117 (2005).

Sheppard, C. L., McArthur, C. & Hitzig, S. L. A systematic review of Montessori-based activities for persons with dementia. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 17 , 117–122 (2016).

Cummings, J. L., Morstorf, T. & Zhong, K. Alzheimer’s disease drug-development pipeline: few candidates, frequent failures. Alzheimers Res. Ther. 6 , 37 (2014).

Camp, C. J. et al. An intergenerational program for persons with dementia using Montessori methods. Gerontologist 37 , 688–692 (1997).

Gold, B. T. Lifelong bilingualism and neural reserve against Alzheimer’s disease: A review of findings and potential mechanisms. Behav. Brain Res. 281 , 9–15 (2015).

Seidenberg, M. S. The science of reading and its educational implications. Lang. Learn. Dev. 9 , 331–360 (2013).

Brehony, K. J. Montessori, individual work and individuality in the elementary school classroom. Hist. Educ. 29 , 115–128 (2000).

Download references

Acknowledgements

I dedicate this work to Sandra Nash Petrek (1939–2017), an inspiring Montessorian.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology and Human Development, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK

Chloë Marshall

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chloë Marshall .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares that they have no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Marshall, C. Montessori education: a review of the evidence base. npj Science Learn 2 , 11 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-017-0012-7

Download citation

Received : 30 October 2016

Revised : 11 September 2017

Accepted : 12 September 2017

Published : 27 October 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-017-0012-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

A preliminary examination of a kindergarten school readiness assessment.

• Marisa Macy
• Mali Sawyer

Early Childhood Education Journal (2022)

Education shapes the structure of semantic memory and impacts creative thinking

• Solange Denervaud
• Alexander P. Christensen
• Roger E. Beaty

npj Science of Learning (2021)

PeppeRecycle: Improving Children’s Attitude Toward Recycling by Playing with a Social Robot

• Giovanna Castellano
• Berardina De Carolis
• Veronica Rossano

International Journal of Social Robotics (2021)

Interaction of children with and without communication disorders using Montessori activities for the tablet

• Juan-Ramón Pérez-Pérez
• David Cabielles-Hernández
• MPuerto Paule-Ruiz

Personal and Ubiquitous Computing (2021)

An fMRI study of error monitoring in Montessori and traditionally-schooled children

• Eleonora Fornari
• David Sander

npj Science of Learning (2020)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• Curriculum Albums

Montessori Function Of Words: Article

A box of small objects, some in quantities, some singly.  Pencil, slips of paper & scissors.  Printed labels “a”, “the”, and the name of the objects. 

Purpose Of The Article Activity

• To help the child to become aware of the function of the article.

How To Present The Article Activity

Recommended age.

5 years old

Prerequisite

The child must be reading well.

Presentation

Part A: Spoken Language

• Invite the child to the shelf.
• Introduce the activity by name.
• Invite the child to carry the article box and I carry the writing tray to a table. Set aside the writing tray.
• Place the article box between me and the child. Open lid and remove items one by one, passing each item to the child and directing him to place it on the table. 
• Start with an item that has multiples and take these items out consecutively and invite child to place them in a column with enough space below each one to place a label. A single item will be next in the row, and so on, working from left to right.
• Close the box and set aside.
• “May I please have a pear?” Child hands me a pear. Repeat for other two pears.
• “May I please have a shell?” Child hands me the shell. 
• Intentionally make a mistake and ask for another shell. “May I please have a shell?” Child says there are no more shells. “Oh, let me give that shell back to you. I made a mistake. May I please have the shell?” (Do not emphasize the article.)
• Continue until I have all objects in front of me in the same order as step 5.
• “Let’s put these objects back in front of you.” Work together to do this and set up in the same order as step 5.
• Bring forward the writing tray. Place the lead pencil, paper strip, and scissors on the table, and set aside the tray.

Part B: Labelling

• Make a label for one of the objects e.g., “a parrot” (if multiples) or “the shell” (if only one).
• Invite child to read the label and place it under the object. 
• Continue until all the objects are labelled. Invite the child to gather the labels.
• I snip the labels between the article and noun and make two mixed up piles.
• Invite the child to label the objects again. 
• “You can work with the article box with the preprinted labels any time you want.”

As in presentation. The child works with the preprinted labels.

Teaching in the Montessori Classroom

Investigating variation theory and embodiment as a foundation of teachers’ development.

• Eva-Maria Tebano Ahlquist Stockholm university http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4883-4341
• Per Wilhelm Sven Gustav Gynther Stockholm university

The theory of Montessori education has been interpreted by some researchers to be vaguely formulated. However, as shown in previous research, Maria Montessori’s didactic approach to teaching and learning mathematics is fully consistent with variation theory and the theory of embodiment. Dr. Montessori used the theoretical concept of isolation of quality , which means that the learning objects have to be kept identical except for one variable, which has to differ to be perceptible. This concept is in alignment with variation theory, which emphasizes variation as a necessary condition for learners to discern aspects of an object of learning. The other theory applied in this article is the theory of embodiment: important cognitive functions are fundamentally grounded in action that is concordant with Dr. Montessori’s view that mind and movement are parts of the same entity. 

               This article reports on a qualitative single-case study with a formative intention in which we investigated the significance of being acquainted with variation theory and the theory of embodiment when working with Montessori material. The study analyzes a teacher’s mathematics presentations with the Montessori material and the children’s work with this material, using Epistemological Move Analysis, which focuses on how the teacher directs children’s learning. The analysis was shared with the teacher to support her awareness of the ways teaching can be developed from a variation and embodiment theoretical perspective. Results show that the teacher’s awareness of why a specific learning object be treated in accordance with variation theory and embodiment seems to promote a more constructive and effective way to direct children’s learning.

Author Biographies

Eva-Maria Tebano Ahlquist received her Ph.D. in education from Stockholm University. Her career as senior lecturer at Stockholm University, Department of Education, encompasses lecturing in the teacher training program, and she is responsible for a further education program in Montessori education.

Per Gynther† received his Ph.D. in education from Stockholm University. His career as senior lecturer at Stockholm University, Department of Education, encompasses lecturing in the teacher training program, and he is responsible for a further education program in Montessori education .

Ahlquist, E.-M. T., & Gynther, P. (2019). Variation theory and Montessori education. Journal of Montessori Research & Education, 2(1), 13–23. http://doi.org/10.16993/jmre.12

Battista, M. T. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 843–908). Information Age.

Blatchford, P. (2003). A systematic observational study of teachers’ and pupils’ behavior in large and small classes. Learning and Instruction, 13(6), 569–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00043-9

Cossentino, J. (2009). Culture, craft, & coherence: The unexpected vitality of Montessori teacher training. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 520–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109344593

Feez, S. (2007). Montessori’s mediation of meaning: A social semiotic perspective [Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney]. Sydney Digital Theses (Open Access). http://hdl.handle.net/2123/1859

Johnson, M. (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books.

Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Östman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom: The interplay between teachers’ epistemological moves and students’ practical epistemology. Science Education, 90(1), 148–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20092

Littler, G., & Jirotková, D. (2004). Learning about solids. In B. Clarke & National Center for Mathematics Education (Eds.), International perspectives on learning and teaching mathematics (pp. 51–66). Göteborg University, National Center for Mathematics Education.

Lillard, A. S. (2005). Montessori: The science behind the genius. Oxford University Press.

Lithner, J. (2015). Learning mathematics by imitative or creative reasoning. In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Selected regular lectures from the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 487–506). Springer International Publishing.

Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching and learning. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

Lundqvist, E., Almqvist, J., & Östman, L. (2012). Institutional traditions in teachers’ manners of teaching. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(1), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9375-x

Marton, F. (2006). Sameness and difference in transfer. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 501–539. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1504_3

Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. Routledge.

Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Marton, F., & Signert, K. (2008). Sinnenas skolning—variation och invarians i Maria Montessoris pedagogik [Educating the senses—variation and invariance in Maria Montessori’s pedagogy]. In H. Rystedt & R. Säljö (Eds.), Kunskap och människans redskap: Teknik och lärande [Knowledge and human tools: Technology and learning] (pp. 179–194). Studentlitteratur AB.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (2004). Phenomenology of perception. Routledge.

Montessori, M. (1964). The Montessori Method. Schocken. (Original work published 1912)

Montessori, M. (1965). Dr. Montessori’s own handbook. Schocken. (Original work published 1914)

Montessori, M. (1972). The discovery of the child. Ballantine. (Original work published 1948)

Montessori, M. (1982). The absorbent mind. Kalakshetra. (Original work published 1949)

Montessori, M. (1996). From childhood to adolescence. Montessori-Pierson. (Original work published 1948)

Montessori, M. (2011). Psychogeometry. Montessori-Pierson.

Montessori, M. M., Jr. (1992). Education for human development: Understanding Montessori (ED136940). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED136940.pdf

Mwingirwa, M. I., Marguerite, M. K., & Khatete, D. (2015). Teachers’ perspectives towards use of technology, the case of GeoGebra in teaching mathematics in Kenya. Scientific Research Journal (SCIRJ), III, (IX), 19–24.

Signert, K. (2012). Variation och invarians i Maria Montessoris sinnestränande materiel. [Variation and invariance in Maria Montessori’s sensory training materials] [Doctoral dissertation, University of Gothenburg, Sweden]. https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/30158/2/gupea_2077_30158_2.pdf

Wiliam, D. (2019). Att följa lärande: Formativ bedömning i praktiken [Embedded formative assessment] (2nd ed.). Studentlitteratur AB.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.) SAGE Publications.

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Authors can view article download statistics for published articles within their accounts.

Journal of Montessori Research Author Agreement The following is an agreement between the Author (the “Corresponding Author”) acting on behalf of all authors of the work (“Authors”) and the Journal of Montessori Research (the “Journal”) regarding your article (the “Work”) that is being submitted for consideration.   Whereas the parties desire to promote effective scholarly communication that promotes local control of intellectual assets, the parties for valuable consideration agree as follows. A. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR’S GRANT OF RIGHTS After being accepted for publication, the Corresponding Author grants to the Journal, during the full term of copyright and any extensions or renewals of that term, the following: 1.    An irrevocable non-exclusive right to reproduce, republish, transmit, sell, distribute, and otherwise use the Work in electronic and print editions of the Journal and in derivative works throughout the world, in all languages, and in all media now known or later developed. 2.    An irrevocable non-exclusive right to create and store electronic archival copies of theWork, including the right to deposit the Work in open access digital repositories. 3.    An irrevocable non-exclusive right to license others to reproduce, republish, transmit,and distribute the Work under the condition that the Authors are attributed. (Currently this is carried out by publishing the content under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 license (CC BY-NC.) 4.    Copyright in the Work remains with the Authors. B. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR’S DUTIES 1.    When distributing or re-publishing the Work, the Corresponding Author agrees to credit the Journal as the place of first publication. 2.    The Corresponding Author agrees to inform the Journal of any changes in contact information. C. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR’S WARRANTY The Corresponding Author represents and warrants that the Work is the Authors’ original work and that it does not violate or infringe the law or the rights of any third party and, specifically, that the Work contains no matter that is defamatory or that infringes literary or proprietary rights, intellectual property rights, or any rights of privacy. The Corresponding Author also warrants that he or she has the full power to make this agreement, and if the Work was prepared jointly, the Corresponding Author agrees to inform the Authors of the terms of this Agreement and to obtain their written permission to sign on their behalf. The Corresponding Author agrees to hold the Journal harmless from any breach of the aforestated representations. D.  JOURNAL’S DUTIES In consideration of the Author’s grant of rights, the Journal agrees to publish the Work, attributing the Work to the Authors. E. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This agreement reflects the entire understanding of the parties. This agreement may be amended only in writing by an addendum signed by the parties. Amendments are incorporated by reference to this agreement. ACCEPTED AND AGREED BY THE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR ON BEHALF OF ALL AUTHORS CONTRIBUTING TO THIS WORK

How to Cite

• Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

Make a Submission

• Norwegian Bokmål

Developed By

This electronic publication is supported by the

University of Kansas Libraries .

ISSN:  2378-3923

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• NPJ Sci Learn

Montessori education: a review of the evidence base

Chloë marshall.

Department of Psychology and Human Development, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK

The Montessori educational method has existed for over 100 years, but evaluations of its effectiveness are scarce. This review paper has three aims, namely to (1) identify some key elements of the method, (2) review existing evaluations of Montessori education, and (3) review studies that do not explicitly evaluate Montessori education but which evaluate the key elements identified in (1). The goal of the paper is therefore to provide a review of the evidence base for Montessori education, with the dual aspirations of stimulating future research and helping teachers to better understand whether and why Montessori education might be effective.

