Validation of the Teacher Questionnaire of Montessori Practice for Early Childhood in the Dutch Context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v10i1.21543Keywords:
progressive education, Montessori education, implementation measurement, validation, early childhoodAbstract
Montessori education has existed for more than 100 years and counts almost 16,000 schools worldwide (Debs et al., 2022). Still, little is known about the implementation and fidelity of Montessori principles. Measuring implementations holds significant importance as it provides insight into current Montessori practices and because it is assumed that implementation might influence its effectiveness. In the Netherlands, it is especially important to measure fidelity because of the country’s history of flexible implementation of Montessori principles. No instruments currently exist that are specifically designed to measure Montessori implementation in the Dutch context. This study aims to validate a translated version of the Teacher Questionnaire for Montessori Practices, developed by Murray et al. (2019), within the Dutch early childhood education context. Additionally, it seeks to investigate the extent to which Montessori principles are implemented in Dutch early childhood schools. Data were collected from 131 early childhood Montessori teachers. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the Dutch dataset did not align with the factor structure proposed by Murray et al. (2019). Subsequent exploratory factor analysis led to the identification of a 3-factor solution, encompassing dimensions related to Children’s Freedom, Teacher Guidance, and Curriculum, which shows some similarities with Murray et al.’s (2019) factors. Implementation levels in the Netherlands varied, with the highest level of implementation observed in Children’s Freedom and the lowest in Curriculum.
References
Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various χ 2 approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 296-298.
Berends, R. & de Brouwer, J. (2020). Perspectieven op Montessori [Perspectives on Montessori]. Saxion University Progressive Education University Press.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
Debs, M. (2023). Introduction: Global Montessori Education. In M. McKenna, A. Murray, E. Alquist, & M. Debs (Eds.), Handbook of Montessori education. Bloomsbury Publications.
Debs, M., de Brouwer, J., Murray, A. K., Lawrence, L., Tyne, M., & Von der Wehl, C. (2022). Global diffusion of Montessori schools. Journal of Montessori Research, 8(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v8i2.18675
Demangeon, A., Claudel-Valentin, S., Aubry, A., & Tazouti, Y. (2023). A meta-analysis of the effects of Montessori education on five fields of development and learning in preschool and school-age children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Article 102182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102182
Dutch Montessori Association. (n.d.). Onze scholen op de kaart [Our schools on the map]. https://montessori.nl/scholen/
Dutch Montessori Association. (1983). Raamplan Montessori opleidingen [Framework plan for Montessori teacher training]. Nederlandse Montessori Vereniging.
Eyssen, C. H. (1919). Iets over de Montessori gedachten in de Fröbelschool [Thoughts about Montessori in Fröbel schools]. Correspondentieblad van den Bond van Onderwijzeressen bij het Fröbelonderwijs, 15, 37–38.
Fabrigar, L., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. SAGE.
Gerker, H. E. (2023). Making sense of Montessori teacher identity, Montessori pedagogy, and educational policies in public schools. Journal of Montessori Research, 9(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v9i1.18861
Hardesty, D. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2004). The use of expert judges in scale development. Implications for improving face validity of measures of unobservable constructs. Journal of Business Research, 57(2), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00295-8
Hazenoot, M. (2010). In rusteloze arbeid: de betekenis van Cornelia Philippi-Siewertsz van Reesema (1880-1963) voor de ontwikkeling van het onderwijs aan het jonge kind [In restless labor: The significance of Cornelia Philippi-Siewertsz van Reesema (1880-1963) for the development of early childhood education]. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Groningen].
Hoencamp, M., Exalto, J., de Muynck, A., & de Ruyter, D. (2022). A Dutch example of New Education: Philipp Abraham Kohnstamm (1875–1951) and his ideas about the New School. History of Education, 51(6), 789-806. https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760X.2022.2038697
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/BF02289447
Hu, L.-I., & Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Imelman, J. D., & Meijer, W. A. J. (1986). De nieuwe school, gisteren en vandaag [The new school, yesterday and tomorrow]. Elsevier.
