Freinet and Montessori in practice. A comparative analysis of the meanings attributed to the process of learning by early education teachers – research report

  • Jarosław Jendza Uniwersytet Gdański
  • Joanna Grzanka Niezależny badacz
Słowa kluczowe: Montessori, Freinet, edukacja nauczycieli, konstruktywizm

Abstrakt

The article presented is a qualitative analysis of the early education Freinet and Montessori teachers in relation to their educational practices in the scope of educational constructivism. Understanding constructivism as a metaphor describing process of learning, the authors outline similarities and differences in the conceptions attributed to the processes of learning between the two researched groups of teachers. The results of the analysis show the opposite “direction” of the thematizations. Freinet teachers concentrate on the techniques and then – in their narratives – outline the values related to education whereas Montessori teachers’ narratives are oriented at values and only illustrated with some technological examples. The outcomes of the analysis can be formulated in a form of provisional synthesis: The realization of constructivism in education is not connected so much with so called “active learning techniques” but rather with values, individual and shared axio-educational orientations and the quality of relations between various subjects involved in education. Such a hypothesis leads to the questioning of the tendency according to which teachers’ education should be practical. On the contrary, we claim that such a conception on teachers’ education might be an obstacle to the wide implementation of constructivism in educational practices.

Bibliografia

Acker V. (2000), Celestin Freinet (1896–1966): A Most Unappreciated Educator in the Anglophone World. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society (San Antonio, TX, March 8–12, 2000), https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED451095.pdf, 1.01.2021.

Adams P. (2006), Exploring social constructivism: theories and practicalities. “Education 3-13”, 34(3).

Ahmad S., Sultana N., Jamil S. (2020), Behaviorism vs Constructivism: A Paradigm Shift from Traditional to Alternative Assessment Techniques. “Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research”, 7(2).

Aleksander Z. (2014), The concept of teachers’ learning in the field of early education. From the Freinet pedagogy to the training of academic teachers. “Problemy Wczesnej Edukacji”, 2(10).

Atkinson R. (1998), The Life Story Interview. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

Biesta G. (2005), Against learning. Reclaiming a language for education in an age of learning. “Nordisk Pedagogik”, 25.

Biesta G. (2006), Beyond Learning. Democratic Education for a Human Future. Boulder, CO, Paradigm.

Biesta G. (2010), Why ‘what works’ still won’t work. From evidence-based education to value-based education. “Studies in Philosophy and Education”, 29(5).

Biesta G. (2012), Giving teaching back to education: responding to the disappearance of the teacher. “Phenomenology and Practice”, 6(2).

Boghossian P. (2006), Behaviorism, Constructivism, and Socratic Pedagogy. “Educational Philosophy and Theory”, 38(6). DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2006.00226.x, 12.12.2020.

Bower G.H., Hilgard E.R. (1981), Theories of learning. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.

Bruner J.S. (1960), The process of education. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Bruner J.S. (1971), The process of education revisited. “Phi Delta Kappan”, 53(1).

Bruner J. (1996), Culture of Education. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Clandinin D.J. (2013), Engaging in narrative inquiry. Walnut Creek, CA, Left Coast Press.

Connelly F.M., Clandinin D.J. (1990), Stories of experience and narrative inquiry, “Educational Researcher”, 19(5).

Creswell J.W. (2012), Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

Duffy M., Duffy N. (2012), Love of Learning. Supporting Intrinsic Motivation in Montessori Students. Santa Rosa, CA, Parent Child Press – A Division of Montessori Services.

Duffy M., Duffy N. (2014), Children of the Universe. Cosmic Education in The Montessori Elementary Classroom. Santa Rosa, CA, Parent Child Press – A Division of Montessori Services.

Ertmer P.A., Newby T.J. (1993), Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features from an Instructional Design Perspective. “Performance Improvement Quarterly”, 6(4). DOI: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x, 9.11.2020.

Fosnot C.T., Perry R.S. (2005), Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In: C.T. Fosnot (ed.), Theory, perspectives and practice. New York, Teacher College Press.

Frankenhuis W.E., Fraley R.C. (2017), What Do Evolutionary Models Teach Us About Sensitive Periods in Psychological Development? “European Psychologist”, 22(3).

Freinet C. (1975), La educación moral y civica. Barcelona, Laia.

Freinet C. (1993), Education through Work: A Model for Child-centered Learning, transl. J. Sivell. Lewinson, Edwin Mellen Press.

Gash H. (2014), Constructing Constructivism. “Constructivist Foundations”, 9(3). http://constructivist.info/9/3/302.gash, 8.07.2019.

Grazzini C. (1996), The four planes of development. “The NAMTA Journal”, 21(2).