Introduction

Maria Montessori (1870–1952) was by any measure an extraordinary individual. She initially resisted going into teaching—one of the few professions available to women in the late 19th century—and instead became one of the very first women to qualify as a medical doctor in Italy. As a doctor she specialised in psychiatry and paediatrics. While working with children with intellectual disabilities she gained the important insight that in order to learn, they required not medical treatment but rather an appropriate pedagogy. In 1900, she was given the opportunity to begin developing her pedagogy when she was appointed director of an Orthophrenic school for developmentally disabled children in Rome. When her pupils did as well in their exams as typically developing pupils and praise was lavished upon her for this achievement, she did not lap up that praise; rather, she wondered what it was about the education system in Italy that was failing children without disabilities. What was holding them back and preventing them from reaching their potential? In 1907 she had the opportunity to start working with non-disabled children in a housing project located in a slum district of Rome. There, she set up her first 'Casa dei Bambini' ('children’s house') for 3–7-year olds. She continued to develop her distinctive pedagogy based on a scientific approach of experimentation and observation. On the basis of this work, she argued that children pass through sensitive periods for learning and several stages of development, and that children’s self-construction can be fostered through engaging with self-directed activities in a specially prepared environment. There was international interest in this new way of teaching, and there are now thousands of Montessori schools (predominantly for children aged 3–6 and 6–12) throughout the world. 1 – 4

Central to Montessori’s method of education is the dynamic triad of child, teacher and environment. One of the teacher’s roles is to guide the child through what Montessori termed the 'prepared environment, i.e., a classroom and a way of learning that are designed to support the child’s intellectual, physical, emotional and social development through active exploration, choice and independent learning. One way of making sense of the Montessori method for the purposes of this review is to consider two of its important aspects: the learning materials, and the way in which the teacher and the design of the prepared environment promote children’s self-directed engagement with those materials. With respect to the learning materials, Montessori developed a set of manipulable objects designed to support children’s learning of sensorial concepts such as dimension, colour, shape and texture, and academic concepts of mathematics, literacy, science, geography and history. With respect to engagement, children learn by engaging hands-on with the materials most often individually, but also in pairs or small groups, during a 3-h 'work cycle' in which they are guided by the teacher to choose their own activities. They are given the freedom to choose what they work on, where they work, with whom they work, and for how long they work on any particular activity, all within the limits of the class rules. No competition is set up between children, and there is no system of extrinsic rewards or punishments. These two aspects—the learning materials themselves, and the nature of the learning—make Montessori classrooms look strikingly different to conventional classrooms.

It should be noted that for Montessori the goal of education is to allow the child’s optimal development (intellectual, physical, emotional and social) to unfold. 2 This is a very different goal to that of most education systems today, where the focus is on attainment in academic subjects such as literacy and mathematics. Thus when we ask the question, as this review paper does, whether children benefit more from a Montessori education than from a non-Montessori education, we need to bear in mind that the outcome measures used to capture effectiveness do not necessarily measure the things that Montessori deemed most important in education. Teachers and parents who choose the Montessori method may choose it for reasons that are not so amenable to evaluation.

Despite its existence for over 100 years, peer-reviewed evaluations of Montessori education are few and they suffer from a number of methodological limitations, as will be discussed in Section 3. This review has three aims, namely to (1) identify some key elements of the Montessori educational method, (2) review existing evaluations of Montessori education, and (3) review studies that do not explicitly evaluate Montessori education but which evaluate the key elements identified in (1). My goal is to provide a review of the scientific evidence base for Montessori education, with the dual aspirations of stimulating future research and helping teachers to better understand whether and why Montessori education might be effective.

Some key elements of the Montessori educational method

The goal of this section is to isolate some key elements of the Montessori method, in order to better understand why, if Montessori education is effective, this might be, and what elements of it might usefully be evaluated by researchers. These are important considerations because there is considerable variability in how the Montessori method is implemented in different schools, and the name, which is not copyrighted, is frequently used without full adherence. 5 , 6 Nevertheless, some elements of the method might still be beneficial, or could be successfully incorporated (or, indeed, are already incorporated) into schools that do not want to carry the name 'Montessori' or to adhere fully to its principles. Pinpointing more precisely what—if anything—about the Montessori method is effective will enable a better understanding of why it works. Furthermore, it has been argued that there might be dangers in adopting wholesale and uncritically an educational method that originated over 100 years ago, in a world that was different in many ways to today’s. 7 If the method is to be adopted piecemeal, which pieces should be adopted? As outlined previously, two important aspects of Montessori’s educational method are the learning materials, and the self-directed nature of children’s engagement with those materials. Some key elements of each of these aspects will now be considered in turn.

The learning materials

The first learning materials that the child is likely to encounter in the Montessori classroom are those that make up the practical life curriculum. These are activities that involve pouring different materials, using utensils such as scissors, tongs and tweezers, cleaning and polishing, preparing snacks, laying the table and washing dishes, arranging flowers, gardening, doing up and undoing clothes fastenings, and so on. Their aims, in addition to developing the child’s skills for independent living, are to build up the child’s gross and fine motor control and eye-hand co-ordination, to introduce them to the cycle of selecting, initiating, completing and tidying up an activity (of which more in the next section), and to introduce the rules for functioning in the social setting of the classroom.

As the child settles into the cycle of work and shows the ability to focus on self-selected activities, the teacher will introduce the sensorial materials. The key feature of the sensorial materials is that each isolates just one concept for the child to focus on. The pink tower, for example, consists of ten cubes which differ only in their dimensions, the smallest being 1 cm 3 , the largest 10 cm 3 . In building the tower the child’s attention is being focused solely on the regular decrease in volume of successive cubes. There are no additional cues—different colours for example, or numbers written onto the faces of the cube—which might help the child to sequence the cubes accurately. Another piece of sensorial material, the sound boxes, contains six pairs of closed cylinders that vary in sound from soft to loud when shaken, and the task for the child is to find the matching pairs. Again, there is only one cue that the child can use to do this task: sound. The aim of the sensorial materials is not to bombard the child’s senses with stimuli; on the contrary, they are tools designed for enabling the child to classify and put names to the stimuli that he will encounter on an everyday basis.

The sensorial materials, are, furthermore, designed as preparation for academic subjects. The long rods, which comprise ten red rods varying solely in length in 10 cm increments from 10 cm to 1 m, have an equivalent in the mathematics materials: the number rods, where the rods are divided into alternating 10 cm sections of red and blue so that they take on the numerical values 1–10. The touchboards, which consist of alternate strips of sandpaper and smooth paper for the child to feel, are preparation for the sandpaper globe in geography—a globe where the land masses are made of rough sandpaper but the oceans and seas are smooth. The touchboards are also preparation for the sandpaper letters in literacy and sandpaper numerals in mathematics, which the child learns to trace with his index and middle fingers.

Key elements of the literacy curriculum include the introduction of writing before reading, the breaking down of the constituent skills of writing (pencil control, letter formation, spelling) before the child actually writes words on paper, and the use of phonics for teaching sound-letter correspondences. Grammar—parts of speech, morphology, sentence structure—are taught systematically through teacher and child-made materials.

In the mathematics curriculum, quantities 0–10 and their symbols are introduced separately before being combined, and large quantities and symbols (tens, hundreds and thousands) and fractions are introduced soon after, all through concrete materials. Operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, the calculation of square roots) are again introduced using concrete materials, which the child can choose to stop using when he is able to succeed without that concrete support.

Principles running throughout the design of these learning materials are that the child learns through movement and gains a concrete foundation with the aim of preparing him for learning more abstract concepts. A further design principle is that each piece of learning material has a 'control of error' which alerts the child to any mistakes, thereby allowing self-correction with minimal teacher support.

Self-directed engagement with the materials

Important though the learning materials are, 8 they do not, in isolation, constitute the Montessori method because they need to be engaged with in a particular way. Montessori observed that the young child is capable of concentrating for long periods of time on activities that capture his spontaneous interest. 2 – 4 There are two features of the way that children engage with the learning materials that Montessori claimed promoted this concentration. The first is that there is a cycle of activity surrounding the use of each piece of material (termed the 'internal work cycle ' 9 ). If a child wishes to use the pink tower, for example, he will have to find a space on the floor large enough to unroll the mat that will delineate his work area, carry the ten cubes of the pink tower individually to the mat from where they are stored, then build the tower. Once he has built the tower he is free to repeat this activity as many times as he likes. Other children may come and watch, and if he wishes they can join in with him, but he will be able to continue on his own if he prefers and for as long as he likes. When he has had enough, he will dismantle the pink tower and reassemble it in its original location, ready for another child to use. This repeated and self-chosen engagement with the material, the lack of interruption, and the requirement to set up the material and put it away afterwards, are key elements aimed at developing the child’s concentration. 10

The second feature which aims to promote concentration is that these cycles of activity take place during a 3-h period of time (termed the 'external work cycle' 9 ). During those 3 h children are mostly free to select activities on their own and with others, and to find their own rhythm of activity, moving freely around the classroom as they do so. One might wonder what the role of the teacher is during this period. Although the children have a great deal of freedom in what they do, their freedom is not unlimited. The teacher’s role is to guide children who are finding it hard to select materials or who are disturbing others, to introduce new materials to children who are ready for a new challenge, and to conduct small-group lessons. Her decisions about what to teach are made on the basis of careful observations of the children. Although she might start the day with plans of what she will do during the work cycle, she will be led by her students and their needs, and there is no formal timetable. Hence the Montessori classroom is very different to the teacher-led conventional classroom with its highly structured day where short timeslots are devoted to each activity, the whole class is engaged in the same activities at the same time, and the teacher instructs at the front of the class.

In summary, there are two aspects of Montessori classrooms that are very different to conventional classrooms: the learning materials themselves, and the individual, self-directed nature of the learning under the teacher’s expert guidance. All the elements described here—the features of the learning materials themselves (e.g., each piece of material isolates just one concept, each contains a control of error that allows for self-correction, learning proceeds from concrete to abstract concepts) and the child-led manner of engagement with those materials (e.g., self-selection, repeated and active engagement, tidying up afterwards, freedom from interruption, lack of grades and extrinsic rewards) might potentially benefit development and learning over the teaching of the conventional classroom. We will return to many of the elements discussed here in the following two sections. (This has necessarily been only a brief survey of some of the most important elements of the Montessori method. Readers wanting to find out more are again directed to refs. 2 – 4 ).

Evaluations of Montessori education

There are few peer-reviewed evaluations of Montessori education, and the majority have been carried out in the USA. Some have evaluated children’s outcomes while those children were in Montessori settings, and others have evaluated Montessori-educated children after a period of subsequent conventional schooling. As a whole this body of research suffers from several methodological limitations. Firstly, few studies are longitudinal in design. Secondly, there are no good quality randomised control trials; most researchers have instead tried to match participants in Montessori and comparison groups on as many likely confounding variables as possible. Thirdly, if children in the Montessori group do score higher than those in the non-Montessori group on a particular outcome measure, then assuming that that effect can be attributed to being in a Montessori classroom, what exactly is it about Montessori education that has caused the effect? Montessori education is a complex package—how can the specific elements which might be causing the effect be isolated? At a very basic level—and drawing on two of the main aspects of Montessori education outlined above—is the effect due to the learning materials or to the self-directed way in which children engage with them (and can the two be separated)? Fourthly, there are presumably differences between Montessori schools (including the way in which the method is implemented) that might influence children’s outcomes, but studies rarely include more than one Montessori school, and sometimes not more than one Montessori class. Fifthly, and relatedly, there is the issue of 'treatment fidelity'—what counts as a Montessori classroom? Not all schools that call themselves 'Montessori' adhere strictly to Montessori principles, have trained Montessori teachers, or are accredited by a professional organisation. A sixth, and again related, point is that children’s experiences in Montessori education will vary in terms of the length of time they spend in Montessori education, and the age at which they attend. Finally, the numbers of children participating in studies are usually small and quite narrow in terms of their demographics, making generalisation of any results problematic. These methodological issues are not limited to evaluations of Montessori education, of course—they are relevant to much of educational research.

Of these, the lack of randomised control trials is particularly notable given the recognition of their importance in education. 11 , 12 Parents choose their child’s school for a host of different reasons, 13 and randomisation is important in the context of Montessori education because parents who choose a non-conventional school for their child might be different in relevant ways from parents who do not, for example in their views on child-rearing and aspirations for their child’s future. This means that if a study finds a benefit for Montessori education over conventional education this might reflect a parent effect rather than a school effect. Furthermore, randomisation also controls for socio-economic status (SES). Montessori schools are often fee-paying, which means that pupils are likely to come from higher SES families; children from higher SES families are likely to do better in a variety of educational contexts. 14 – 16 A recent report found that even public (i.e., non-fee-paying) Montessori schools in the USA are not representative of the racial and socioeconomic diversity of the neighbourhoods they serve. 17 However, random assignment of children to Montessori versus non-Montessori schools for the purposes of a randomised control trial would be very difficult to achieve because it would take away parental choice.

