Lessons and Activities

At the beginning it is necessary to say that during the whole time of my observations all guides talked to children strictly in English. The instructions the guides used were very simple and clear, such as “Take off your shoes”, “Close the door”, “Take out your notebooks” etc., thus it was not necessary to use Czech. When a guide wanted to explain or tell me something, she always used English as well. It was obvious that

children were used to it and all their questions to a guide were also in English.

The observations also showed that the activities and tasks are almost always focused on practical utilization such as on so called “small talk”. For example at the beginning of a lesson children were throwing and catching a ball while asking about favourite colour, name of their pet, hobbies etc. These types of exercises, when all the pupils were involved, they could move or manipulate with material, were one of the prime foci of the observations because they are common for Montessori classes. What was very surprising for me was the fact that even though their English was not at a high level they tried to talk in English even when they were working in pairs or groups.

Sometimes the guide asked how the children felt that day. Talking about children´s feelings is very common for Montessori pedagogy. In both grades the guide taught children basic grammar. Since the children were very young, all activities had a form of a game or were very interactive. I never saw an activity where children would just sit and fill in gaps in a handout or an exercise book. However, the guides told me, that occasionally they have also some regular lessons, when they use just course books.

Most of the time children were sitting on the carpet or on the floor, so that the freedom

for movement was supported. They used desks only when they needed to write in notebooks. The children commonly worked together in a circle, but there were

situations, when some of them (mostly the disabled ones) did not want to cooperate and they rather wanted to work alone. I think that this would be a problem at regular schools, because children have to do exactly what they are told. In the Montessori class, this was not a problem. A guide came to a child and asked him/her what and where she/he wanted to do and basically offered this child an alternative. It is necessary to say, that it did not interrupt a lesson and all other children worked in a common pace. This situation shows a good example for independence and a right of choice in the Montessori system. What secures the calm environment is absolute immersion of children into activities.

While children at traditional schools usually use external motivation in order to ingratiate teachers with their results, in Montessori class they used intrinsic motivation to achieve a goal. For example the children displayed real enthusiasm and interest in an activity when they played with rhymes. The guide placed cards with rhymed words all over the classroom and children’s task was to find rhyming couples e.g.

down-brown; pink-king, blue-glue etc.

Children moved freely around the classroom and pronounced the sounds of the words, which was a great fun for the children, but on the other hand an excellent opportunity to practice pronunciation.

6. Conclusion

The aim of bachelor thesis was to find out whether and to what extent the principles of the Montessori pedagogy are used during English lessons in practice.

For this purpose, a structured observation was conducted at the Elementary school in Pardubice. The observation helped to gain an insight into English language learning

and teaching in context and to evaluate the impact of Montessori pedagogy on language learning. The data was then categorised with the aim to find key concepts

that would be in accordance with the theoretical findings presented in Chapter four – Principles of Montessori pedagogy. Finally, the analysis provided basic sources for conclusions that allowed me to answer the research questions.

The most distinctive characteristics of English lessons within Montessori school was a friendly atmosphere where individual approach to learners and supportive environment are observed. “The atmosphere in English language classes offers children safety and security. This helps all children to reach their highest potential at their own unique pace. A classroom with children of various abilities is a community in which everyone learns from one another. Everyone contributes, according to the Montessori philosophy” (Goins 2000, 1). An atmosphere of trust was predominant throughout the observation. A particular seating arrangement was also noticeable.

The fact that children were sitting almost constantly near their guide on the carpeted area provided them a unique sense of belonging and security. For English language learning this arrangement aided an equal communication between a guide and pupils.

Dialogues of this “face to face” manner were much more open and natural for children.

Moreover; a guide had an immediate response from the children and could help, encourage them or assess their performance. Moreover, if needed, each child was treated individually.

This applied especially to children with special needs for whom an assistant was also present. In addition to this arrangement, where guides were sitting close to their pupils, on the same level as children, it made their roles as observers easier, because they could also see interactions between children. The friendly and supportive environment obviously facilitated English language learning.

As far as the application of specific Montessori principles are concerned, the most distinctive principle of the English language class was the role of a guide.

