As I have been thrust into the world of Montessori as an educator, I cannot deny it has been transformative for me as a university lecturer. I am well versed in learning theories such as Kolb’s Learning Cycle, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, and Fleming’s VARK model (Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, Kinaesthetic) for various learning preferences, espousing the Montessori method reveals how profoundly different teaching and learning can is when the typical resources (e.g., textbooks, lectures, etc.) are not available.
For higher educators, Fleming’s VARK model guides educators in catering to students’ learning preferences, including visual aids, auditory discussions, written work, and applied learning. Using a multimodal approach affords me, as a lecturer, to cater to my students' unique learning styles, helping them process information better. That said, the Montessori framework uses a completely different set of lenses in learning. Instead of separating learning into distinct differences, Montessori materials, particularly the materials in the sensorial milieu, incorporate various sensory experiences. Montessori materials engage children in a holistic sense, offering the opportunity for the child to be tactile, visual, and sometimes auditory stimuli, which consolidate and deepen their learning. For example, a child may learn about texture through direct touch, exploring dimensions by manipulating geometry shapes, affording them to move beyond such segmented approaches like VARK.
As such, the Montessori philosophical framework emphasises learning through experience and movement, underscoring the notion that children’s development is linked to active engagement. This notion connects to Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZDP), where learning occurs best when children are given tasks slightly above their current cognitive ability while working and receiving guidance from a more knowledgeable source. That said, in the Montessori context, the ‘more knowledgeable source’ is typically the materials the child is actively engaged with, which are designed to guide the child to discover and self-correct through trial and error independently. As such, the distinction is set at this point because the Montessori framework differs from a higher education context, where students typically rely on my feedback so they can move through their ZPD and garner the benefits of bespoke teaching and learning methodologies centred on their VARK preferences.
Heutagogy, or self-determined learning, aligns with the concept of Montessori, as it is the child driving their learning based on their interests, in turn empowering them to create their own intended learning objectives. Creating their learning objectives empowers the child, and the guide is simply there to observe and respect the child’s process of learning without interfering. This is different for me as a higher educator, as it is my job to engage with the VARK model to tailor my teaching style to the learners who sit before me with their learning needs by using lecture notes (Reading/Writing), interactive discussions in seminars (Auditory), visual diagrams (Visual), or lab-based practical learning (Kinaesthetic). In the Montessori framework, the child learning journey is organic and self-directed, using materials that are designed to naturally incorporate corporeal means without overtly segmenting them, thereby fostering intrinsic drive and self-direction that creates the foundation for self-concept from an early age.
While I am navigating this new teaching paradigm, I am learning to unlearn my proclivity to explicitly direct learning. I am humbled by the experience of witnessing how children, through their exploration using sensorial materials, can tandemly develop cognition and perceptual abilities without my interference. I find I am required to develop a different set of skills and mindset as an educator, adjusting to the subtle yet formidable ways Montessori education fosters learning within a child’s own ZPD, affording them to incorporate sensorial learning in a manner that contrasts with the compartmentalised approach of VARK while creating a strong foundation for their self-concept.
To round this brief discussion off, my foray into the Montessori modality of teaching, and speaking specifically to the realm of sensorial education, expanded my perspective on heutagogical methods. As much as VARK in higher education encourages lecturers to adapt to individual preference learning styles, the Montessori framework blends sensorial experiences while developing a child’s inner order and self-concept (i.e., self-esteem and self-efficacy). As such, my transition from traditional higher education to the Montessori milieu is not without its challenges, as it affords me a refreshing departure from the world of traditional academics while reminding me that learning is not sequestered to books, lectures, or even preferred sensory modes, instead, embodying dynamic processes that are holistic.
댓글