Arguably the most robust evaluation of the Montessori method to date is that by Lillard and Else-Quest. 18 They compared children in Montessori and non-Montessori education and from two age groups—5 and 12-year olds—on a range of cognitive, academic, social and behavioural measures. Careful thought was given to how to overcome the lack of random assignment to the Montessori and non-Montessori groups. The authors’ solution was to design their study around the school lottery that was already in place in that particular school district. All children had entered the Montessori school lottery; those who were accepted were assigned to the Montessori group, and those who were not accepted were assigned to the comparison (other education systems) group. Post-hoc comparisons showed similar income levels in both sets of families. Although group differences were not found for all outcome measures, where they were found they favoured the Montessori group. For 5-year olds, significant group differences were found for certain academic skills (namely letter-word identification, phonological decoding ability, and math skills), a measure of executive function (the card sort task), social skills (as measured by social reasoning and positive shared play) and theory of mind (as measured by a false-belief task). For 12-year olds, significant group differences were found on measures of story writing and social skills. Furthermore, in a questionnaire that asked about how they felt about school, responses of children in the Montessori group indicated that they felt a greater sense of community. The authors concluded that 'at least when strictly implemented, Montessori education fosters social and academic skills that are equal or superior to those fostered by a pool of other types of schools'. 18

Their study has been criticised for using just one Montessori school, 19 but Lillard and Else-Quest’s response is that the school was faithful to Montessori principles, which suggests that the results might be generalisable to other such schools. 20 That fidelity might impact outcomes has long been of concern, 21 and was demonstrated empirically in a further, longitudinal, study, 6 that compared high fidelity Montessori classes (again, from just one school), 'supplemented' Montessori classes (which provided the Montessori materials plus conventional activities such as puzzles, games and worksheets), and conventional classrooms. Children in these classes were 3–6 years old, and they were tested at two time-points: towards the beginning and towards the end of the school year. Although the study lacked random assignment of children to groups, the groups were matched with respect to key parent variables such as parental education. As in Lillard and Else-Quest’s earlier study, 18 outcome measures tapped a range of social and academic skills related to school readiness (i.e., children’s preparedness to succeed in academic settings). There were two research questions: firstly, do preschool children’s school readiness skills change during the academic year as a function of school type, and secondly, within Montessori schools, does the percentage of children using Montessori materials in a classroom predict children’s school readiness skills at the end of the academic year? Overall, the answer to both questions was “yes”. Children in the high-fidelity Montessori school, as compared with children in the other two types of school, showed significantly greater gains on measures of executive function, reading, math, vocabulary, and social problem-solving. Furthermore, the degree to which children were engaged with Montessori materials significantly predicted gains in executive function, reading and vocabulary. In other words, treatment fidelity mattered: children gained fewer benefits from being in a Montessori school when they were engaged in non-Montessori activities.

This study does not demonstrate definitively that the Montessori materials drove the effect: there might have been other differences between the high and lower fidelity classrooms—such as the teachers’ interactions with their pupils—that were responsible for the difference in child outcomes. 6 In a move to explore the role of the Montessori materials further, a more recent experimental study 22 removed supplementary materials, to leave just the Montessori materials, from two of the three classrooms in a Montessori school that served 3–6-year olds. Over a period of 4 months children in the classrooms from which supplementary materials were removed made significantly greater gains than children from the unchanged classroom on tests of letter-word identification and executive function, although not on measures of vocabulary, theory of mind, maths, or social problem-solving. The authors acknowledge weaknesses in the study design, including the small number of participants (just 52 across the three classrooms) and the short duration. Nevertheless, the study does provide a template for how future experimental manipulations of fidelity to the Montessori method could be carried out.

Fidelity is important because variation in how faithful Montessori schools are to the 'ideal' is likely to be an important factor in explaining why such mixed findings have been found in evaluations of the Montessori method. 6 For example, two early randomised control trials to evaluate Head Start in the USA did not find any immediate benefit of Montessori preschool programmes over other types of preschool programmes. 23 , 24 In both programmes, only 4-year olds were included, whereas the ideal in Montessori preschool programmes is for 3–6 year olds to be taught in the same class in order to foster child-to-child tutoring. 6 Furthermore, in one of the programmes 23 the ideal 3-h work cycle was reduced to just 30 min. 6 A more recent study of older children compared 8th grade Montessori and non-Montessori students matched for gender, ethnicity and socio-economic status. 25 The study found lower scores for Montessori students for English/Language Arts and no difference for maths scores, but the participating Montessori school altered the “ideal” by issuing evaluative grades to pupils and introducing non-Montessori activities. 6

These same limitations then make it difficult to interpret studies that have found 'later' benefits for children who have been followed up after a subsequent period of conventional education. In one of the studies discussed earlier, 23 social and cognitive benefits did emerge for children who had previously attended Montessori preschools and then moved to conventional schools, but these benefits did not emerge until adolescence, while a follow-up study 26 found cognitive benefits in Montessori males only, again in adolescence. Although such 'sleeper effects' have been widely reported in evaluations of early years interventions, they may be artefacts of simple measurement error and random fluctuations. 27 Importantly, if the argument is that lack of fidelity to the Montessori method is responsible for studies not finding significant benefits of Montessori education at younger ages, it is not logical to then credit the Montessori method with any benefits that emerge in follow-up studies.

Some studies report positive outcomes for certain curricular areas but not others. One, for example, investigated scores on maths, science, English and social studies tests in the final years of compulsory education, several years after children had left their Montessori classrooms. 28 Compared to the non-Montessori group (who were matched for gender, socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity and high school attended), the Montessori group scored significantly higher on maths and science, but no differences were found for English and social studies. What might explain this differential effect? The authors suggested that the advantages for maths might be driven by the materials themselves, compared to how maths is taught in conventional classes. 28 Alternatively, or perhaps in addition, children in Montessori classrooms might spend more time engaged in maths and science activities compared to children in conventional classes, with the amount of time spent on English and social studies not differing. However, the authors were unable, within the design of their study, to provide details of exactly how much time children in the Montessori school had spent doing maths, science, English and social studies, in comparison to the time that children in conventional classes were spending on those subjects.

Just as knowing what is going on in the Montessori classroom is vital to being able to interpret the findings of evaluations, so is knowing what is going on in the comparison classrooms. One of the earliest evaluations of Montessori education in the USA 29 speculated that Montessori would have found much to appreciate in one of the non-Montessori comparison classes, including its 'freedom for the children (moving about; working alone); its planned environment (innovative methods with tape recorder playback of children’s conversations; live animals, etc.); its non-punitive character (an “incorrect” answer deserves help, not anger; original answers are reinforced, but other answers are pursued); and its emphasis on concentration (the children sustained activity without direct supervision for relatively long periods of time)'. In some evaluations, the differences between Montessori and conventional classrooms might not actually be so great, which might explain why benefits of being educated in a Montessori classroom are not found. And even if the Montessori approach to teaching a particular curriculum area is different to those used in conventional classrooms, there are likely to be different, equally-effective approaches to teaching the same concepts. This is a suggested explanation for the finding that although children in Montessori kindergartens had an advantage relative to their conventionally-educated peers for base-10 understanding in mathematics, they did not maintain this advantage when tested 2 years later. 30

While most evaluations are interested in traditional academic outcomes or factors related to academic success such as executive functions, a small number have investigated creativity. For example, an old study 31 compared just 14 four and five-year-old children who attended a Montessori nursery school with 14 four and five-year olds who attended a conventional nursery school (matched for a range of parental variables, including attitudes and parental control). In a non-verbal creativity task, involving picture construction, they were given a blank sheet of paper, a piece of red gummed paper in the shape of a curved jellybean, and a pencil. They were then asked to think of and draw a picture in which the red paper would form an integral part. Each child’s construction was rated for originality, elaboration, activity, and title adequacy, and these ratings were then combined into a 'creativity' score. The group of conventionally-schooled children scored almost twice as high as the Montessori group. A second task involved the child giving verbal descriptions of seven objects: a red rubber ball, a green wooden cube, a short length of rope, a steel mirror, a piece of rectangular clear plastic, a piece of chalk, and a short length of plastic tubing. Each description was scored as to whether it was functional (i.e., focused on the object’s use) or whether it was a description of the object’s physical characteristics (i.e., shape, colour, etc.). Like the non-verbal creativity task, this task differentiated the two groups: whereas the conventionally educated children gave more functional descriptions (e.g., for the cube: “you play with it”), the Montessori children gave more physical descriptions (e.g., “it’s square, it’s made of wood, and it’s green”). A third task, the Embedded Figure Test, involved the child first being presented with a stimulus figure and then locating a similar figure located in an embedding context. Both accuracy and speed were measured. While the two groups did not differ in the number of embedded figures accurately located, the Montessori group completed the task significantly more quickly. The fourth and final task required children to draw a picture of anything they wanted to. Drawings were coded for the presence or absence of geometric figures and people. The Montessori group produced more geometric figures, but fewer people, than the conventional group.

The authors were careful not to cast judgement on the performance differences between the two groups. 31 They wrote that 'The study does, however, support the notion that differing preschool educational environments yield different outcomes' and 'Montessori children responded to the emphasis in their programme upon the physical world and upon a definition of school as a place of work; the Nursery School children responded on their part to the social emphasis and the opportunity for spontaneous expression of feeling'. They did not, however, compare and contrast the particular features of the two educational settings that might have given rise to these differences.

Creativity has been studied more recently in France. 32 Seven to twelve-year olds were tested longitudinally on five tasks tapping different aspects of creativity. 'Divergent' thinking tasks required children to (1) think of unusual uses for a cardboard box, (2) come up with ideas for making a plain toy elephant more entertaining, and (3) make as many drawings as possible starting from pairs of parallel lines. 'Integrative' thinking tasks required children to (1) invent a story based on a title that was provided to them, and (2) invent a drawing incorporating six particular shapes. Their sample was bigger than that of the previous study, 31 comprising 40 pupils from a Montessori school and 119 from two conventional schools, and pupils were tested in two consecutive years (no information is provided about whether pupils from different schools were matched on any variable other than age). For both types of task and at both time-points the Montessori-educated children scored higher than the conventionally-educated children. Again, the authors made little attempt to pinpoint the precise differences between schools that might have caused such differences in performance.

None of the studies discussed so far has attempted to isolate individual elements of the Montessori method that might be accounting for any of the positive effects that they find. There are several studies, however, that have focused on the practical life materials. A quasi-experimental study 33 demonstrated that the practical life materials can be efficacious in non-Montessori classrooms. More than 50 different practical life exercises were introduced into eight conventional kindergarten classes, while five conventional kindergarten classes were not given these materials and acted as a comparison group. The outcome measure was a fine motor control task, the 'penny posting test', whereby the number of pennies that a child could pick up and post through a one-inch slot in a can in two 30 s trials was counted. At pre-test the treatment and comparison groups did not differ in the number of pennies posted, but at post-test 6 months later the treatment group achieved a higher score than the comparison group, indicating finer motor control. A nice feature of this study is that teachers reported children in both groups spending the same amount of time on tasks designed to support fine motor control development, suggesting that there was something specific to the design of the practical life materials that was more effective in this regard than the conventional kindergarten materials on offer. And because the preschools that had used the practical life activities had introduced no other elements of the Montessori method, the effect could be confidently attributed to the practical life materials themselves.

An extension of this study 34 investigated the potential benefits of the practical life materials for fine motor control by comparing 5-year olds in Montessori kindergarten programmes with 5-year olds in a conventional programme (reported to have similarities in teaching mission and pupil background characteristics) on the 'flag posting test'. In this task, the child was given a solid hardwood tray covered with clay in which there were 12 pinholes. There were also 12 paper flags mounted on pins, six to the right of the tray and six to the left, and the child’s task was to place the flags one at time in the holes. The child received three scores: one for the amount of time taken to finish the activity, one for the number of attempts it took the child to put each flag into the hole, and one for hand dominance (to receive a score of 1 (established dominance) the child had to consistently use the same hand to place all 12 flags, whereas mixed dominance received a score of 0). Children were pre-tested at the beginning of the school year and post-tested 8 months later. Despite the lack of random assignment to groups, the two groups did not differ on pre-test scores, but they did at post-test: at post-test the Montessori group were significantly faster and significantly more accurate at the task, and had more established hand dominance. However, no attempt was made to measure how frequently children in both groups engaged with materials and activities that were designed to support fine motor control development. Furthermore, the children in the Montessori classrooms were at the age where they should also have been using the sensorial materials, some of which (for example, the 'knobbed cylinders' and 'geometric cabinet') are manipulated by holding small knobs, and whose use could potentially enhance fine motor control. At that age children would also have been using the 'insets for design', materials from the early literacy curriculum designed to enhance pencil control. Therefore, although the results of this study are consistent with the practical life materials enhancing fine motor control, the study does not securely establish that they do.

A further study 35 introduced practical life exercises into conventional kindergarten classes, while control kindergarten classes were not given these materials. 15 min were set aside in the experimental schools’ timetable for using the practical life materials, and they were also available during free choice periods. This time the outcome measure at pre-test and post-test was not fine motor skill but attention. There were benefits to attention of being in the experimental group, but only for girls—boys showed no such benefits. The differential gender impact of the practical life materials on the development of attention is puzzling. Girls did not appear to engage with the materials more than boys during the time that was set aside for using them, but no measure was taken of whether girls chose them more frequently than boys during the free choice periods. Similarly, there were no measurements of the time that children in both the experimental and control groups spent engaged in other activities that might have enhanced fine motor control. Nor is it clear whether it was the fine motor practice directly or rather the opportunity to select interesting activities (the teachers in the experimental schools commented on how interesting the children found the practical life activities) that was responsible for the benefits to attention that were recorded for girls.

Finally, it has been found that young adolescents in Montessori middle schools show greater intrinsic motivation than their peers in conventional middle schools (matched for an impressive array of background variables, including ethnicity, parental education and employment, home resources, parental involvement in school, and number of siblings). 36 The authors did not establish exactly which elements of the Montessori method might be responsible for this finding, but they did speculate that the following might be relevant: “students were provided at least 2 h per day to exercise choice and self-regulation; none of the students received mandatory grades; student grouping was primarily based on shared interests, not standardised tests; and students collaborated often with other students”. The authors did not evaluate the Montessori and non-Montessori groups on any measures of academic outcomes, but given the links between academic success and motivation at all stages of education (they provide a useful review of this literature), this link would be worth investigating in Montessori schools.