In classes which I observed, a teacher/guide was not the main organiser of a lesson;

rather they were managers, who accompanied children through the learning process and led them towards accomplishing tasks. “Montessori teachers demonstrate the use of the materials and observe when the children are ready for new challenges” (What are montessori materials, anyway 2014⁷). Nevertheless; the guides helped children to do tasks by themselves. The motto “Help me to do myself” was a “foundation stone”

for the Montessori pedagogy which helped children to reach their own potential.

In the English classes they were led to search their own solutions, they derived grammatical rules through practical exercises and deduced meanings of words from a context. This made them self-reliant and independent. From the didactical point of view the children were active fellow participants in teaching a learning process.

Guides functioned fundamentally as a mutual link between pupils, material and activities. The guides also did not evaluate a child’s performance in a traditional way with grades and points, but they helped them to carry out their own self-assessment.

Evaluation during the lessons that I observed was only verbal, for example phrases such as “Well done” or “Excellent” were used. During those lessons children never got a grade but they were praised or directed towards ways of improvement.

Another subsequent and decisive principle of English lessons was an option to choose.

Children had a right to choose an activity, task or a classmate to work with.

For example, none of the children were ever forced to do a particular activity with their classmates. If they were not in the mood for collective activity, they could go aside and work with an assistant or alone on a different task. However, this right has its limits and it does not mean that children can do anything at will, but they can choose an activity, that is available in the lesson and that fits them best at the moment.

Children learn languages in diverse ways; an option to choose supports diversity in language learning in a way that pupils can adjust their own individual language learning according to their own needs.

Finally, the last distinctive principle, which was observed, was prepared material.

Most of the material that was used in English lessons was designed so that the children could manipulate and touch it.. It is because “children learn best through working with

their hands. The work of the hand is a direct route to the brain, providing the stimulation that young brains need to develop complex neural pathways” (What

are montessori materials, anyway 2014). Most of the tasks based on these materials were easy to understand. Similarly, materials prepared for English lessons were effective since they provided visual support, offered a solution or suggested steps for

managing exercises or tasks. Moreover; some activities were adapted in order to develop skills from other subjects. For example children from the second year

worked consistently with the alphabet and letters. I was able to observe guides talking to children strictly in English and they also tried to encourage children to do the same.

Because of this, it was obvious that they were used to it and when they had a chance, they used it and speak in English as well.

All the above mentioned factors contributed significantly to the language learning process.

An environment typical of Montessori school eased communication between a guide and the children. Close relationship with the guides, supported by the arrangement of the classroom, contributed to the fact that communication was much more relaxed and the children were not so afraid to talk to the teachers or to each other. Since the guides encouraged children to find their own way of learning, children had a spirit of initiative and tried to find out rules and patterns on their own. Although these young learners had a very low level of English, they learned how to use the language in practice and they were not afraid to experiment. Since language learning is a very demanding subject for some children, a right to choose enabled them to control their actions and tempo according to their needs. As a result, I observed that some children were not

“falling behind”, but they just followed their own path towards achievement according to their abilities and skills corresponding with a particular sensitive period and it was also the intrinsic motivation that functioned as a source of energy and enthusiasm for English language learning. Due to the right to choose, children were not pushed into

learning from outside, but they learned English with interest and pleasure.

For this purpose the guides tried to prepare material that would be interesting for them and would help them become autonomous learners at the same time. In this instance they also had a chance to develop independent learning skills, which will be useful in their future education.

Although the bachelor thesis provided a useful insight into specifics of English

language learning at a Montessori school, the research has its limits caused by the restricted extent of the investigation. However, the above discussion provides a lot

of implications for the design of further research.

For example, long-term pupils´ results in the English language might be investigated;

Montessori school learners’ competences can be compared with learners from common schools, or pupils´ perceptions of classroom routines might be examined.

Research methods could be also complemented by an interview with the teachers or a questionnaire for pupils in order to achieve more detailed picture of Montessori

pedagogy.

7. List of References

Hainstock, Elizabeth G. 1999. Metoda Montessori a jak ji učit doma: Školní léta.

