[bcrosby95]

I know it's not your point, but learning to write by tracing at age 3 doesn't sound anything like the actual teachings of Maria Montessori. The whole point is child directed learning, and having kids at 3 trace things sounds pretty anti-ethical towards that.

Most of this stuff is parent directed because they want little Johnny to be brilliant, but afaik goes against pretty much all early childhood development research.

[taeric]

Give charity to the idea. Odds are high they had a ton of tracing stations available, and the kids that gravitated to it, used it. That is, the idea is to enable learning by availability of opportunities and encouragement.

So, no. This doesn't go against any research. Unless you frame it in the most uncharitable way that you can.

[gavinmckenzie]

Yes exactly. The children at that age in a “Casa” classroom cycle through self-chosen activities every day and may not choose the same activities consistently. If a child is observed to be avoiding a particular learning activity over a period of time, it’s the role of the teacher (director/directress) to nudge the child back to that activity and understand why they might be avoiding it.

Plus given there are three years worth of children in the same class, seeing the “senior” children operate at the higher levels of activities helps with incentive for the younger children who want to emulate them.

That said, anyone can open a “Montessori school” and not adhere to any particular Montessori pedagogy. I’d argue the schools with the purest interpretations of Maria Montessori’s teachings are often just as problematic as those who are Montessori in name only. There are two tribes in Montessori: AMS (purists)and AMI (more flexible).

Thankfully the school my daughter attended was AMI and I watched the school adapt their methods to children who needed more structure than classical Montessori advises. Ultimately, it’s not for everyone.