This section has discussed studies that have evaluated the Montessori method directly. To date there have been very few methodologically robust evaluations. Many suffer from limitations that make it challenging to interpret their findings, whether those findings are favourable, neutral or unfavourable towards the Montessori method. However, while randomised control trials could (and should) be designed to evaluate individual elements of the Montessori method, it is difficult to see how the random assignment of pupils to schools could work in practice (hence the ingenuity of the study reported in ref. 18 ). Nor could trials be appropriately blinded—teachers, and perhaps parents and pupils too, would know whether they were in the Montessori arm of the trial. In other words, although random assignment and blinding might work for specific interventions, it is hard to see how they could work for an entire school curriculum. Furthermore, given the complexity of identifying what it is that works, why it works, and for whom it works best, additional information, for example from observations of what children and teachers are actually doing in the classroom, would be needed for interpreting the results.

Evaluations of key elements of Montessori education that are shared with other educational methods

This final section examines studies that have not evaluated the Montessori method directly, but have evaluated other educational methods and interventions that share elements of the Montessori method. They, together with our growing understanding of the science underpinning learning, can add to the evidence base for Montessori education. Given the vast amount of research and the limited space in which to consider it, priority is given to systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

One of the best-researched instructional techniques is the use of phonics for teaching children to read. Phonics is the explicit teaching of the letter-sound correspondences that allow the child to crack the alphabetic code. Montessori’s first schools were in Italy, and Italian orthography has relatively transparent one-to-one mappings between letters and sounds, making phonics a logical choice of method for teaching children the mechanics of reading and spelling. English orthography is, however, much less regular: the mappings between letters and sounds are many-to-many, and for this reason the use of phonics as a method of instruction has been challenged for English. 37 Nevertheless, there is overwhelming evidence of its effectiveness despite English’s irregularities. 38 – 40 At the same time, great strides have been made in elucidating the neural mechanisms that underlie early reading and reading impairments, and these too demonstrate the importance to successful reading of integrating sound and visual representations. 41

As always in education, the devil is in the detail. Importantly, phonics programmes have the greatest impact on reading accuracy when they are systematic. 39 , 40 By 'systematic' it is meant that letter-sound relationships are taught in an organised sequence, rather than being taught on an ad hoc as-and-when-needed basis. However, within systematic teaching of phonics there are two very different approaches: synthetic phonics and analytic phonics. Synthetic phonics starts from the parts and works up to the whole: children learn the sounds that correspond to letters or groups of letters and use this knowledge to sound out words from left to right. Analytic phonics starts from the whole and drills down to the parts: sound-letter relationships are inferred from sets of words which share a letter and sound, e.g., h at , h en , h ill , h orse . Few randomised control trials have pitted synthetic and analytic phonics against one another, and it is not clear that either has the advantage. 40

The Montessori approach to teaching phonics is certainly systematic. Many schools in the UK, for example, use word lists drawn from Morris’s 'Phonics 44'. 42 , 43 Furthermore, the Montessori approach to phonics is synthetic rather than analytic: children are taught the sound-letter code before using it to encode words (in spelling) and decode them (in reading). One of the criticisms of synthetic phonics is that it teaches letters and sounds removed from their meaningful language context, in a way that analytic phonics does not. 44 It has long been recognised that the goal of reading is comprehension. Reading for meaning requires both code-based skills and language skills such as vocabulary, morphology, syntax and inferencing skills, 45 and these two sets of skills are not rigidly separated, but rather interact at multiple levels. 46 Indeed, phonics instruction works best where it is integrated with text-level reading instruction. 39 , 40 The explicit teaching of phonics within a rich language context—both spoken and written—is central to the Montessori curriculum. No evaluations have yet pitted phonics teaching in the Montessori classroom versus phonics teaching in the conventional classroom, however, and so whether the former is differentially effective is not known.

Research into writing supports Montessori’s view that writing involves a multitude of component skills, including handwriting, spelling, vocabulary and sentence construction. 47 , 48 Proficiency in these skills predicts the quality of children’s written compositions. 49 , 50 In the Montessori classroom these skills are worked on independently before being brought together, but they can continue to be practised independently. A growing body of research from conventional and special education classrooms demonstrates that the specific teaching of the component skills of writing improves the quality of children’s written compositions. 51 – 54

With respect to teaching mathematics to young children, there are many recommendations that Montessori teachers would recognise in their own classrooms, such as teaching geometry, number and operations using a developmental progression, and using progress monitoring to ensure that mathematics instruction builds on what each child knows. 55 Some of the recommended activities, such as 'help children to recognise, name, and compare shapes, and then teach them to combine and separate shapes' 55 map exactly on to Montessori’s sensorial materials such as the geometric cabinet and the constructive triangles. Other activities such as 'encourage children to label collections with number words and numerals' 55 map onto Montessori’s early mathematics material such as the number rods, the spindle box and the cards and counters. The importance of conceptual knowledge as the foundation for children being able to understand fractions has been stressed. 56 The Montessori fraction circles—which provide a sensorial experience with the fractions from one whole to ten tenths—provide just such a foundation, as do practical life exercises such as preparing snacks (how should a banana be cut so that it can be shared between three children?) and folding napkins.

Finally in this section, it is worth returning to the sustained attention and self-regulation that have been argued to characterise children’s engagement with the learning materials in the Montessori classroom. 2 – 4 These are important parts of the complex cognitive construct of executive functions (EFs), which also include inhibition, working memory and planning. Put simply, EFs are the set of processes that allow us to control our thoughts and actions in order to engage in motivated, goal-directed behaviour. That EFs are critical for academic success is backed by a wealth of research evidence. 57 – 61 Given this key role, EFs have become the target for a number of individually-administered interventions, full curricula, and add-ons to classroom curricula, such as CogMed (Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ), Tools of the Mind, 62 PATHS (PATHS Training LLC, Seattle, WA), music, yoga and martial arts. A review study compared these, including Montessori education, and concluded that compared to interventions such as CogMed that solely target EFs, 'school curricula hold the greatest promise for accessibility to all and intervening early enough to get children on a positive trajectory from the start and affecting EFs most broadly'. 63

Conclusions

Montessori education has been in existence for over a hundred years. Such longevity could well be due, at least in part, to its adaptability. 6 However, by its very nature, of course, greater adaptability means lower fidelity. This paper has discussed evidence that children may benefit cognitively and socially from Montessori education that is faithful to its creator’s principles, but it is less clear that adapted forms—which usually result in children spending less time engaged with self-chosen learning materials—are as effective. Nevertheless, studies suggest that the practical life materials can be usefully introduced into non-Montessori classrooms to support the development of young children’s fine motor skills and attention, and there is ample evidence from the wider educational literature that certain elements of the Montessori method—such as teaching early literacy through a phonic approach embedded in a rich language context, and providing a sensorial foundation for mathematics education—are effective. It has not been possible in this paper to give an exhaustive discussion of all the elements of Montessori education that might be beneficial, for example the lack of extrinsic rewards, the reduced emphasis on academic testing and lack of competition between pupils, the 3-year age-banding that fosters cross-age tutoring, or the presence of a trained teacher in the early years classroom.

Where does this leave Montessori education more than 100 years after its birth, and more than 60 years after the death of its creator? As others have noted, Montessori was a scientist who truly valued the scientific method and would not have expected her educational method to remain static. 64 Yet Montessori teachers often feel fear or uncertainty about being able to apply Montessori’s theories in new and innovative ways while still adhering to her underlying philosophical principles. 65 Ultimately, only empirical research, undertaken by teachers and researchers working together, can be our guide, because the questions that need answering are empirical in nature. Neuroscientific research—using neuroimaging methods which were not available in Montessori’s day—might also play a guiding role. For example, Montessori was prescient in her views that adolescence was a special time in development where the individual required a specially-designed form of education to address their needs. 66 Recent neuroimaging evidence points to adolescence as indeed being an important period for neural development, particularly for areas involved in executive functions and social cognition. 67 , 68 Montessori did not fully develop her ideas for the education of 12–18-year olds during her lifetime, but it is an area where current Montessorians might be able to take over the reins. Although some Montessori schools take pupils up to the age of 18, they are few and far between, and to my knowledge there are no published evaluations of their effectiveness. Developing a Montessori education for this age group in conjunction with the best of our current knowledge of developmental cognitive neuroscience has the potential to make a very positive contribution.

Nor did Montessori consider using her method with the elderly. In the context of a rapidly aging population and increasing numbers of elderly adults with acquired cognitive impairments such as those that result from Alzheimer’s disease, 69 it is interesting to note that the Montessori method is now being adapted for use with dementia patients, with the aim of improving functioning in activities of daily living, such as feeding, and in cognition. There is strong evidence for a reduction in difficulties with eating, weak evidence for benefits on cognition, and mixed evidence for benefits on constructive engagement and positive affect. 70 However, the quality of studies varies across domains; those evaluating effects on cognition have been of rather poor quality so far, and they have not yet examined whether there might be long-term effects. Nevertheless, given the challenges to developing successful medication for patients with Alzheimer’s disease despite a detailed knowledge of changes in their neurobiology, it would be sensible to continue the search for successful behavioural interventions alongside that for medical interventions. 71 One method for delivering Montessori-based activities to the elderly is via inter-generational programmes, whereby older adults with dementia are supported in teaching Montessori-based lessons to preschool children. Benefits have been reported for the adults involved, 72 but whether the children also benefit in particular ways from such inter-generational teaching has not been evaluated. Nor is it known whether a Montessori education in childhood or Montessori-based activities experienced in later life can protect the executive control circuits of the brain, as has been proposed for bilingualism. 73 A lifespan approach to the evaluation of the Montessori method involving both behavioural and neuroimaging methods might be valuable.

In sum, there are many methodological challenges to carrying out good quality educational research, including good quality research on the Montessori method. Arguably the most obvious challenge to emerge from the literature reviewed here is the practical difficulty of randomly allocating pupils to Montessori and non-Montessori schools in order to compare outcomes. The majority of studies have relied instead on trying to match pupils and teachers in Montessori and non-Montessori schools on a number of different variables, with the concomitant danger that unidentified factors have contributed to any difference in outcomes. Even if randomisation is achievable, studies need to be conducted on a large enough scale to not only allow generalisations to be made beyond the particular schools studied, but to also allow investigation of which children the Montessori method suits best. On a more optimistic note, recent experimental studies—whereby features of existing Montessori classrooms are manipulated in some way, or features of the Montessori method are added to non-Montessori classrooms—hold promise for investigating the effectiveness of particular elements of the Montessori method. The evidence base can be strengthened yet further by drawing on research of educational interventions with which it shares certain elements, and by drawing on related research in the science of learning. National and regional education systems are beset by regular swings of the pendulum, for example towards and away from phonics, 74 and towards and away from children working individually. 75 This means that elements of the Montessori method will sometimes be in vogue and sometimes not. It is therefore particularly important that Montessori teachers understand the evidence base that supports, or does not support, their pedagogy.

Acknowledgements

I dedicate this work to Sandra Nash Petrek (1939–2017), an inspiring Montessorian.

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing financial interests.

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Got any suggestions?

We want to hear from you! Send us a message and help improve Slidesgo

Top searches

Trending searches

41 templates

el salvador

32 templates

49 templates

21 templates

16 templates

28 templates

Montessori Pedagogy

Montessori pedagogy presentation, free google slides theme and powerpoint template.

What interests children? Does it really need to match the things that the school wants to teach them? Introducing the Montessori education, which focuses on appealing to the kids' interest, instead of a standarized set of topics and subjects. Do you want more information about it? Slidesgo, in collaboration with educators, has created this template with actual content, so you (and everyone else) can learn about the Montessori method. It's available in different languages, so choose the one you prefer. It has some cute illustrations of kids and lots of random geometrical shapes!

Features of this template

• Designed for teachers and parents
• 100% editable and easy to modify
• 18 different slides to impress your audience
• Contains easy-to-edit graphics such as graphs, maps, tables, timelines and mockups
• Includes 500+ icons and Flaticon’s extension for customizing your slides
• Designed to be used in Google Slides and Microsoft PowerPoint
• 16:9 widescreen format suitable for all types of screens
• Includes information about fonts, colors, and credits of the resources used
• Available in different languages

How can I use the template?

Am I free to use the templates?

How to attribute?

Attribution required If you are a free user, you must attribute Slidesgo by keeping the slide where the credits appear. How to attribute?

Available in, related posts on our blog.

How to Add, Duplicate, Move, Delete or Hide Slides in Google Slides

How to Change Layouts in PowerPoint

How to Change the Slide Size in Google Slides

Related presentations.

Premium template

Unlock this template and gain unlimited access

Register for free and start editing online

You are using an outdated, insecure, unsupported browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Useful Articles

The Power of Positive Language

Parents can struggle to communicate with their children and to get their requests heard, understood and taken seriously. Alicia Eaton, a ‘Children’s Behavioural and Emotional Wellbeing Specialist’ and also a qualified AMI Montessori Teacher and mum, gives her top 10 tips on using positive language in an article in the Montessori Society Magazine.

Positive Language

Technology and Montessori

Mark Berger, US Montessori teacher and administrator reflects on whether the use of technology could add anything to the Montessori approach in the Montessori Society Magazine.

