Models of Engaging Private Schools and the Case of Montessori Schools

  • David J. Shernoff
Part of the Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development book series (ARAD)


In this chapter, three private school models with empirical support for engaging youth are presented and discussed: Montessori schools; Eagle Rock School in Estes Park, Colorado; and the planned Arete School in San Rafael, California. Montessori philosophy is built around reverence for the child. In contrast to public schools, Maria Montessori believed that mental development was dependent on movement, and that overall development was dependent on autonomous actions and the cultivation of interests in the world. Rathunde and Csikszentmihalyi’s studies using the experience sampling method found that students in Montessori high schools were significantly more engaged, reporting more positive experiences at school and perceiving their classmates to be friends to a greater extent, than a matched sample of students in traditional public high schools. The Eagle Rock School provides another compelling private school example of engaging students, who, before entering the Eagle Rock, had experienced only failure in school. The culture of the school revolves around the foundational values of a learning environment rather than a testing environment, nurturing relationships, principles rather than rules, and democratic life. Individual testimonies suggest that even the hardest to engage at the time of admission became deeply immersed and committed at Eagle Rock. The planned Arete School in San Rafael, CA, seeks to infuse the entire schooling experience with positive aspects of sports culture. The Arete Schools is based on a program piloted in public schools that was found to meet exceeded standards for motivation and learning established by learner-centered models of excellence.


Intrinsic Motivation Private School Mastery Goal Charter School Traditional School 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. American Sports Institute. (2011). Programs and services: The Arete school. Accessed 21 Oct 2011.
  2. Athavanker, U. A. (1999). Gestures, mental images and spatial reasoning. In J. S. Gero, & B. Tversky (Eds.), Visual and spatial reasoning and design (pp. 103–127). Sydney: Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition: International Conference on Visual and Spatial Design.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campos, J. J., Anderson, D. I., Barbu-Roth, M. A., Hubbard, E. M., Hertenstein, M. J., & Witheringston, D. (2000). Travel broadens the mind. Infancy, 1(2), 149–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning points: Preparing American youth for the 21st century. New York: Carnegie Corp.Google Scholar
  6. Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  8. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  9. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Schneider, B. (2000). Becoming adult: How teenagers prepare for the world of work. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  10. Damasio, A. (1994). Decartes’ error. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  11. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627–668.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dewey, J. (1910/1997). How we think. Mineola: Dover.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Easton, L. B. (2008). Engaging the disengaged: How schools can help struggling students succeed. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  14. Easton, L. B., Condon, D., & Soguero, M. (2014). Engaging the disengaged: Engaging at-risk students at Eagle Rock School and Professional Development Center. In D. J. Shernoff, & J. Bempechat (Eds.), Engaging youth in schools: Evidence-based models to guide future innovations. New York: NSSE Yearbook by Teachers College Record.Google Scholar
  15. Engelkamp, J., Zimmer, H. D., Mohr, G., & Sellen, O. (1994). Memory of self-performed tasks: Self-performing during recognition. Memory and Cognition, 22(1), 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Flavell, J. H. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. New York: D. Von Nostrand.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallagher, S. (2005). How the body shapes the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gamoran, A., & Nystrand, M. (1992). Taking students seriously. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 40–61). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gang, P. (2001). Some characteristics of a Montessori Erdkinder compromise. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 233–238.Google Scholar
  20. Griffin, R. (1997). The PASS program: Teaching engagement skills. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 33(4), 132–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Predicting success in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 562–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson, M. (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jordan, H. J. (2001). Montessori high school. NAMTA Journal, 26, 259–269.Google Scholar
  24. Kahn, D. (2001a). Hershey Montessori Farm School, 2001: Unmasking individual truth. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 393–407.Google Scholar
  25. Kahn, D. (2001b). The Kibbutz, boy’s town, Williamsburg, and the Montessori Erdkinder. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 239–254.Google Scholar
  26. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  27. Lillard, A. S. (2005). Montessori: The science behind the genius. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. McCombs, B. L., & Lauer, P. A. (2002). PASS passes the learner-centered test. Aurora: Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory.Google Scholar
  29. Montessori, M. (1936/2001). Dr. Montessori’s third lecture. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 175–188.Google Scholar
  30. Montessori, M. (1937/2001). A new education for the secondary school. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 189–198.Google Scholar
  31. Montessori, M. (1938/2001). Twenty-eighth lecture of the twenty-third international Montessori course. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 199–207.Google Scholar
  32. Montessori, M. (1949/1988). The absorbent mind (1st ed.). Oxford, UK: Clio Press.Google Scholar
  33. Montessori, M. (1973). From childhood to adolescence. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  34. Montessori, M. (1989). The child, society, and the world: Unpublished speeches and writings (Vol. 7). Clio: Oxford.Google Scholar
  35. Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noice, H., Noice, T., & Kennedy, C. (2000). Effects of enactment by professional actors at encoding and retrieval. Memory and Cognition, 8(6), 353–363.Google Scholar
  37. Rathunde, K. (1993). The experience of interest: A theoretical and empirical look at its role in adolescent talent development. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 8, 59–98.Google Scholar
  38. Rathunde, K. (1996). Family context and talented adolescents’ optimal experience in school-related activities. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 6(4), 605–628.Google Scholar
  39. Rathunde, K. (2003). A comparison of Montessori and traditional middle schools: Motivation, quality of experience, and social context. NAMTA Journal, 28(3), 13–52.Google Scholar
  40. Rathunde, K. (in press). Understanding optimal school experience: Contributions from Montessori education. In D. J. Shernoff, & J. Bempechat (Eds.), Engaging youth in schools: Evidence-based models to guide future innovations. New York: NSSE Yearbook by Teachers College Record.Google Scholar
  41. Rathunde, K., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005a). Middle school students’ motivation and quality of experience: A comparison of Montessori and traditional school environments. American Journal of Education, 111(3), 341–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rathunde, K., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005b). The social context of middle school: Teachers, friends, and activities in Montessori and traditional school environments. The Elementary School Journal, 106(1), 59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motivation. In C. Sansone & J. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (pp. 373–404). New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  45. Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Ego-involved persistence: When free-choice behavior is not intrinsically motivated. Motivation and Emotion, 15(3), 185–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). “I don’t feel like it”: The function of interest in self-regulation. In L. L. T. A. Martin (Ed.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals, affect, and self-regulation (pp. 203–228). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  47. Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance. San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  48. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schwartz, D. L., & Black, T. (1999). Inferences through imagined actions: Knowing by simulated doing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(1), 116–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sizer, T. (1984). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  52. Stephenson, M. E., & Joosten, A. M. (1976/2001). Erdkinder: The experiment for the experiment. NAMTA Journal, 26(3), 209–231.Google Scholar
  53. The International Montessori Index. (2012). FAQ’s. Accessed 17 Oct 2012.
  54. Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • David J. Shernoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Leadership, Educational Psychology and Foundations College of EducationNorthern Illinois UniversityDeKalbUSA

Personalised recommendations