Inspectorate of Education. (n.d.). Toezichtresultaten [Monitoring results]. https://toezichtresultaten.onderwijsinspectie.nl/zoek?q=montessori&page=1§or=BAS
Joosten-Chotzen, R. (1937). Montessori opvoeding. Haar toepassing in ons land. [Montessori education. Its application in our country]. Bijleveld.
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02291575
Kramer, R. (1976). Maria Montessori: A biography. Diversion Books.
Ledesma, R. D., & Valero-Mora, P. (2007). Determining the number of factors to retain in EFA: An easy-to-use computer program for carrying out Parallel Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.7275/wjnc-nm63
Leenders, H. H. M. (1999). Montessori en fascistisch Italië: een receptiegeschiedenis [Montessori and fascist Italy: A reception history]. Intro.
Lillard, A. S. (2019). Shunned and admired: Montessori, self-determination, and a case for radical school reform. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 939–965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09483-3
Lillard, A. S. (2012). Preschool children’s development in classic Montessori, supplemented Montessori, and conventional programs. Journal of School Psychology, 50(3), 379–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2012.01.001
Lillard, A. S., Heise, M. J., Richey, E. M., Tong, X., Hart, A., & Bray, P. M. (2017). Montessori preschool elevates and equalizes child outcomes: A longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01783
Montessori, M. (1935). De Methode der wetenschappelijke pedagogiek [The Montessori Method]. Van Holkema & Warendorf N.V. (original work published 1914)
Montessori, M. (1937). Het geheim van het kinderleven [The secret of childhood]. Van Holkeman & Warendorf N.V.
Montessori, M. (1949). The absorbent mind. Theosophical Press.
Montessori, M. (1971). The formation of man. The Theosophical Publishing House. (original work published 1955)
Montessori, M. (1989). The child in the family. Clio Press. (original work published 1975)
Montessori, M. (1997). The California lectures of Maria Montessori, 1915. Clio Press.
Montessori, M. M. (1961). Waarom Montessori lycea [Why Montessori high schools]. In M. A. Allessie, O. Cornelissen, J. Haak, L. D. Misset, & W. P. Postma (Eds.), Montessori perspectieven (pp. 15–21). J. H. De Busy.
Montessori, M. M. (1973). Voorwoord [Preface]. In M. J. ten Cate, T. J. Hoeksema, & E. J. Lintvelt-Lemaire, (Eds.), Het montessori material deel 1 (pp. 3–5). Nederlandse Montessori Vereniging.
Murray, A. K., Chen, J., & Daoust, C. J. (2019). Developing instruments to measure Montessori instructional practices. Journal of Montessori Research, 5(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i1.9797
Murray, A. K., & Daoust, C. J. (2023). Fidelity issues in Montessori research. In M. McKenna, A. Murray, E. Alquist, & M. Debs (Eds.), Handbook of Montessori education. Bloomsbury Publications.
Philippi-Siewertsz van Reesema, C. (1924). Voorlopers van Montessori [Predecessors of Montessori]. Pedagogische Studiën, 5, 72–77.
Philippi-Siewertsz van Reesema, C. (1954). Kleuterwereld en kleuterschool [Toddler world and kindergarten]. Wereldbibliotheek. https://objects.library.uu.nl/reader/index.php?obj=1874-205180&lan=en#page//21/44/33/21443341246326260137183521089397551476.jpg/mode/1up
Prudon, P. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis as a tool in research using questionnaires: A critique. Comprehensive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.2466/03.cp.4.10
Randolph, R. J., Bryson, A., Menon, L., Henderson, D., Mauel, A. K., Michaels, S., Rosenstein, D. L. W., McPherson, W., O’Grady, R., & Lillard, A. S. (2023). Montessori education’s impact on academic and nonacademic outcomes: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 19(3), 1–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1330
Rietveld-van Wingerden, M., Sturm, J. C., & Miedema, S. (2003). Vrijheid van onderwijs en sociale cohesie in historisch perspectief [Freedom of education and social cohesion in historical perspective]. Pedagogiek, 23(2), 97–108. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/187625
den Ouden, M. et al. . (n.d.). Saxion Ethische commissie [Saxion Universitiy of Applied Sciences Ethical commission]. https://srs.saxion.nl/ethische-commissie/
Schmitt, T. A. (2011). Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 304–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911406653
Schwegman, M. (1999). Maria Montessori 1870–1952. Amsterdam University Press.