Why dividing us by age in school doesn’t make sense

“Given that people are curious and interested in different topics at different times, we believe that building a flexible class system for students is the best way for them to develop and grow. Forcing a child to study a rigid curriculum throughout the years can be inhibiting.”

 https://medium.com/the-exofiles/why-dividing-us-by-age-in-school-doesnt-make-sense-c6d1b5d79f0c

Playful Learning and Montessori Education

Dr Angeline Lillard’s latest research on fantasy: “Regarding children’s love of and need for fantasy, recent research suggests that our tendency to think young children prefer fantasy may be misguided.”

http://www.journalofplay.org/sites/www.journalofplay.org/files/pdf-articles/5-2-article-play-learning-and-montessori-education_0.pdf

The one question every parent should quit asking

“There’s a big difference between wanting the best for our children and wanting them to be the best.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-dannemiller/the-one-question-every-parent-should-quit-asking_b_6182248.html?ir=Parents&utm_campaign=112014&utm_me

Why children should still learn cursive

“The hands are the instruments of man’s writing… …The human hand allows the mind to reveal itself. – Maria Montessori”

http://m.auburnpub.com/lifestyles/bauso-why-children-should-still-learn-cursive/article_51eaef95-08cf-5114-8075-a951fd37112f.html?mobile_touch=true 

Baby-led Adventures – 5 reasons babies need to lead

‘Encouraging a baby to lead play means we must be patient, observant, and responsive in a gentle way so that we don’t interrupt the child’s process. It’s well worth it.’

http://www.janetlansbury.com/2011/07/baby-led-adventures-5-reasons-babies-need-to-lead/

The social world of newborns: A guide for the science-minded parent

‘There’s this myth that self-esteem comes from making everything easy for your children and making sure they never fail. If they never encounter hardship or conflict, the logic goes, they’ll never feel bad about themselves. Well, that’s ridiculous. That’s not even a human life. Kids learn self-esteem from mastering difficult tasks. It’s as simple as that.’

http://montessoriobserver.com/2014/03/01/kingsolver-on-montessori-you-can-do-hard-things/

Angry Birds ‘holds toddlers back’: Children who play touch screen games score lower in verbal tests than those who don’t 

‘Just talking to your child is the best way to encourage learning’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619238/Angry-Birds-holds-vocabulary-toddlers-Children-play-touch-screen-games-score-lower-verbal-tests-dont.html

Mind-minded parenting: How mental state talk help kids learn about others’ minds

Parents who are “mind-minded” treat their children as individuals with minds. When in doubt, they act as if their children’s acts are meaningful—motivated by feelings, thoughts, or intentions

http://www.parentingscience.com/mind-minded-parenting.html

Children’s Laureate’s plan to get boys back into books

What can we do to get boys interested in reading?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27061158

Heavily decorated classrooms disrupt attention and learning in young children 

Find out why the walls in the a Montessori classroom are not cluttered with children’s work and the colours are muted and calm

http://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2014/may/may27_decoratedclassrooms.html

What really happens when kids are pushed to be more persistent?

Helping children learn to persevere is important but knowing when to give up and move on to something you can be successful at or enjoy is more important it seems – and can lead to a ‘life that’s happy and fulfilling, morally admirable, creative, or characterized by psychological health’

http://www.alfiekohn.org/miscellaneous/grit.htm

Trying to close a knowledge gap, word by word 

‘I didn’t know I was supposed to talk to my baby until they could say words and talk to me,’

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/us/trying-to-close-a-knowledge-gap-word-by-word.html?emc=eta1&_r=0

Gray Matters: Too much screen time damages the brain

‘Use this research to strengthen your own parental position on screen management, and to convince others to do the same.’

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mental-wealth/201402/gray-matters-too-much-screen-time-damages-the-brain

Your baby needs you! Yes, you! Not heaps of baby equipment

Children under the age of three are spending an increasing amount of time in “restricted sedentary positions from where the scope for physical experience is constrained”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/10694349/Your-baby-needs-you-Yes-you-Not-heaps-of-baby-equipment.html

Children need to be taught ‘attentiveness skills’ to fight the effects of social media

Children can concentrate when they are babies but lose this capacity due to the fact they keep being interrupted their concentration – good job there is a solution – but it must start way before they become teenagers…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2555549/Children-need-taught-attentiveness-skills-fight-effects-social-media-claims-shadow-Education-Secretary.html

 What machines can’t do

In the second computer age we need humans beings who have ‘the voracious lust for understanding, the enthusiasm for work, the ability to grasp the gist, the empathetic sensitivity to what will attract attention and linger in the mind.’ Is this what education should be aiming at then?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/opinion/brooks-what-machines-cant-do.html?emc=eta1&_r=0

What’s the point of school?

School should be about the development of character..this is what we see in our schools …’spontaneous discipline, continuous and happy work, social sentiments of help and sympathy for others.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26127515

Modern life damaging infant brains

This conference has highlighted strapping small children into pushchairs, and the increased use of smartphones and tablets as being particularly damaging.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26559872

Want your child to be a success? Quit scheduling and let them play 

Dr David Whitebread explains the science behind free play and why parents must give children the chance to choose the pastimes they’re interested in.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/10636731/Half-term-school-holidays-Want-your-child-to-be-a-success-Quit-scheduling-and-let-them-play.html

Kingsolver on Montessori: ‘You can do hard things’

Kids learn self-esteem from mastering difficult tasks. It’s as simple as that.

School ditches rules and loses bullies

“Children develop the frontal lobe of their brain when taking risks, meaning they work out consequences. “You can’t teach them that. They have to learn risk on their own terms. It doesn’t develop by watching TV, they have to get out there.”

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/school-ditches-rules-and-loses-bullies-5807957

The mysterious workings of the adolescent brain

Adolescent brains continue to develop into their 20’s – is it any wonder they need a different form of education than we are offering at present – Montessori Secondary school to be offered in the UK by 2017

http://www.ted.com/talks/sarah_jayne_blakemore_the_mysterious_workings_of_the_adolescent_brain.html

This really happy 13-year-old hacks his education!

http://www.upworthy.com/this-really-happy-13-year-old-hacks-his-education-and-now-i-regret-i-didnt-do-the-same-with-mine

Doing Prekindergarten Right

‘,,,neuroscientific evidence demonstrates that all learning is based on emotional responses and social experiences. Therefore, social and emotional intelligence need to be developed as carefully and as thoughtfully as IQ.’

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ruth-bettelheim/doing-prekindergarten-rig_b_4684452.html

Inflated praise can harm kids with low self-esteem

Children only need the kind of praise that helps them judge their own abilities

http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/inflated-praise-can-harm-kids-with-low-self-esteem-114010300577_1.html

Children at Montessori schools are better educated

‘…schooling method that focuses on personal development rather than exams produces more mature, creative and socially adept children, scientists have revealed.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-407528/Children-Montessori-schools-better-educated.html

Hildegard Solzbacher, AMI Trainer talks movingly about the benefits of Montessori.

Sadly she passed away in 2014. The world lost a great Montessorian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3fbwNij3X0

Teacher as Learner

Montessori said: ‘What matters is to mix the ages, our schools show that children of different ages help one another…there is a communication between the two that one seldom finds between the adult and the small child.’

http://baandek.org/blog/2013/11/18/teacher-as-learner

Repetition in a Montessori infant community

‘Why does repetition irritate adults so much when children so obviously need to do it’ – Putting on and talking off socks, putting on and talking off socks, putting on and talking off socks, putting on and talking off socks…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g89Z86c9jAY

Building the Pink Tower – A project to promote Montessori education for al l

A documentary film that reimagines schools and learning through the lens of Montessori education.

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/building-the-pink-tower

Baking in a Montessori class in Sweden

The Unlimited Potential of the Child under Three!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3kTUFRjgGM

Brain research: Three principles for the 21st century classroom

Brain-based learning – intuited from observation by Montessori, confirmed by neuroscience today

http://www.learningfirst.org/brain-research-three-principles-21st-century-classroom

Children aged two need to develop through play and not begin schooling

In response to the suggestion by Baroness Morgan that children from poorer families should start formal school at 2, Sally Goddard-Blythe writes that ‘The problem will not be solved by putting children into formal settings at ever younger ages. The solution is to educate future parents better about the needs of the developing child.’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/10428556/Children-aged-two-need-to-develop-through-play-and-not-begin-schooling.html

 Presence, Not Praise: How to cultivate a healthy relationship with achievement

‘Nowadays, we lavish praise on our children. Praise, self-confidence and academic performance, it is commonly believed, rise and fall together. But current research suggests otherwise — over the past decade, a number of studies on self-esteem have come to the conclusion that praising a child as ‘clever’ may not help her at school. In fact, it might cause her to under-perform. Often a child will react to praise by quitting — why make a new drawing if you have already made ‘the best’? Or a child may simply repeat the same work — why draw something new, or in a new way, if the old way always gets applause?’

http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2013/05/23/stephen-grosz-examined-life/

 For poor schoolchildren, a poverty of words

‘there is strong evidence that increasing the general knowledge and vocabulary of a child before age 6 is the single highest correlate with later success. Schools have an enormously hard time pushing through the deficiencies with which many children arrive.’

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/nyregion/for-poor-schoolchildren-a-poverty-of-words.html?_r=1&

 Successful parenting without spending money: a mother’s story

This mother sets a great example – opting out of ‘kiddy consumerism’ just makes sense for our children.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/10211090/Successful-parenting-without-spending-money-a-mothers-story.html

 Using the Montessori method to combat dementia

Someone is diagnosed with dementia every 4 seconds. Can the Montessori approach help promote a better quality of life for sufferers?  This project certainly suggests it might.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/using-the-montessori-method-to-combat-dementia/article7819360/

 10 reasons why handheld devices should be banned for children under the age of 12

Paediatric occupational therapist, biologist, speaker and author, Chris Rowan, explains why exposure to handled devices should be avoided to children under the age of 12.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cris-rowan/10-reasons-why-handheld-devices-should-be-banned_b_4899218.html

• Find Your Country
• Become a Member

These presentations are designed for outreach to current parents, potential parents, and potential teacher trainees. Each resource can be customised for your school or training centre to most effectively communicate what you offer.

Policymaker Outreach

Marketing 101 for Schools

Parent Outreach

Teacher Outreach

Teacher Outreach (Short)

Donor Outreach

AMI Core Research

AMI Training Outreach

• Voices of AMI Training
• Questions and Answers
• Publications
• Presentations

Bestiality references allegedly made during presentation at Renmark High School

Warning for readers: This article contains graphic language.

The South Australian Department for Education is investigating a presentation delivered to year 9 girls in a regional high school that allegedly referenced bestiality as being accepted by the LGBTQIA+ community.

Female students said teachers at Renmark High School told them to leave their lessons and attend a presentation in a separate classroom.

Students who attended the presentation on March 22 say two staff from the Headspace centre in the neighbouring town of Berri introduced a "third-party" presenter who facilitated an hour-long presentation focused on relationships.

Parents said they were not notified about the presentation, nor was it consented to.

Students said they were left unsupervised for the duration of the presentation.

Student Courtney White, 14, said she felt confused and blindsided by the presentation.

"We had a teacher that told us to grab a chair and sit in front of the board, and then the Headspace people came in and then [the teacher] left, so then we're sitting in front of a board alone with no teachers, just the Headspace people," she said.

"The first slide of the PowerPoint on the board was 'You can see queerly now' and 'No point hiding.'"

Girls felt 'really uncomfortable'

Fourteen-year-old Emelia Wundenberg said the presenter was graphic when referencing their own sexual preferences and spoke in sexually explicit terms about growing up and being confused about whether they idolised people of the same gender or wanted to be intimate with them.

Students say they were then given an explanation of the initialism LGBTQIA+, with each word and its meaning displayed on the screen.

"There was a slide for what the 'plus' means, and they just started randomly saying words that no-one knew, like bestiality," Emelia said.

"It was on the board when they were showing what the 'plus' meant."

The students said bestiality was then explained in detail and the presenter seemed to imply it was something practised by people who identified as LGBTQIA+.

"They said [the queer community] just accepts all of it, even though … isn't it illegal?" Emelia said.

As the talk went on multiple girls, including Courtney, began to feel uncomfortable and asked to leave the classroom to "go to the bathroom".

"We're all just sitting there like, 'What the hell? What are we doing here? Why are we learning about animals having sex with humans?'" she said.

"It was really disgusting, it was really uncomfortable."

Emelia said many of those who asked to leave the classroom did not return.

When the ABC sought comment from the presenter a response was sent on the person's behalf asking that reporters refrained from reaching out or naming them in its coverage.

'Normal procedure' not followed

Letters seen by the ABC that were sent to parents on behalf of Renmark High School principal Mat Evans stated that the presentation was meant to discuss "respectful relationships".

The letter acknowledged that the school's "normal procedure for notifying parents ahead of specific presentations was not followed".

Mr Evans said the third-party presenter had "been suspended from department schools while the department undertakes an investigation".

"We are undertaking an internal review to ensure that processes around such notifications and procedures with regard to third parties attending at our school are always met," he said.

The ABC contacted the Department for Education, which provided a similar statement and said the presentation was being investigated.

SA education department chief executive Martin Westwell said the presentation was "unacceptable" and "shouldn't have happened".

Speaking with ABC Radio Adelaide on Thursday, Professor Westwell said conversations about sexual health, societal norms, stereotypes and sexuality were normal parts of the Australian curriculum, but the presentation at Renmark High School was not.

"The core idea that students should understand sexuality and other sexualities is, I think, really important — but the way [the presenter] went about it was unacceptable," he said.

"The school has clearly made some mistakes.

"There should have been a teacher in the room when that occurred, but there wasn't and the principal has apologised for that.

"They hadn't reviewed the content.

"There was a few things that went wrong and it ended up with this inappropriate language and a few things being discussed in that session that were just not appropriate."

Support being provided to students

Headspace's national head of clinical leadership Nicola Palfrey said the organisation was aware of concerns raised by members of the Renmark community.

