Observation Analysis Essay Example

of mixed ages and are allotted uninterrupted blocks of work time. This model allows for personal exploration and discovery as students are allowed to choose their activity and explore at their own inclination and pace.

Maria Montessori believed that younger students, those up to the age of about 6, had a natural path for psychological development, and through exploration of their environment they would develop and learn naturally with minimal educator influence. For the adolescents, those on their way to becoming adults, the children are naturally creating a new psychological construction, that is based on their outside environment and those that make it up. This “free play” however is not free of manipulation.

Children’s Garden Montessori, and others like it, encourage free exploration, but prepare and manipulate the environment. Lesson plans are established, and the tools and toys made available to fulfill the needs of those lessons. The environment has to be orderly and clean, the space also must be constructed to facilitate flow from activity to activity, and be to the proportion of the students in the school. The available materials, toys, and manipulatives, are limited so all aspects of the environment facilitate development, and all things have an orderly place.

Children are responsible for not only returning toys to the original place that they found them before they continue with another activity, but also are responsible for clearing plates, wiping tables, sweeping crumbs and keeping their learning environment pristine. Montessori pedagogy separates the journey from childhood to adulthood into four planes of development. (Montessori, 1949) The first, from birth to six years, is known as the absorbent mind.

In

this stage or plane, the child is building their independence, developing language, searching for order and increasing their social interactions, defining the behavior that is necessary to thrive. The second plane extends to the twelfth year; this developmental era is defined by physical growth and changes, the introduction of reason and increased imagination, and intense socialization. In this stage students are learning how to be moral, intellectually curious, and independent.

The third plane, from twelve to eighteen years is a psychologically unstable place where the adolescent is trying to form the person they will be as they enter into society. This period is creative, but students also express difficulty in concentration as they try to relate to peer groups and the outside world, to find self esteem and define who they are. The fourth plane is when a student enters the world and hopefully becomes a social aware and monetarily successful member of society.

To Maria Montessori her final and real goal was a student population that graduated her program with a sense that they had a duty to society, to be strong moral leaders and increase peace. Teachers, she said, “must set a good example if there is to be a good humanity”(Montessori, 1949). Although the philosophy of Montessori education intersects greatly with progressivism, the schools were often placed at odds with one another. A contemporary, collaborator, and student of John Dewey, William Kilpatrick, orchestrated a series of lectures and writings that discounted Montessori’s teaching philosophy as egocentric and restrictive.

He said that the learning materials created hindered the imagination of the teacher and the emphasis on the individual would lead

to an entire generation of ill-behaved egomaniacs (Shortridge, 2007). His critiques in combination with American educators dislike of the passive role given to the teacher, and the outbreak of World War I, Maria Montessori was Italian after all, derailed the Montessori movement until its revival in the 1960’s.

Ms. Montessori was not quite a victim, she certainly attacked traditional methods of American education, in The Absorbent Mind, she states “Education as it is today! Can we imagine anything more immobile, stagnant and indifferent? ” (Montessori, 1949). She also refers to other movements in cognitive psychology as “mental hygiene”. In other words, she may have had many critics but her strength and the solidity of her teaching is what made this school survive. We have to believe that many of the critics, especially those of the competing progressive school, were reactions of fear to the strength of her ideas and the threat that they pose to American education.

The overlapping philosophies of progressive and Montessori school were seen as a threat rather than a sign that perhaps the movement forward was paved with the idea of learner centered teaching. Just like the progressive schools, her results were startling, even referred to as “miracles” in the publications of the day (Montessori, 1949). How could a student learn how to read and write without any lecture or proper instruction?

It was the belief she had in environmental cues and coercion, and the power of social interactions that she reliably turned out students that were better behaved than other preschoolers, harder working, showed better assimilation into social groups, and had a profound sense of morality. During my

observation I was affected as both a future educator and as a parent. Although I have researched Montessori programs extensively both as a mother and now for this paper, it is a process that is at times hard to trust.

