You don’t have to scroll far through Instagram or Pinterest to find imagery and articles related to Montessori. As of this writing, there are nearly 3 million posts on Instagram hashtagged #montessori and another 760,000 dubbed #montessoriathome, with a bumper crop of Montessori-influenced influencers. Suddenly, the program’s emphasis on helping children discover their individual strengths and become self-sufficient, independent, curious learners both in the home and in the community is in vogue—especially aesthetically.
But if a parent’s primary exposure to the term “Montessori” is associated with exclusive, expensive toys and home furnishings, I worry that their association with the concept might be of privilege and money, instead of the egalitarian educational philosophy it actually is.
I developed my own interest in Montessori before becoming a parent to my two young sons when I worked in education and social work, and for my own part, I believe the Montessori philosophy is applicable to many families. But to see Montessori “trending” is exposing an undercurrent of exclusivity that I’ve found curious, because Montessori’s origins are actually quite different from the modern-day reality. Of course, this just marks the latest in the commercialization of Montessori, which has long been used as a term to help market toys. That’s not to say this fascination and interest isn’t recommended, or even that those pursuing “Montessori lite” shouldn’t be encouraged. But if a parent’s primary exposure to the term “Montessori” is associated with exclusive, expensive toys and home furnishings, I worry that their association with the concept might be of privilege and money, instead of the egalitarian educational philosophy it actually is. What’s more, it raises the issue that wealthier families with higher education are more likely to snag the coveted few public spots at Montessori public schools without the necessary outreach and understanding that could help all families in the community evaluate their educational options.
So what exactly happened along the way, and what could be some possible solutions to making Montessori methods more democratic and available to parents and educators?
In her now-classic The Montessori Method, educator (as well as scientist and doctor) Maria Montessori describes the childcare center she was asked to open in 1907 in San Lorenzo, Italy, which, in her words, “is the quarter of the poor. . . . It is the quarter where lives the underpaid, often unemployed workingman.” This is where she applied her groundbreaking methodologies of child pedagogy. At the time, many were skeptical that these children born into poverty and a relative lack of privilege could become competent learners. However, her theories proved highly successful in closing the achievement gap, and many of the children went on to do well both personally and professionally. Other schools around Europe sprang up shortly thereafter adopting Montessori’s model.
After my oldest was born and started daycare, I spent 2018 working at a Montessori preschool in Germany, watching children as young as 2.5 years old grate cheese, clean windows and start to work with letters. I tried to incorporate some of what I was learning into our routines at home. What I also noticed, though, is that virtually every school or daycare labeled “Montessori”—both in Germany and back in my native United States was, well, expensive. Most of the schools were private, and many of them weren’t very socioeconomically diverse. A number of schools had very few qualified Montessori educators on staff, if any, but still labeled themselves as such, possibly to attract high-income parents. (There is no actual trademark on the name Montessori, so some schools will throw a few “Montessori toys” in with the mix and make the claim.)
According to the website of the American Montessori Society, the first Montessori school in the United States opened in 1911, in Scarborough, New York. It was here that the concept of Montessori education started to shift away from a pedagogy meant to provide opportunities for success for underprivileged children; this school was held in the private home of a well-to-do banker. Frank Vanderlip, the school’s founder, initially ran the school for his own children and family friends (the school later expanded to a private K-12 program and operated until the late 1970s).
By this point, Maria Montessori had achieved a degree of fame in pedagogical circles around the world. Then, as now, wealthy and educated families wanted the best possible education for their children, and a well-regarded educator’s methodologies lent respectability to the concept of sending their children to a new type of school. Vanderlip’s school was a success, and soon other Montessori schools in the United States began to open. However, these were primarily private and tuition based. With the growing success of the program, more Montessori public magnet schools were founded in the following decades. During the period of desegregation in the 1960s and 1970s in the United States, the spots continued to be primarily filled by white, middle-class families.
Then, as now, wealthy and educated families wanted the best possible education for their children, and a well-regarded educator’s methodologies lent respectability to the concept of sending their children to a new type of school.