"We take all feedback very seriously and are reviewing how we can support and guide Headspace centres … to ensure presentations they facilitate or deliver are aligned with evidence and best practice and are safe and appropriate for young people," she said.

FocusOne Health Board chair Ian Gartley said the "focus at Headspace Berri, operated under licence by FocusOne Health, is on the mental health and wellbeing of young people".

"We are aware of concerns raised by local members of the Renmark community following a presentation delivered by a lived experience speaker that Headspace Berri facilitated at Renmark High School," he said.

"Our priority right now is ensuring that any young people and their families who may be experiencing distress receive the support they need."

All parties involved in the alleged incident declined to provide the presentation to the ABC.

Following the presentation, a follow-up letter seen by the ABC was sent to parents offering counselling services from the education department, which had arranged a social worker to attend the school to help support affected students.

Parents express shock and outrage

Parents of students who attended the presentation said it was a poor representation of the queer community and had raised many concerns about the school's protocols for third-party presentations.

"Who vetted this material? Who made sure it was safe for 14- and 15-year-old girls? Some of them are still 13," Emelia's mother Kristy Fyfe said.

"It has done a huge disservice to the [queer] community."

Following the presentation, Courtney's mother Nicki Gaylard removed her three children from Renmark High School. 

"My kids are in limbo," she said.

"They're not in an education department at this point.

"I'm not putting them anywhere until I know this won't happen again.

"Under no circumstances should a child in that school ever feel trapped and unsafe without someone with their certificate, meaning a teacher."

The ABC has spoken to five other parents whose children attended the presentation.

They substantiated the two girls' claims.

LGBTQIA+ educators condemn 'slur'

Sexuality educators and LGBTQIA+ inclusion advocates Mel Brush and Eleonora Bertsa-Fuchs conduct consent and queer inclusion training for schools, parents and workplaces via their social enterprise Let's Talk About X.

Both are secondary teachers and Mx Bertsa-Fuchs said queer education was important but should be delivered in a safe and appropriate setting.

"The teachers are the people that these young people have a relationship with, that they are familiar with, that they're comfortable with," Mx Bertsa-Fuchs said.

"When you're in a vulnerable situation, like a respectful relationships workshop or seminar, there should be someone in the room that you are familiar with."

Mx Brush said the alleged use of the word bestiality in the presentation was damaging to the queer community.

"It's pretty shocking to think about that term being thrown around like that, especially given how loaded it is, and for a historical context of the way that it's been used as a slur and to discriminate against LGBT+ people," Mx Brush said.

ABC Riverland — local news in your inbox

• X (formerly Twitter)
• Relationships
• Renmark South
• Safety Education
• Secondary Schools

Use Keynote Remote to control your Keynote presentation

You can control your Keynote presentation from an iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch using Keynote Remote.

Check your requirements

Link keynote remote to your mac, link keynote remote to another iphone or ipad, use keynote remote.

Keynote Remote is included with Keynote for iPhone and iPad. To use Keynote Remote to control your presentation, here's what you need:

An iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch with Keynote 2.1 or later for iPhone or iPad

A Mac with Keynote for Mac 6.1 or later

A remote device linked to your Mac or another iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch

You can play your presentation on your Mac and remotely control it with your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch.

Turn on Wi-Fi on your iPhone or iPad and turn on Wi-Fi on your Mac .

On your Mac, open Keynote.

From the menu bar, choose Keynote > Settings (or Preferences), click Remotes, then select the "Enable" checkbox.

On your iPhone or iPad, tap Continue.

On your Mac, next to the name of your iPhone or iPad, click Link.

Make sure that the four-digit passcode that appears matches on both devices, then click Confirm on your Mac.

After you link your devices, learn how to use Keynote Remote .

You can play your presentation on iPhone or iPad and remotely control it with another.

Turn on Wi-Fi on both devices .

Open your Keynote presentation on the device with the presentation.

On the device that you want to use as a remote, open the Keynote app.

On the presentation device, tap Link next to the remote device.

Make sure that the four-digit passcode that appears matches on your devices, then click Confirm.

After you link Keynote Remote to your Mac, iPhone or iPad, follow these steps to control your slideshow.

Tap Play, then choose what you want to do:

To move to the next or previous slide, swipe in either direction.

To end the presentation, tap the Close button or swipe down with two fingers.

If your devices can't stay connected, connect both devices to the same Wi-Fi network on your Mac and on your iPhone or iPad .

Before playing your slideshow, you might want to turn on Do Not Disturb on your Mac and on your iPhone or iPad .

Use Keynote with Apple Watch

Learn how to use AirPlay to play your presentation from Keynote to an Apple TV.

Explore Apple Support Community

Find what’s been asked and answered by Apple customers.

Contact Apple Support

Need more help? Save time by starting your support request online and we'll connect you to an expert.

MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Jul 16, 2014

360 likes | 561 Views

INTERNATIONAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE “MEDICRIME CONVENTION” 26-28 October 2011, Moscow The Co operation within the OMCL NETWORK. Dr Popi Kanari , Director State General Laboratory Ministry of Health, Cyprus. Dr Popi Kanari , Director State General Laboratory

Share Presentation

• generic drugs
• high profit activity
• long term data collection
• active ingredient
• robust network

Presentation Transcript

INTERNATIONAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE “MEDICRIME CONVENTION” 26-28 October 2011, Moscow The Co operation within the OMCL NETWORK Dr Popi Kanari, Director State General Laboratory Ministry of Health, Cyprus Dr Popi Kanari, Director State General Laboratory Ministry of Health, Cyprus MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Objectives of the Presentation To show: • The imperative need for the adoption and implementation of the Convention on Combating Counterfeit of Medical Products and Similar Crimes • The important role of OMCL s and their integrated action with all stakeholders at a national and international level • The immense benefit in the protection of public health MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

An imperative Need for Adoption and Implementation • Traditionally the problem of counterfeit pharmaceuticals was limited to developing nations in Asia and Africa .Nowadays counterfeiting is rapidly becoming a world wide concern and it is gaining momentum • The increase in global trade and the growth of internet sale coupled with weak regulatory and enforcement structures in a number of countries has exacerbated the problem MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

A public health threat • Defraud consumers • Lead to loss of confidence in the entire health system and affect its the credibility • Can cause great harm such as • Allergies and fatalities • Heavy metal and chemical poisoning • Promote drug resistance strains to disease • Not limited to brand name prescription and lifestyle drugs MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Counterfeit drugs –a threat to patient health – can cause even deaths • Counterfeit meningitis vaccines caused deaths in 1995 • Pregnant women injected with counterfeit iron for anaemia • Children who took paracetamol syrup with diethylene glycol ( children died in Haiti 1965) (in Bangladesh 1990) (in 2006 in Panama) • Heparin case with OSCS -2007 Very few cases are reported because : • In Almost all cases the diagnosis preceding the administration of counterfeits has not been made by a professional so it is very difficult to identify contra-indications resulting from patient’s state of health or interactions with concomitant treatments MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Reasons for Increase in Counterfeiting • A high profit activity • Remains a low risk activity • Sanctions are now relatively weak and often difficult to apply • Inter-state co-operation is deficient • Cross-border vigilance is deficient • Taxation systems are bypassed • Weak administrative structures • Counterfeiters know that there is still a legal vacuum and legal uncertainties MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Counterfeiting: a significant part of the shadow economy and shadow trade • Likely involvement in other types of crime • Potential for significant financial gain and funding of organized crime • Potential links to terrorism • Countries can for example be used as transit areas or brokers without realising it MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

A challenge for all: preventing and combating threats to public health through a legal instrument - a Convention • The Council of Europe has drawn up the first International MEDICRIME Convention to criminilise • The manufacturing of counterfeit medical products • Supplying ,offering to supply and trafficking in counterfeit medical products • The falsification of documents • The unauthorised manufacturing or supplying of medical products MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

MEDICRIME CONVENTION A Convention, with signatory parties for its implementation which provides a Legal Instrument, which so far was non existent,to protect public health ALSO through: Protecting rights of victims Promoting national and international cooperation The Convention is open to members and non members of the Council of Europe –universally relevant MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Implementation of the Convention The implementation is based on 3 pillars: 1. Strengthening existing and promoting new legislative and administrative procedures and measures 2. Strengthening co-operation and collaboration at a National level and International level between Health Authorities, Customs, Police and Judiciary system as well as between Authorities and Industry 3.Strengthening expertise and means in the identification for detection and awareness for prevention MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

OMCLs specific role in the Medicrime Convention • OMCLs play a key role in certain articles in The Medicrime Convention • Chapter iv Cooperation of Authorities and information exchange - Article 17 • Chapter v Measures of Prevention – Article 18 • Chapter vii International cooperation – Article 22 • Chapter viii Follow up mechanisms – Article 25 MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Article 17 of the ConventionNational measures for coordination and information exchange • OMCL s already have information sharing tools in place that facilitate rapid dissemination of information and data exchange on counterfeit medicinal products between OMCLs and Competent Authorities • If a network of single points of contact (SPOCS –Customs, Police Competent Authority for drugs, Judicial System) exists this can lead to a more multi sectoral,coordinated, integrated and holistic approach (Cooperation can involve industry for further information) • Strengthening collaboration with all stake- holders thus saving time and resources MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Article 18 –Preventive measures can establish the quality and safety requirements of medicinal products • The OMCL s can support this article at a practical and technical level through surveillance testing of products but also API’ s and prior to the granting of marketing authorization • Sampling in surveillance can be on a risk base system and targeted to products that are prone to counterfeiting MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Article 22-International cooperation • Networking and International cooperation are the cornerstones of the OMCLs with • EMA • PICS • Working groups of HMA • The EDQM in conjuction with the OMCL’s has the expertise to coordinate and run specifically tailored programmes for counterfeit analysis within and outside the Network • The OMCL ‘s have a robust network under EDQM and provide through Quality Assurance VALID AND ESSENTIAL DATA for enforcement purposes MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Article 25- the Committee of Parties to monitor the implementation of the Convention • The OMCL network can efficiently support the projects and activities that relate to the goals of the Convention through its analytical capacity ,long term data collection and expertise • The EDQM which is represented in the Committee of Parties coordinates the activities of the OMCL Network. So the OMCL Network has a line of communication with the Committee of Parties MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Utilisation of existing networks/infrastructure • OMCLs/EDQM network: • analyse counterfeit products and results and information are disseminated to • -Members of the Network • -Drug regulatory Authorities • -Law Enforcement • share knowledge and experience with members of the network (83 Laboratories within the countries of the CE) • initiating and supportenforcement actions with the appropriate Authorities • Initiate awareness through media/training MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

OMCLs mandate • Unless mandated by National Competent Authority OMCLs should not have as normal responsibility the certification of the presence of a counterfeit product during routine surveillance testing • Should be provided with sufficient indications that sample may be a counterfeit product • Adequate training to analytically cope with unknown substances • Adequate technical equipment to confirm the presence of unknown /toxic substances MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

OMCLs :An invaluable support to Drug Regulatory Authorities and Law Enforcement • OMCLs : Can Help to solve the difficult puzzle • Is it a counterfeit? • Does it have the right Active ingredient and right concentration • Does it have the right Excipients ? • How does it compare with the genuine ? • Can it be linked to another /previous case? • Can traceability be achieved ? • It is a printing /packaging counterfeiting and not due to its composition? MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Capacity of OMCLs The OMCLs through the network activities organised by EDQM are gaining more experience and • have a plethora of data collected over the years on original and generic drugs –less on APIs which they share • Can describe and identify obvious differences to the genuine/authorised product –active ingredient, colour, physical characteristics, related substances , • Can link with analytical and technical expertise one counterfeit with another • Can link a counterfeit product with API /Raw materials if available • Can have the capacity to link a counterfeit product with illegal/unauthorised manufacturing premises MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

The OMCLs • have a plethora of data collected over the years on original and generic drugs –less on APIs • Can describe and identify obvious differences to the genuine/authorised product –active ingredient ,colour ,physical characteristics ,related substances , • Can link with analytical and technical expertise one counterfeit with another • Can link a counterfeit product with API /Raw materials if available • Can thus link a counterfeit product with illegal/unauthorised manufacturing premises MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

OMCL s need to improve on the following to improve their technical support to the Convention • Use existing intelligence to tailor specific sampling schemes targeted for the identification of counterfeit drugs • Cover the whole distribution chain (including internet pharmacies ) with the collaboration of the Drug Authorities • More information on traceability (if known)of a product should be given to OMCL s by Regulatory Authority • Have a Closer look and apply more techniques for labelling and packaging (training needed) MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

OMCL s need improvement on the following to enhance their technical support to the Convention • Look more into API s and their impurities (profile as tracer, residual solvents), excipients (IR, NIR) coating-Specific surveillance programmes on APIs • Keep a good data bank for all these details for comparisons (If possible use software available in the trade) • Availability of Reference Standards egAnabolics –Sometimes spurious web sites that sell them through DR GOOGLE ! MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Outcomes from activities of OMCLs The robust network of the OMCL’s provides • Better informed risk analysis • Utilisation of limited resources to address counterfeiting by avoiding duplication • Better Coordinated and multi-disciplinary investigations when linked to Customs, Police and Justice • Through its analytical results integrated preventive actions • Protection to public health and support to a reliable health care system MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Further Contribution from EDQM to OMCL Network • Efforts already in place to : • Strengthen data on APIs involving more OMCLs (collaborative studies ) • Give OMCLs access to impurity profiles of Authorised APIs • Provide fora for more information exchange • Raise awareness to the public with the contribution OMCL network • Provide training opportunities to OMCLs along with other stake holders (customs ,police )so as to have harmonised procedures and more collaboration MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