Praha: Pragma.

Harald Ludwig a kol. 2000. Vychováváme a vzděláváme s Marií Montessoriovou:

Praxe Reformě Pedagogické Koncepce. Pardubice: Univerzita Pardubice.

Montessori, Maria and Gerald Lee Gutek. 2004. The Montessori Method: The Origins of an Educational Innovation, Including an Abridged and Annotated Edition of Maria Montessori's The Montessori Method. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Rýdl, Karel. 1994. Alternativní pedagogické hnutí v současné společnosti. Brno: M.

Zeman.

Rýdl, Karel. 1999. Principy a pojmy pedagogiky Marie Montessori: Učební pomůcka pro veřejnost. Praha: Public History.

Rýdl, Karel, 2006. Metoda Montessori pro naše dítě: inspirace pro rodiče a další zájemce. Pardubice: FF Univerzity Pardubice.

Zelinková, Olga. 1997. Pomoz mi, abych to dokázal: Pedagogika Marie Montessoriové a její metody dnes. Praha: Portál.

Alternativní školy v Čr. 2016. WordPress, January 20. Accessed May 10, 2016.

http://www.alternativniskoly.cz/.

Bodrova, Elena. 2003. Vygotsky and Montessori: One Dream, Two Visions.

Montessori Life. Last modified June 9,

2010. http://search.proquest.com/docview/219952991?accountid=17116

Goins, Eva Jo. 2000. Nambe Montessori School Lets Kids Learn at their Own Pace. The Santa Fe New Mexican. Last modified June 19,

2010. http://search.proquest.com/docview/331508606?accountid=17116.

Goodson, Ivor. 2005. Learning, Curriculum and Life Politics: The Selected Works of Ivor F. Goodson. Online. World Library of Educationalists Series. New York:

Routledge. Accessed May 10, 2016.

Ivanenko, Nadiya. 2014. Education in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. New York:

Bloomsbury Academic. Accessed May 16, 2016.

https://books.google.cz/books?id=EPwqAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&hl=cs&pg=PP1#v=

onepage&q&f=false.

Lange, C. M., & Sletten, S. J. 2002. Alternative Education: A Brief History and Research Synthesis. Accessed May 15, 2016.

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED546775.pdf

Montessori Jr, Mario M. 1976. Education for Human Development: Understanding Montessori. Accessed May 7, 2016. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED136940.pdf.

Montessori, Maria. 2014. Spontaneous Activity in Education. Montessori Helper.

Accessed May 5, 2016.

https://books.google.cz/books?id=nq5FBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA1&hl=cs&pg=PA1#v=

onepage&q&f=false.

Namc Montessori Teacher Training Blog. Accessed May 6, 2016.

http://montessoritraining.blogspot.cz/2013/09/montessori-teaching-learning-foreign-language.html.

http://montessoritraining.blogspot.cz/2007/07/montessori-philosophy-second-plane-of.html.

Normalizace a odchylky. 2014. Žijeme Montessori. Accessed May 12, 2016.

http://www.zijememontessori.cz/o-montessori/normalizace-a-odchylky/.

Stoll Lillard, Angeline. 2008. Montessori: The Science behind the Genius. Oxford:

University Press. Accessed May 13, 2016.

https://books.google.cz/books?id=GuQS7Z9iVaAC&hl=cs&source=gbs_slider_cls_

metadata_7_mylibrary.

What are montessori materials, anyway? 2014. The Brampton. Accessed May 12, 2016. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1617713621?accountid=17116.

8. Appendix

List of Appendices

Appendix A – Learning English puzzle Appendix B – Prepared Environment Appendix C – Language work Appendix D – Self-control

Appendix A

1 Source: http://www.zivothrou.cz/obchudek/anglictina-hry-a-pomucky/puzzle-anglictina/

Appendix B

Appendix C

3Source: http://www.howwemontessori.com/how-we-montessori/pre-writing/

Appendix D

4Source: https://www.maitrilearning.com/collections/leaf/products/leaf-shapes-3-part-reading