In the 1990s and 2000s, with the advent of what I’ll loosely call the Internet Age of Parenting, bringing parenting and educational practices and theories into the home became a niche topic of interest in United States, with terms like “attachment parenting,” “Reggio-Emilia” and “gentle parenting” cropping up in parenting forums and articles. Up until this time, Montessori wasn’t much of a buzzword when it came to early childhood, although parents high up on the socioeconomic and well-educated ladder were tuned in.
As author Mira Debs writes in her book Diverse Families, Desirable Schools, a well-researched survey of Montessori methods in public education, “many cities’ school choice marketing campaigns instruct families to choose a school that is a ‘good fit’ without explaining how to do so.”
Meanwhile, public options for Montessori are few and far between. According to one piece by Edutopia, “estimates suggest that between 80 to 90 percent of U.S. Montessori schools are private,” which is fairly strong evidence that the philosophy is primarily utilized in private education. Another hurdle for Montessori to be a more egalitarian opportunity is that funding is frequently privatized—for instance, philanthropists such as billionaire Jeff Bezos back Montessori education by starting Montessori preschools that are tuition-free for low-income families, but choose not to finance preexisting public schools to enhance their programs and staff.
At the same time, with a growing interest in “Montessori-ing” one’s life, there’s no shortage of suggestions for ways to bring Montessori into the home—but none that seem to appreciate that the philosophy itself would probably eschew such an acquisition-focused approach. Chairs that allow small children to reach sinks and countertops independently—often marketed as “Montessori learning towers”—can cost upward of $100 per piece. In one recommendations list of toys to set up your own “Montessori playpen,”none of the featured items is less than $12, though this particular list has much less expensive recommendations than many other such articles.
So what can be done to bring Montessori back to its original vision of helping to close the achievement gap for all children via its innovative, proven methodologies?
I think we have to start with financial support and outreach to underserved communities to let families know about Montessori educational opportunities. Free seminars and playgroups that teach basic Montessori concepts that parents can implement in their homes would be another way to make Montessori more accessible for all—and bring it back to Maria Montessori’s initial, trailblazing goals—because social media isn’t cutting it.
What’s more, I would argue that the optimal way to give more equal access to the philosophy is to expand Montessori’s usage in public schooling in the United States. There are currently over 300 public schools in the country (out of a total of roughly 98,277 public schools in the United States) that have Montessori-trained educators, but there are two primary obstacles to widening the method’s reach.
Free seminars and playgroups that teach basic Montessori concepts that parents can implement in their homes would be another way to make Montessori more accessible for all.
According to educator and school principal Krishna Feeney of Urban Montessori in Oakland, California, one challenge is that “all public schools are suffering from a shortage of qualified teachers. This has been a growing struggle for decades. As a public Montessori school we have the added challenge of trying to find teachers that are State credentialed and Montessori credentialed. This creates a unique challenge for public Montessori schools in states like California that do not recognize Montessori Credentials by making our available applicant pool exponentially smaller in an already dwindling market. One way we are working through this specific struggle is by paying for our staff to enter and complete both state and Montessori credentialing programs. It is a costly solution but in the context of a statewide (or nationwide) teacher crisis it has been an effective tool to support and grow our staff of quality educators.” This credentialing challenge extends beyond California and affects schools nationwide.
Another major hurdle is that many Montessori training centers are not always centrally located in large urban areas that often serve a much more diverse student body (for example, most of the training centers for the San Francisco Bay Area are farther afield in towns like Santa Rosa and San Leandro), so it can be physically hard for an interested candidate to attend trainings. Having more training centers in urban environments as well as low-cost (or better yet, free via federal or state funding) Montessori teacher training would make this a much more viable possibility for both teachers and public schools. That might be the first critical step in bringing Maria Montessori’s original goals back to the forefront of the Montessori method.
Like this piece? Subscribe to our newsletter for real stories about women on their journey to motherhood.