As a product of traditional public education it was hard for me to imagine a space where the teacher was a facilitator rather than providing instruction, and where the children seemed to be on their own program. My observation was originally scheduled at just two hours, however I found myself there for five. The children were challenged, mostly by each other, and although there were no formal lessons, watching the children create rules, respond to each others guidance, act empathetically toward younger students, and negotiate difficult situations, expressed intense thought and mastery.

The program for the school is very regimented and a schedule adhered to everyday. My daughter often describes her day as a series of chronological events and now that I have witnessed a day in action I can see why she expresses it this way. The classroom day begins with the transition from the home sphere to that of the school environment. Many children had ceremonies to say goodbye to parents, lots of hug and kisses, little sayings like “see you later, alligator” were tossed around. One mommy bent over at the door so her little girl could push her out.

These all served as a healthy transition from one environment to the next. Some of the ceremony, I suspect, may have been more for the parents as I noticed that every one of the twenty-two students in attendance happily

began playing after their parents departure without one incident or moment of longing. I think this is a combination of the very loving environment head teacher Alaina Benner creates at her school, and also the schedule that allows every student to know what to expect and when. From the transition period is a time of independent indoor play.

One room of the school is dedicated to baby dolls, dress up, dollhouses, kitchens and blocks, the center room is filled with tiny tables and chairs set with the art supplies and projects of the day, the third room is outfitted with a big carpeted space, a circle printed on the center, flanked by bookshelves of Montessori designed toys. They are mostly centered around themes of sorting, by size or color, building, counting and puzzle making. There is also a large bookshelf full of stories on the weeks letter, animals and themes, and the children’s art for the week are hung allover the walls.

In this period of the day children are encouraged to wonder freely between the rooms and engage in any activity that suits their whims. It seems as though this would create some form of chaos, but in practice the children are engaged within peer play and their teachers, when they move or need a assistance like beginning an art activity a teacher is there to provide for there needs. They are also closely supervised to witness social interactions and settle disputes. Once independent playtime is over, Alaina, the instructor takes a seat on the large circle and begins to sing.

It’s a song about cleaning up and grabbing a book

that interests them, and sitting down at circle. “I am waiting just to see who is sitting quietly” Alaina refrains. All of the students put away toys, and mats, and paints and join Alaina at the circle. In circle time, they begin with a brain dance, tapping and tickling their bodies. Up until this moment everyone has behaved, less a few skirmishes, pretty much as expected. Now one child, who is new to the school and may have a learning disability, is acting up. He says he wants to go outside, and cannot seem to be still.

Rules for him are enforced the same. Alaina takes the boy into her lap and begins to sing again, it’s a song about a little mouse and they all know it well, including hand motions, but the little boy is not participating. This time kind of writhing, and standing, and sitting down. None of the other children seem to be upset by the interruption, children chime in, “he is just new,” they say, or “he will learn”. The teachers are sweet and patient and Alaina changes the song to a get up and dance song. They all rise together and the little boy seems happier.

When they are seated again and have to be still, the problem comes back. Another student (my daughter) asks if she can play ball with him even though there are no toys allowed at circle time. An assistant teacher says yes, and she rolls the ball back and forth to him and whispers that it is almost time to go outside and play. “Don’t you like outdoor time? ” she asks.

He nods. They sing more and do a show and tell and then it is indeed outdoor time. Outside in the courtyard there is a sand and water table full of manipulatives, an outdoor painting area, and two huge play structures full of slides, ladders and bars.

There is also an outdoor eating table, a children’s garden and a bunny cage with three daring little class pets. The children are called to the table and lunches are given out with little plates and cups. The kids all eat together happily as they finish they take their plates and cups, stack them together, zip up their lunch kits and put them away and then they play again. I watch them as they create games, assign tasks for big projects like building the largest sandcastle; they hide behind rocks and describe imaginary monsters from which they must escape.

The play is physically tough and emotionally engaging. The children are also encouraged to paint at their own desire or trample off to feed the bunnies and water the garden. They usually move in groups with some play happening with mixed sexes but most between two or three individuals of the same sex. Playtime seems to go on without many hurdles, the little new boy, let us call him Dave, has settled in his outdoor environment, although he does play completely alone. This does not seem to be a reflection of the other children rejecting him, but rather a personal preference.

