Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 1517–1533 | Cite as

Opportunities for Inquiry Science in Montessori Classrooms: Learning from a Culture of Interest, Communication, and Explanation

  • Carol R. RinkeEmail author
  • Steven J. Gimbel
  • Sophie Haskell
Article

Abstract

Although classroom inquiry is the primary pedagogy of science education, it has often been difficult to implement within conventional classroom cultures. This study turned to the alternatively structured Montessori learning environment to better understand the ways in which it fosters the essential elements of classroom inquiry, as defined by prominent policy documents. Specifically, we examined the opportunities present in Montessori classrooms for students to develop an interest in the natural world, generate explanations in science, and communicate about science. Using ethnographic research methods in four Montessori classrooms at the primary and elementary levels, this research captured a range of scientific learning opportunities. The study found that the Montessori learning environment provided opportunities for students to develop enduring interests in scientific topics and communicate about science in various ways. The data also indicated that explanation was largely teacher-driven in the Montessori classroom culture. This study offers lessons for both conventional and Montessori classrooms and suggests further research that bridges educational contexts.

Keywords

Inquiry Science instruction Montessori schools Classroom environment Ethnography 

References

  1. Agar, M. H. (1996). The professional stranger: an informal introduction to ethnography (2nd ed.). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, R. D. (2007). Inquiry as an organizing theme for science curricula. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 807–830). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Bagby, J., & Sulak, T. (2010). Connecting educational theory and Montessori practice. Montessori Life, 22(1), 8–9.Google Scholar
  5. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  6. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, D.C.: National Academy.Google Scholar
  7. Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: a review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cossentino, J. (2005). Ritualizing expertise: a non-Montessorian view of the Montessori method. American Journal of Education, 111(211–244).Google Scholar
  9. Cossentino, J. (2006). Big work: goodness, vocation, and engagement in the Montessori method. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(1), 63–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: new roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: the discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1–32). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elkind, D. (2003). Montessori and constructivism. Montessori Life, 15(1), 26–29.Google Scholar
  14. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (Chicago guides to writing, editing, and publishing). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gale, J. (2012). Exploring the allocation of time for science in urban elementary schools implementing comprehensive school reform. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia Google Scholar
  17. Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers. White Plains: Longman.Google Scholar
  18. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Gutek, G. L. (2004). The Montessori method: the origins of an educational innovation. Lanham: Roman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  20. Inan, H. Z., Trundle, K. C., & Kantor, R. (2010). Understanding natural sciences education in a Reggio Emilia-inspired preschool. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(10), 1186–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: a conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. LeCompte, M. D., & Goetz, J. P. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. Orlando: Academic.Google Scholar
  25. Lillard, P. P. (1980). Montessori in the classroom: a teacher’s account of how children really learn. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  26. Lillard, P. P. (1996). Montessori today: a comprehensive approach to education from birth to adulthood. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  27. Lillard, A. (2005). Montessori: the science behind the genius. Cary: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Loeffler, M. H. (2002). The essence of Montessori in the elementary years. Montessori Life, 14(2), 39–40.Google Scholar
  29. Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (1995). The learning environment as a site of science education reform. Theory into Practice, 34(1), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  31. Miles, & Huberman. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Minstrell, J., & Van Zee, E. H. (2000). Inquiry into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
  33. Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori method (A. E. George, Trans.). New York: Frederick A. Stokes.Google Scholar
  34. National Research Council. (1995). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy.Google Scholar
  35. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: a guide for teaching and learning. Washington, D.C.: National Academy.Google Scholar
  36. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K–8. Washington, D.C.: National Academies.Google Scholar
  37. Orem, R. C. (1971). Montessori today. New York: Capricorn Books.Google Scholar
  38. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1972). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  39. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Van Deur, P. (2010). Assessing elementary school support for inquiry. Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 13(2), 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: on writing ethnography. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Whitescarver, K., & Cossentino, J. (2008). Montessori and the mainstream: a century of reform on the margins. Teachers College Record, 110(12), 2571–2600.Google Scholar
  46. Zuckerman, G. A., Chudinova, E. V., & Khavkin, E. E. (1998). Inquiry as a pivotal element of knowledge acquisition within the Vygotskian paradigm: building a science curriculum for the elementary school. Cognition and Instruction, 16(2), 201–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol R. Rinke
    • 1
    Email author
  • Steven J. Gimbel
    • 1
  • Sophie Haskell
    • 1
  1. 1.Education DepartmentGettysburg CollegeGettysburgUSA

Personalised recommendations