Sins, P., & van der Zee, S. (2015). De toegevoegde waarde van traditioneel vernieuwingsonderwijs: een studie naar de verschillen in cognitieve en niet-cognitieve opbrengsten tussen daltonscholen en traditionele scholen voor primair onderwijs [The added value of progressive education: A study of the differences in cognitive and noncognitive outcomes between Dalton schools and traditional primary schools]. Pedagogische Studiën, 92(4). https://pedagogischestudien.nl/article/view/14174/15663
Sixma, J. (1956). De Montessori lagere school [The Montessori elementary school]. Wolters.
Slaman, P. (2018). In de regel vrij. 100 jaar politiek rond onderwijs, cultuur en wetenschap [Generally free. 100 years of politics around education, culture and science]. Ministerie van OCW.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
Tavakol, M., & Wetzel, A. (2020). Factor analysis: A means for theory and instrument development in support of construct validity. International Journal of Medical Education, 11, 245–247. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5f96.0f4a
Thompson, B., & Daniel, L. G. (1996). Factor Analytic Evidence for the Construct Validity of Scores: A Historical Overview and Some Guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(2), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164496056002001
Vos, W. (2007). Aandacht voor kwaliteit [Focus on quality]. In M. Stefels & M. Rubinstein (Eds.), Montessorischolen in beweging (pp. 75–80). Garant Uitgevers.
Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.3.93
Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: a content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Jaap de Brouwer, Vivian Morssink-Santing, Symen van der Zee
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Authors can view article download statistics for published articles within their accounts.
Journal of Montessori Research
Author Agreement
The following is an agreement between the Author (the “Corresponding Author”) acting on behalf of all authors of the work (“Authors”) and the Journal of Montessori Research (the “Journal”) regarding your article (the “Work”) that is being submitted for consideration.
Whereas the parties desire to promote effective scholarly communication that promotes local control of intellectual assets, the parties for valuable consideration agree as follows.
A. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR’S GRANT OF RIGHTS
After being accepted for publication, the Corresponding Author grants to the Journal, during the full term of copyright and any extensions or renewals of that term, the following:
1. An irrevocable non-exclusive right to reproduce, republish, transmit, sell, distribute, and otherwise use the Work in electronic and print editions of the Journal and in derivative works throughout the world, in all languages, and in all media now known or later developed.
2. An irrevocable non-exclusive right to create and store electronic archival copies of theWork, including the right to deposit the Work in open access digital repositories.
3. An irrevocable non-exclusive right to license others to reproduce, republish, transmit,and distribute the Work under the condition that the Authors are attributed. (Currently this is carried out by publishing the content under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 license (CC BY-NC.)
4. Copyright in the Work remains with the Authors.
B. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR’S DUTIES
1. When distributing or re-publishing the Work, the Corresponding Author agrees to credit the Journal as the place of first publication.
2. The Corresponding Author agrees to inform the Journal of any changes in contact information.
C. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR’S WARRANTY
The Corresponding Author represents and warrants that the Work is the Authors’ original work and that it does not violate or infringe the law or the rights of any third party and, specifically, that the Work contains no matter that is defamatory or that infringes literary or proprietary rights, intellectual property rights, or any rights of privacy. The Corresponding Author also warrants that he or she has the full power to make this agreement, and if the Work was prepared jointly, the Corresponding Author agrees to inform the Authors of the terms of this Agreement and to obtain their written permission to sign on their behalf. The Corresponding Author agrees to hold the Journal harmless from any breach of the aforestated representations.
D. JOURNAL’S DUTIES
In consideration of the Author’s grant of rights, the Journal agrees to publish the Work, attributing the Work to the Authors.
E. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This agreement reflects the entire understanding of the parties. This agreement may be amended only in writing by an addendum signed by the parties. Amendments are incorporated by reference to this agreement.
ACCEPTED AND AGREED BY THE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR ON BEHALF OF ALL AUTHORS CONTRIBUTING TO THIS WORK