OMCL Laboratories, apart from giving reliable results , keeping a good data bank, need TIME to think when investigating a counterfeit sample… to notice , to look at details, to remember details from previous cases • They started looking at products in a more forensic approach MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Examination /analysis of counterfeit products by OMCL s The most exciting phrase to hear in science - the one that heralds new discoveries - is not "Eureka!" but "That's funny..." (Isaac Asimov 1920 -1992) OMCLs have the challenge to look for something extraordinary ,something <funny> when examining a counterfeit Pharmaceutical product -and many such cases have been reported by OMCLs The OMCL s have distributed among the NETWORK information and data of more than 300 different counterfeit products in the last 5 years MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

Cyprus OMCL findings • 2007 – 2011 • More than 40 counterfeit drugs • Through internet ,sale of products from door to door ,customs control, • Found undeclared substances :sibutramine,synerphine,phenophalein,tadala fil,DHEA ,Yohimbine ,Arsenic,Testosterone

Example of testing results :sample: BOTANICAL preparation The same brand name ( different lots),was tested at The State General Laboratory in Cyprus three times. It found to contain: • First time (2009): Sibutramine (10mg/cps) • Second time (2010): Sibutramine (15,7mg/cps) and synephrine • Third time (2010): Sibutramine, dinorsibutramine and Phenolphthalein -no uniformity of capsules size/weight -each different capsule contained one or two or all of the three above substances in different amounts Emerging Risks, Budapest, 27 May 2011

Industry’s input • The availability of such products in the regulated supply chain undermines the confidence in the health system and even more, the good status of Authorized Products • So support from Industry is essential in combating Counterfeit Medicines MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

The real driving force for the implementation of the Convention • Political will and • legal support to strengthen and utilize further the existing infra structures MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

The way forward – some key issuesfor EDQM with Drug Regulatory Authorities in collaboration with OMCLs • Streamlining the expertise of OMCL s and utilising more their capacity to cope better with illegal and counterfeit medicines • Optimizing the use of existing networks and infrastructures at both national level and a European/International level will facilitate further the implementation of the Convention. • Set a risk management procedure/system for suspected counterfeit products • Set up Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) reporting and pharmacovigilence systems for counterfeit products MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

The way forward – some key issuesfor EDQM with Drug Regulatory Authorities in collaboration with OMCLs • Set up centres of technical expertise(in specific techniques ie NMR) in counterfeit drugs within EDQM /OMCL Network to provide either training or assistance or data if needed- thus saving resources • OMCL s can collaborate more with Academia/forensic institutions for specific techniques • A minimum expertise should exist in all OMCL s so that in a crisis a country must have the capacity to respond immediately.Training among OMCL’s can be provided . MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

The benefit of joining forces • Small OMCL’S like the one in Cyprus can also have the expertise in the analysis of counterfeit drugs but joining forces with the other OMCL’s and the support and coordination of the EDQM this expertise and knowhow becomes a very strong tool in combating counterfeit drugs • Big successes start from small successes through constant but committed efforts !

Thank you for your attention Dr Popi Kanari Director of State General Laboratory,OMCL ,CYPRUS MEDICRIME CONVENTION, MOSCOW 26-28 OCTOBER 2011

• More by User

AMEDA 26-28 October 2011 CPSS – IOSCO FMI Principles

AMEDA 26-28 October 2011 CPSS – IOSCO FMI Principles. Monica Singer CEO – Strate Limited. 1. The Importance of a Regulatory Structure. An essential regulatory objective is to ensure legal certainty in post- trading ( IOSCO # 1) Why ? Enhance efficiency and safety of post-trading

318 views • 8 slides

IMFO Audit and Risk Indaba 26-28 October 2011

Welcome…. IMFO Audit and Risk Indaba 26-28 October 2011. Interchangeable roles of Audit Committee and Municipal Public Accounts Committee in enhancing oversight within a municipality . 1. Introduction. General

297 views • 16 slides

Risk Management October 26 - 28 2005

Risk Management? October 26 - 28 2005. Cijeli ?ivot jest upravljanje rizikom, ne njegova eliminacija. Walter Wriston, biv?i predsjednik Citicorp. Risk Management? October 26 - 28 2005. Uvod. Najbolji nacin razmi?ljanja o riziku jest razlika izmedu onog ?to ste ocekivali da se dogodi i ?to se mo

2.41k views • 224 slides

Council of Europe Convention on Counterfeiting of Medical Products and Similar Crimes Moscow, Russia, October 26-28, 201

Council of Europe Convention on Counterfeiting of Medical Products and Similar Crimes Moscow, Russia, October 26-28, 2011. Presented by: Jeffrey Gren, Director, Office of Health and Consumer Goods, U.S. Department of Commerce.

426 views • 19 slides

Moscow, 2011

The Fine Art of Construction. Moscow, 2011 . MISSION OF VIS CONSTRUCTION GROUP. We carry out unique projects in Russia and abroad, building facilities that promote economic growth and improving people’s quality of life. WE RELY ON advanced technologies effective management

437 views • 28 slides

Helder Mota Filipe INFARMED I.P. International High-Level Conference MEDICRIME CONVENTION Moscow, 26-28 October 2011

Multisectorial Assistance Programmes in the fight against counterfeit medical products The Portuguese Experience. Helder Mota Filipe INFARMED I.P. International High-Level Conference MEDICRIME CONVENTION Moscow, 26-28 October 2011. Summary. The collaborating countries

580 views • 36 slides

October 26 th , 2011

Solar Jackets’ Racer Battery Monitoring System(BMS) Ali Bibonge Daniel Christopher Paul Martin Mark Slade Taverishima Tsegha. October 26 th , 2011. BMS Project Overview. Battery monitoring system for a solar powered race car Maintain batteries in a “safe to operate” and efficient state

267 views • 14 slides

FIBRE KoM – 28 October 2011

WP6: Dissemination and Collaboration. FIBRE KoM – 28 October 2011. FROM THE DOW:.

203 views • 12 slides

26-28 January 2011

26-28 January 2011. Presidential State of the Union Address. Option: If you have headphones you may listen to the Address in room 137. If you prefer to read the transcript you may go to room 137 (access the transcript on my teacher website)

98 views • 2 slides

Bologna, 26 th October, 2011

Simulations of Coupled Core and Steam Generator Dynamics (Contribution to Task 4.4: “Preliminary definition of the Control Architecture” Status Report). Bologna, 26 th October, 2011. Authors:Dumitru Dobrea , Laurentiu Aioanei. 1. Introduction.

311 views • 19 slides

Kandidatorientering, October 28, 2011

Kandidatorientering, October 28, 2011. Algorithms and Data Structures. Algorithms and Data Structures – Who?. Faculty Lars Arge Gerth Stølting Brodal. Researchers Henrik Blunck Brody Sandel Constantinos Tsirogiannis Wei Yu Cicimol Alexander Elad Verbin Qin Zhang Lap Kei Lee.

184 views • 9 slides

Added Value of the Medicrime Convention Moscow 26-28 October 2011

Added Value of the Medicrime Convention Moscow 26-28 October 2011. Gerald Heddell - Director Inspections, Enforcement &amp; Standards Division Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Outline. MHRA and the Council of Europe Counterfeit Medicine Situation - UK

411 views • 26 slides

OCTOBER 28, 2011

OCTOBER 28, 2011. READING COUNTS 1 st Grade. Oct. 28, 2011. Books/Points Boles 199/201 Fields 246/265 Trent 192/195 Weston 171/181. READING COUNTS 2 nd Grade. Books/Points Greer 544/873 Housewright 413/734 Tackett 178/326 Testerman 507/811.

290 views • 20 slides

March 26-28, 2008 Pennsylvania Convention Center

Disposable Manufacturing System for Rapid Mass Production of Influenza Vaccine. James Robinson, PE Vice President, Technical &amp; Quality Operations Novavax, Inc. Bob Bader Senior Manager Technology - Pharma Bio Jacobs Engineering. March 26-28, 2008 Pennsylvania Convention Center.

368 views • 24 slides

Moscow, IKI, October 10-14, 2011

PHOTOMETRIC AND RADIOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF PHOBOS REGOLITH FROM DATA GATHERED BY THE PHOBOS MISSION L.V. Ksanfomality, Space research institute of the RAS Moscow. The second Moscow Solar system symposium. Moscow, IKI, October 10-14, 2011. KRFM PHOBOS-2 1989.

380 views • 19 slides

Friday, October 28, 2011

Friday, October 28, 2011. Journal: Please write in your journal, the following dates, then write them in your agenda: AR Book DUE – Friday, October 28, 2011 AR Book DUE–Wednesday, November 30, 2011 AGENDA Drop Everything And Read!

477 views • 37 slides

October 26, 2011

ACCOMMODATIONS for Students with Disabilities Taking STAAR, STAAR Spanish, STAAR Modified, STAAR L, or TELPAS. October 26, 2011. Contact Information. Check the webpage for latest postings. http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/accommodations/staar-telpas/.

319 views • 18 slides

Louisiana Board of Regents. October 26, 2011. Committee Meetings. Finance Facilities and Property Academic and Student Affairs Planning, Research and Performance. Finance Committee. W. Clinton Rasberry, Jr., Chair Donna Klein, Vice Chair Scott Ballard Robert Bruno Maurice Durbin

881 views • 82 slides

Olga Geitus – Eitvina Moscow, September 28, 2011

Improvement and unification of informational systems for simplification of the property registration procedure. Olga Geitus – Eitvina Moscow, September 28, 2011. The aims of the presentation. T o give a short overview of the existing procedure; T o draw a vision of a future unified system;

288 views • 22 slides

Wednesday 26 October 2011

Wednesday 26 October 2011. Wednesday 6:22 back in stable beams, Fill 2254 Beam intensity: 1.9E14 Bunch intensity: 1.4E11 Initial luminosity: 3.5 10 33 cm -2 s -1 Integrated Luminosity: 34 pb -1 09:30 Beam dump due to cryo fault sector 12 (false temperature reading, most likely SEU)

176 views • 8 slides

The Peterson Group to Join Medicrime Convention

Counterfeiting has been a long-time issue among health advocates. It has brought frustrations and arguments on top of complaints on the seemingly unsolvable problem.

195 views • 10 slides

FIAPAC Seminar October 27-28, 2005, Moscow

FIAPAC Seminar October 27-28, 2005, Moscow. Post-abortion contraception: Methods’ choice. Irina Savelieva, M. D., Ph.D., Research Center Ob. &amp; Gyn., Moscow, Russia. Reproductive health intentions in postpartum and abortion clients. BUT:.

225 views • 22 slides

Find Info For

• Current Students
• Prospective Students
• Research and Partnerships
• Entrepreneurship and Commercialization
• Office of Engagement

Quick Links

• HLA Department Site
• College of Agriculture
• Purdue Extension

LA Capstone Presentations

It is the policy of the purdue university that all persons have equal opportunity and access to its educational programs, services, activities, and facilities without regard to race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, disability or status as a veteran. purdue is an affirmative action institution. this material may be available in alternative formats., purdue sites purdue sites.

• Purdue Homepage
• Employee Portal
• Purdue Today
• Campus Directory
• University Calendar

College of Agriculture Sites College of Agriculture Sites

• College of Ag Homepage
• Education Store
• Extension Events

© 2024 Purdue University | An equal access/equal opportunity university | Copyright Complaints | Maintained by HLA Happenings

If you have trouble accessing this page because of a disability, please contact HLA Happenings at [email protected] | Accessibility Resources

Some results uranium dioxide powder structure investigation

• Processes of Obtaining and Properties of Powders
• Published: 28 June 2009
• Volume 50 , pages 281–285, ( 2009 )

Cite this article

• E. I. Andreev 1 ,
• K. V. Glavin 2 ,
• A. V. Ivanov 3 ,
• V. V. Malovik 3 ,
• V. V. Martynov 3 &
• V. S. Panov 2  

115 Accesses

7 Citations

Explore all metrics

Features of the macrostructure and microstructure of uranium dioxide powders are considered. Assumptions are made on the mechanisms of the behavior of powders of various natures during pelletizing. Experimental data that reflect the effect of these powders on the quality of fuel pellets, which is evaluated by modern procedures, are presented. To investigate the structure of the powders, modern methods of electron microscopy, helium pycnometry, etc., are used. The presented results indicate the disadvantages of wet methods for obtaining the starting UO 2 powders by the ammonium diuranate (ADU) flow sheet because strong agglomerates and conglomerates, which complicate the process of pelletizing, are formed. The main directions of investigation that can lead to understanding the regularities of formation of the structure of starting UO 2 powders, which will allow one to control the process of their fabrication and stabilize the properties of powders and pellets, are emphasized.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Investigation of the Properties of Uranium-Molybdenum Pellet Fuel for VVER

L. A. Karpyuk, V. V. Novikov, … O. A. Bakhteev

Investigation of the Influence of the Energy of Thermal Plasma on the Morphology and Phase Composition of Aluminosilicate Microspheres

V. V. Shekhovtsov

Evaluation of the Possibility of Fabricating Uranium-Molybdenum Fuel for VVER by Powder Metallurgy Methods

A. V. Lysikov, E. N. Mikheev, … D. S. Missorin

Patlazhan, S.A., Poristost’ i mikrostruktura sluchainykh upakovok tverdykh sharov raznykh razmerov (Porosity and Microstructure of Chaotic Packings of Solid Spheres of Different Sizes), Chernogolovka: IKhF RAN, 1993.