He sits and does the same task over and over, sliding rocks down a slide and watching the repetition seems to be comforting to him.

One child, a little girl, let us call her Rose, gets three timeouts for being aggressive to other children. She threw rocks, hit, pulled hair, each time she was given a time out, but it seems not to affect her or her actions in the least. After lunch the teachers converse about the two students that seemed to have been having trouble today. For the little boy the interest is how to approach the parents about his possible disability.

For the little girl it is how to get her to stop assaulting her classmates, as this is an ongoing problem for her at the school. In analysis of this observation it has to be said that most of the observations I made were extremely positive. I love the environment of the school, and the overall feeling of love and family that Alaina provides. It was amazing to me that not one time did even the littlest of kids ask for their mommy or even where she was, they seem extremely secure and content.

However, I believe their was some room to enhance learning and also address some of the tough issues in behavior I saw between the little boy, Dave, and the little girl Rose. First, I do trust the process of Montessori learning and I believe that it is through play and interaction with their environment that young students up until the age of six will learn most of their skills. However, for those students who will not continue their education in Montessori, as it can be cost prohibitive, I do believe that any school should strive to prepare them for their

next educational step. It may be helpful then, that even within this Montessori odel, students moving on to a public kindergarten get some instruction in writing the alphabet and numbers, basic addition and subtraction and perhaps more teacher engagement even it is just an introduction to some Socratic conversation.

Children can learn thorough play, but my personal teaching philosophy would place a little more instruction in to the hands of the teachers to gently guide, facilitate, and challenge the natural play of the children. When it comes to Dave, who perhaps has some developmental disabilities, I do think that the teacher should have addressed the parents.

It is a difficult situation, especially if you think there is a chance they do not know that their child is not preforming at age level. Put into the position of owner of the school, and given that the Dave was new to the environment, I would have probably approached the parents right away and said something about how Dave seems to have problems focusing, is not engaging other students in play, and is unable to sit still for any length of time. I may ask if they are issues that they see at home, and if they do, inquire as to their coping mechanisms.

As a teacher and not a doctor you never want to diagnose a child, but perhaps engaging the parents and revealing what you have observed will allow them the space to take some steps in that direction or at least make them aware how you are trying to address these differences in the school setting. As it comes to discipline I

think the school may have failed Rose. Although she was reprimanded with each misbehavior, given a time out, and asked to apologize, these normal steps seemed to have no effect on her or her future behavior. I would say that this is an immediate sign that perhaps the methods have to change.

I noticed that although she was separated and given time away from the group there was little or no discussion over what she did wrong, or what the consequences of her behavior were. There was also no change in the tone of voice of the educators when they were enforcing their punishment. I know that these days educators can sometimes be afraid of parental consequences to reprimanding a child, but I think more dangerous is the child’s hurtful behavior toward the other students, and the ongoing misbehavior of Rose herself. It is clear she is not learning the lesson and need more guidance.

I suppose then my suggestions would be for a nominal amount of teacher engagement in the program to encourage learning further, and also to broach and approach difficult subjects like underperforming or misbehaving students. Just as we are asking our students in these progressive models to be fluid, curious and react to the environment, so should we as teachers learn that our best doctrine is to be a great educator and however we can imagine to expand our children’s minds or correct and address behavioral issues we should explore it.

To me it is far more important to be the most effective, honest educator I can be than to adhere to any formal doctrine. Language skills, although

they varied greatly by age and ability, seemed to not effect student interaction very much. The students seemed to understand that the younger were differently abled than the older students, and concessions were made for lack of communication. Students were very sympathetic towards each other’s needs, and lots of play took place between age groups.

The one exception to this rule was the physicality of some students. One student, Shannon, was incredibly strong and physical in her play. I learned later that she grew up with a family of brothers, which may explain the differences between her play and that of the other girls. Although she was a sweet girl and well meaning she often would play a little too rough or pick up the other children and move them to assert her will.