Hobbiss M. (2018), Constructivism is a theory of learning not a theory of pedagogy. Neuroscienceexplains why this is important, “NJP – Science of Learning”. https://npjscilearncommunity.nature.com/posts/41828-constructivism-is-a-theory-of-learning-not-a-theory-of-pedagogy-neuroscience-explains-why-this-is-important, 16.12.2020.

Issacs B. (2018), Understanding the Montessori Approach. Early Years Education in Practice. London–New York, Routledge.

Klus-Stańska D. (2003), Konstruowanie wiedzy w szkole. Olsztyn, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego.

Kvale S. (2009), Interviews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. Los Angeles– London–New Dehli–Singapore, Sage.

Lillard A.S. (2007), Montessori. The Science behind the Genius. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Lindström L. (2018), Pedagogy of Work, transl. A.S. Pihlgren, http://www.ridef.one/wp-content/ uploads/2018/07/The-Pedagogy-of-Work-article-of-Lars-Lindström.pdf, 4.05.2020.

Mareschal D., Johnson M.H., Sirois S., Spratling M.W., Thomas M.S.C., Westerman G. (2007), Neuroconstructivism Volume One. How the Brain Constructs Cognition. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press.

Marton F. (1981), Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us. “Instructional Science”, 10.

Marton F. (1986), Phenomenography – A Research Approach to Investigating Different Understandings of Reality Source. “Journal of Thought”, 30(21).

Masschelein J., Simons M. (2013), In Defence of School: A Public Issue. Leuven, Education, Culture & Society Publishing.

Masschelein J., Simons M. (2018), The University as Pedagogical Form: Public Study, Responsibility, Mondialisation. In: S. Ramaekers, N. Hodgson (eds.), Past, Present, and Future Possibilities for Philosophy and History of Education. Springer, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94253-7_4, 3.08.2019.

Moll I. (2004), Towards a constructivist Montessori education. “Perspectives in Education”, 22(2).

Montessori M. (1964), The Montessori Method. New York, Schocken.

Montessori M. (1972), The Secret of Childhood. New York, Ballantine Books.

Montessori M. (1973), From Childhood to Adolescence. New York, Schocken.

Montessori M. (1994), Creative Development in the Child. Vol. 1. Madras, India, Kalakshetra Publications.

Montessori M. (2007), The Absorbent Mind. Vol. 1. Amsterdam, Montessori-Pierson Publishing Company.

Montessori R. (2005), Educateurs sans Frontières. Educators without Borders. Amsterdam, Nienhuis Montessori.

Oldfather P., West J., White J., Wilmarth L. (1998), Learning through children’s eyes: Social constructivism and the desire to learn. Washington, DC, APA.

Oppl S. (2017), Adopting Principles of Freinet Pedagogy for Research Skill Development in Higher Education. “Zeitschrift für Sozialen Fortschritt”, 6(4).

Osborne J. (2014), Constructivism: Critiques. In: R. Gunstone (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Science Education. Dordrecht, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6165-0_344-2, 8.10.2020.

Patton M.Q. (2002), Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications.

Perzigian A., Braun M. (2020), A comparison of school climate ratings in urban alternative and traditional high schools. “Journal of Educational Research and Practice”, 10. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2020.10.1.22, 17.11.2020.

Polanyi M. (2009), The Tacit Dimension. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

Schaffer H.R. (2003), Introducing Child Psychology. Hoboken, NJ, Wiley-Blackwell.

Schwab J.R., Johnson Z.G., Ansley B.M., Houchins D.E., Varjas K. (2016), A literature review of alternative school academic interventions for students with and without disabilities, “Preventing School Failure”, 60. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2015.1067874, 11.11.2020.

Tangney B., Byrne J.R., Girvan C. (eds.) (2020), Constructionism 2020. Proceedings of the 2020 Constructionism Conference. Dublin, Trinity College, 26–29 May.

Thorndike E.L. (1905), The Elements of Psychology. New York, A.G. Seiler.

Vygotsky L.S. (1978), Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky L.S. (1986), Thought and language, transl. and ed. A. Kozulin. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

Warren C., Karner T. (2005), The Interview. Discovering Qualitative Methods: Field Research, Interviews and Analysis. Los Angeles, CA, Roxbury.

Wheatley G.H. (1991), Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. “Science Education”, 75(1).

Zolkoski S.M., Bullock L.M., Gable R.A. (2016), Factors associated with student resilience: Perspectives of graduates of alternative education programs. “Preventing School Failure”, 60. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2015.1101677, 15.11.2020.

Opublikowane
2020-12-31
Jak cytować
Jendza, J., & Grzanka, J. (2020). Freinet and Montessori in practice. A comparative analysis of the meanings attributed to the process of learning by early education teachers – research report. Problemy Wczesnej Edukacji, 51(4), 167-179. https://doi.org/10.26881/pwe.2020.51.13