Google Scholar  

Andreev, E.I., Bocharov, A.S., Ivanov, A.V., et al., Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Tsvetn. Metall. , 2003, no. 1, p. 48.

Assmann, H., Dörr, W., and Peehs, M., “Control of HO 2 Microstructure by Oxidative Sintering,” J. Nucl. Mater. , 1986, vol. 140,issue 1, pp. 1–6.

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Elektrostal’ Polytechnical Institute (Branch), Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys, ul. Pervomaiskaya 7, Elektrostal’, Moscow oblast, 144000, Russia

E. I. Andreev

Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys (State Technical University), Leninskii pr. 4, Moscow, 119049, Russia

K. V. Glavin & V. S. Panov

JSC “Mashinostroitelny Zavod”, ul. K. Marksa 12, Elektrostal’, Moscow oblast, 144001, Russia

A. V. Ivanov, V. V. Malovik & V. V. Martynov

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. V. Glavin .

Additional information

Original Russian Text © E.I. Andreev, K.V. Glavin, A.V. Ivanov, V.V. Malovik, V.V. Martynov, V.S. Panov, 2009, published in Izvestiya VUZ. Poroshkovaya Metallurgiya i Funktsional’nye Pokrytiya, 2008, No. 4, pp. 19–24.

About this article

Andreev, E.I., Glavin, K.V., Ivanov, A.V. et al. Some results uranium dioxide powder structure investigation. Russ. J. Non-ferrous Metals 50 , 281–285 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3103/S1067821209030183

Download citation

Published : 28 June 2009

Issue Date : June 2009

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3103/S1067821209030183

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• nuclear fuel
• uranium dioxide
• uranium protoxide-oxide
• crystallite
• agglomerate
• conglomerate
• surface morphology
• ADU-ammonium diuranate
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Disney at CinemaCon 2024: Everything Announced and Revealed

Deadpool & wolverine, captain america: new world order, inside out 2, and much more..

Disney held the final big studio presentation of CinemaCon 2024 and it brought updates for a few Disney and Marvel projects, including Inside Out 2, Deadpool & Wolverine, Captain America: Brave New World, Moana 2, Mufasa: The Lion King, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, Young Woman and the Sea, and much more.

While a lot of what was shown at Disney's CinemaCon presentation was only for those in the room for now, IGN was in attendance and can at least share with you our impressions and breakdowns of all the big footage that was featured. And it only feels right to kick things off with Deadpool & Wolverine...

Deadpool & Wolverine Shows Nine Minutes of Footage at CinemaCon: 'Suck it Fox, We're Going to Disneyland'

On stage at CinemaCon 2024, Marvel's Kevin Feige helped introduce nine minutes of footage from Deadpool & Wolverine. Before the footage was shown, he dropped F-bomb after F-bomb as he's allowed to say them now because the movie is rated R.

As for the footage, it all kicked off with Ryan Reynolds' Wade Wilson no longer as a superhero but as a used car salesman. While he may not be a superhero at the moment, he is still very inappropriate and, on a test drive with a family, says, "not that I didn't want to have [kids], I just haven't had a lot of vaginal sex."

After we see Wilson still has his Deadpool outfit in his locker, he and Rob Delaney's Peter head back to the one bedroom apartment he splits with Blind Al and get shocked by a surprise birthday party. Here we get to see one of the fourth-wall breaks when Wilson says, "Hey, cocaine is the one thing Feige said is off limits!"

The party is then interrupted as Wilson is taken by the Time Variance Authority and meets Mr. Paradox. He says Deadpool can save the sacred timeline and that he is going to give him everything he's ever wanted. Deadpool responds with, "Suck it, Fox. We're going to Disneyland!" and then proceeds to put on his new costume.

We then got a sizzle reel with extended trailer footage, including Deadpool and Wolverine in his yellow suit.

Deadpool and Wolverine will be released in theaters on July 26, 2024.

Captain America: Brave New World Shows First Footage at CinemaCon: Harrison Ford Asks Anthony Mackie to Rebuild the Avengers

Captain America: Brave New World footage was revealed at CinemaCon and, perhaps most excitingly, it featured Harrison Ford's Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross asking Anthony Mackie's Captain America to rebuild the Avengers.

We also were shown President Ross speaking with his staff while having a lollipop because he can't smoke cigars anymore. He then reveals his new look (Ross used to be played by the late William Hurt) is because he had to "lose the mustache of lose the election."

The footage cuts to Isaiah Bradley and another agent being "activated" by some high pitch noise and they start attacking our heroes. Chaos ensues and President Ross even throws a big punch. As Sam notes, the "inner circle has been compromised."

Captain America: Brave New World is set to be released in theaters on February 14, 2025.

13 Minutes of Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes Sets Up the Wild Adventure to Come

Attendees at Disney's CinemaCon presentation were treated to 13 minutes of footage from Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes and it all began with some beautiful shots of nature. We follow a hawk down a river in the woods with rapids and waterfalls and we are soon in the company of some young apes making their way along cliffs and treetops.

Noah, the protagonist of Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, is one of these three apes and he leaps across a chasm and climbs his way up to a nest of eggs. The mother hawk returns and knocks him off and he starts sliding down a cliff before saving himself.

We then cut to Noah's village being attacked by bad apes who want to burn it down. They wear armor and have tasers and beat up Noah something bad. He wakes up after the battle and appears to be the only ape left. He finds the body of his father and buries him under stones and vows to find the missing apes and bring them home.

He comes across an old train tunnel and exits to the ruins of an American city where the skyscrapers are all overgrown with vegetation. It's a striking image and only the beginning of Noah's journey.

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes will be released in theaters on May 8, 2024.

Young Woman and the Sea Trailer Gives the World a Look at Daisy Ridley as an Olympic Swimmer Defying All the Odds

Young Woman and the Sea is a biographical drama film starring Daisy Ridley as Gertrude 'Trudy' Ederle, an Olympic champion who overcame incredible odds in the early 1900s and completed a 21-mile swim from France to England through the English Channel.

The film is set to be released in theaters on May 31, 2024, and we were treated to its official trailer and a new poster.

Joining Ridley is Tilda Cobham-Hervey, Stephen Graham, Kim Bodnia, Christopher Eccleston, and Glenn Fleshler, and the film is being directed by Joachim Rønning and written by Jeff Nathanson. It's also based on the book "Young Woman and the Sea: How Trude Ederle Conquered the English Channel and Inspired the World" by Glenn Stout.

The film is also being produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and is said to be the highest-testing movie of his career.

Alien: Romulus Footage Is As Scary As It Is Awesome

The above trailer is not from CinemaCon 2024.

A few scenes from Alien: Romulus were shown at CinemaCon and it all began with a pre-taped intro from Ridley Scott and director Fede Álvarez before jumping into a few scenes from the film.

We get to see Cailee Spaeny's Rain Carradine and crew investigating a ship, an android rebooting itself, a xenomorph escaping from a container and swimming through a flooded ship before face hugging one of the crew, a chest-bursting seizure scene, and more.

Alien: Romulus will be released in theaters on August 16, 2024.

Inside Out 2 Footage Shows the Troubles of Becoming a Teenager

Amy Poehler, who once again plays Joy in Inside Out 2, helped introduce 35 minutes of the sequel to those in the seats at Disney's CinemaCon presentation. While we won't spoil too much here, we see Riley, who is now 13, trying to impress the older kids at the girls hockey team camp she wins a spot on.

However, her newly emerging emotions - Anxiety, Boredom, Envy, and Embarrassment - basically take over and lock away her original emotions now that she has more complicated feelings to work out as a teenager.

Inside Out 2 will be released in theaters on June 14, 2024.

Mufasa: The Lion King Gets a Quick, Yet Beautiful First Look

Mufasa: The Lion King director Barry Jenkins stopped by CinemaCon to discuss the much-anticipated prequel to The Lion King and shared a first look teaser of the film that is set to be released in theaters on December 20, 2024.

Jenkins explained that this movie is "so full of heart" and explains how people who become great become the way they are. There will be plenty of new songs, and the story will see Mufasa, Scar, and others going on a journey throughout Africa.

The footage was brief but it featured a snowy part of Africa and a voice-over that said the story begins far beyond the mountains and the shadows on the other side of the light.

Moana 2 Footage Teases the New Adventures Ahead

CinemaCon 2024 also revealed the first footage of Moana 2 to those in attendance and we even got to hear a new song that goes a little like this - "Finally we're back, back to who we're meant to be!"

We get glimpses of Moana on her boat with Pua and singing about coming home to her island. We then get to see a little of that joyful reunion and everyone on the island rejoices in song that Moana has returned from beyond the horizon.

A sizzle reel was then shown and it featured Hei Hei, sunsets, the wide open ocean, and a short look at Maui.

Moana 2 will be released in theaters on November 27, 2024.

The Amateur Is a Tale of Blackmail and Revenge

The Amateur is a new film starring Rami Malek and an exclusive sneak peek was given to those at Disney's presentation at CinemaCon 2024. The film will be released on April 11, 2025, and tells the story of a CIA cryptographer who blackmails his agency to train him and send him on a mission to kill the terrorists who murdered his wife.

Adam Bankhurst is a writer for IGN. You can follow him on X/Twitter @AdamBankhurst and on TikTok.

In This Article

IGN Recommends

• Become a member
• The Montessori Event
• AMS Learning
• Administration
• Early Childhood
• Global Initiatives
• Infant & Toddler
• Professional Development
• Public Policy
• Public Schools
• Special Needs
• Toggle Search

Talking Respectfully to Your Children

Montessori life, winter 2018, by jane jacobs.

If you have observed a Montessori class, you may have wondered: How does the teacher manage 20 or more children when I have trouble with just one or two? If only I had her skills and patience!

Having taught for several years before I had children, I was astonished to discover that my Montessori classroom experience did not prepare me for parenthood. Though Maria Montessori believed in extensive training of the teacher, few parents receive useful preparation. Fortunately, I found a book that helped me translate Montessori theory into more effective parenting: How to Talk So Kids Will Listen & Listen So Kids Will Talk , by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish.

The following ideas from this valuable book might be helpful as part of your parenting tool kit. The bonus is that these tools will work for you in any setting—and with everyone, not just children.

Learn to look and listen

Montessori stresses the importance of carefully observing a child as he goes about his work. This is one of the ways we can show respect for the child, another major premise of the Montessori philosophy. We often jump to conclusions and step in without taking into account what our child might be doing, thinking, or feeling. Put down the phone, turn off the television, watch, and look into your child’s eyes when you speak.

• Practice observing and staying quiet first.
• Listen to yourself as well as your child—if your immediate inclination is dismay or anger, write down what you would like to say, but don’t say it.
• Try not to fix anything or problem-solve—just be with your child.

Name the feelings

It’s easy to be anxious when your child is upset. As a result, we may minimize children’s feelings or attempt to protect them from disappointment. In the long run, it is more productive to help children identify and learn from their emotions. Just as Montessori materials help children learn concepts and nomenclature, thoughts and feelings can be defined for our children. Adapt the style or phrasing to suit your child’s age.

• Listen to your child as he or she talks, offering feedback such as: “Oh...”; “Mmm…”; “I see.”
• Recognize and name your child’s feelings: “You seem upset (or angry, or happy).…”
• Resist asking and then answering questions that are rhetorical or accusatory: “What were you thinking?” “Who drank the milk?” “How many times have I told you…?”
• Try to understand from your child’s perspective and describe, perhaps with fantasy: “Sounds like you wish you could eat cookies for every meal.”
• Show respect for your child’s struggle: “I see that it’s hard for you to…”
• Describe the dilemma your child is facing: “Even though you know…” “The problem is…”

Engage cooperation

Keeping the family on schedule—and making certain everyone is fed, clothed, bathed, etc.—is no easy task, especially as children often have timetables, needs, and desires different from adults (and often from each other). Montessori believed that children, when given tasks appropriate to their abilities, delight in their accomplishments. Organize your home so children needn’t rely on adults for everything, and give them the time and the direction they need so they can become independent and successful in contributing to the family. You may find you don’t have to resort to demands or reprimands.

• Acknowledge feelings first: “You’re cozy in your bed this morning.”
• Offer a choice: “Do you want to wear the red shirt or the green shirt?”
• Be playful: “If you were a magician, you would already be dressed!”
• Rather than reminding, describe what you see: “This table needs to be set.”
• Say it with information: Use a word or short description, rather than a nagging, repetitive demand: “Shoes, backpack…”
• Write a note: “I’m hungry” on the dog’s collar or “Hang me up!” on the jacket.
• Take action without insulting: “Let’s clean up, put the paints away, and go outside.”

Be patient as you learn these new skills; it takes time and practice—and will pay off. As Faber and Mazlish state: “We want to demonstrate the kind of respectful communication that we hope our children will use with us—now, during their adolescent years, and ultimately as our adult friends” (1982, p. 88).

About the Author

JANE M. JACOBS, MA , is a licensed marriage and family therapist and an educational consultant at Montessori Services. She has taught children ages 2 to 7 in Montessori schools, Head Start, and at a preschool for children with developmental challenges. She is AMS-credentialed (Early Childhood). Contact her at [email protected] .

Faber, A. & Mazlish, E. (1982.) How to talk so kids will listen and listen so kids will talk. New York, NY: Avon Books.

AMS Recommends

Manners, Naturally

The Importance of a Simple Environment

Please stay…here’s why, throwback parenting.