Examining Montessori Middle School through a Self-Determination Theory Lens: A Study of the Lived Experiences of Adolescents
This study examined the influence of enrollment on the development of self-determination in a Montessori middle school. Bounded by self-determination and student voice theory, this research was designed to give voice to students, add to the discourse on middle school reform, and provide the perspective of the student to the critique of middle level education.
Based on the analysis of narrative major themes indicated the importance of autonomy and relatedness. Students valued the ability to choose the order of their tasks and the tasks they could choose to demonstrate understanding as well as the ability to re-take tests. These changes require a paradigm shift to a student-centered learning environment.
Alfassi, M. (2004). Effects of a learner-centered environment on the academic competence
and motivation of students at risk. Learning Environments Research, 7 (2): 1-22.
Anderman, L.H. and Midgley, C. (1998). Motivation and middle school students. ERIC
Association for Middle Level Education (2000). This we believe: Successful school for
Young adolescents. Westerville: National Middle School Association.
Chirkov, V.I. (2009). A cross-cultural analysis of autonomy in education: A self-
determination theory perspective. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 253-262.
Chirkov, V.I. and Ryan, R.M. (2001) ‘Parent and teacher autonomy-support in Russian and U.S.
adolescents: Common effects on well-being and academic motivation’, Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology 32(5), 618–35.
Daly, A.J. (2009). Rigid response in an age of accountability: the potential of
leadership and trust. Education Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 168-216.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Dee, T.S. (2004). The race connection. Education Next, 4(2), 52-59.
Dohrmann, K.R., Nishida, T.K., Gartner, A., Lipsky, D.K and Grimm, K.J. (2007). High
school outcomes for students in a public Montessori program. Journal of
Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical
underpinning, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 295-311.
Fielding, M. (2001). Students as radical agents of change. Journal of Educational
Change 30(2), 123-141.
Gillespie, T. (1994). You start with trust. Montessori Life, 6(2), 18-21.
Goddard, R. D., Salloum, S. J., & Berebitsky, D. (2009). Trust as a mediator of the
relationship between poverty, racial composition, and academic achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 292–311.
Goddard, R.D., Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, W.K. (2001). A multilevel examination of
the distribution and effects of teacher trust in students and parents in urban elementary school. The Elementary School Journal, 102(1), 3-17.
Guay, R., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., and Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous motivation
for teaching: how self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of Educational Psychology. 99(4), 761-774.
Hanson, B.(2009). An exploratory study on the effectiveness of Montessori constructs
and traditional teaching methodology as change agents to increase academic achievement of elementary Black students. Ph.D. study, Capella University, United States -- Minnesota. Retrieved October 23, 2011, from Studys & Theses: A&I.(Publication No. AAT 3371732).
Hobbs, A.(2008). Academic achievement: Montessori and non-Montessori private school
settings. Ed.D. study, University of Houston, United States -- Texas. Retrieved October 23, 2011, from Studys & Theses: A&I.(Publication No. AAT 3309550).
Jang, H., Reeve, J., Ryan, R.M., Kim, A. (2009). Can self-determination theory explain
what underlies the productive, satisfying learning of experiences in collectivistically oriented Korean students? Journal of Educational Psycology. 101(3), 644-661.
McCladdie, K. (2006). A comparison of the effectiveness of the Montessori Method of
reading instruction and the Balanced Literacy Method for inner city African American students. Ed.D. study, Saint Joseph’s University, United States—Pennsylvania. Retrieved October 30, 2011, from Studys & Theses: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (Publication No. AAT 3213419)
McDurham, R.(2011). A comparison of academic achievement for seventh and eighth
grade students from Montessori and non-Montessori school programs. Ed.D. study, Tarleton State University, United States -- Texas. Retrieved October 23, 2011, from Studys & Theses: A&I.(Publication No. AAT 3462630).
McLaren, P.L. & Giarelli, J.M. (1995). Introduction: Critical theory and educational
research. In P.L. McLaren and J.M. Giarelli (eds.), Critical theory and educational research. Albany: State University Press.
Miserandino, M. (1996). Children who do well in school: Individual differences in
perceived competence and autonomy in above-average children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(2), 203-214.
Mitra, D.L. (2004). The significance of students: Can increasing “student voice” in
schools lead to gains in youth development? Teachers College Record, 106 (4): 651-688.
Montessori, Maria (1972). The discovery of the child. New York: Schocken Books.
Montessori, Maria (1964 ). Dr. Montessori’s own handbook. Massachusetts:
Robert Bentley, Inc.
Montessori, Maria (1972). Education and peace. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company.
Montessori, Maria (1973 ). From childhood to adolescence. New York: Schocken
Montessori, Maria (1964 ). The Montessori method. New York: Schocken Boooks.
Montessori, Maria (1936). To educate the human potential. Thiruvanmiyur: Kalakshetra
Montessori, Mario (1976). Education for human development: Understanding
Montessori. New York: Schocken Books.
Mouratidis, A. and Michou, A. (2011): Self?determined motivation and social
achievement goals in children’s emotions, Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 31:1, 67-86
Musial, D. (1986). In search of excellence. Applying the principles of trust to education.
Contemporary Education, 58(1): 42-44.
Niemiec, C.P., Lynch, M.F., Vansteenkiste, M., Bernstein, J., Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of autonomous self-regulation for college: A self-determination theory perspective on socialization. Journal of Adolescence. 29(2006),
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144. doi:10.1177/1477878509104318
Peng, H. (2009). A comparison of the achievement test performance of children who
attended Montessori schools and those who attended non-Montessori schools in Taiwan. Ph.D. study, Indiana State University, United States—Indiana. Retrieved October 30, 2011, from Studys & Theses: The Humanities and Social Science Collection. (Publication No. AAT 3394721).
Roessingh, H. (2006). The teacher is the key: building trust in ESL high school
programs. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(4), 563-590.
Rule, A.C., Kyle, P.B. (2009). Community-building in a diverse setting. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 36, 291-295.
Ryan, R.M., and Deci, E.L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic
definitions and new directions: Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: the Finnish
approach. Journal of Educational Policy, 22(2), 147-171.Scribner, J.P. (2005). The problems of practice: Bricolage as a metaphor for teacher’s work and learning. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 51(4), 295-310.
Shih, S. (2008). The relation of self-determination and achievement goals to Taiwanese
eighth graders’ behavioral and emotional engagements in schoolwork. The Elementary School Journal 108(4), 313-334.
Soenens, B. and Vansteekiste, M. (2005). Antecedents and outcomes of self-
determinations in 3 life domains: The role of parents and teachers’ autonomy support. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 34(6), 589-604
Standing, E.M. (1998). Maria Montessori: Her life and work. New York: Plume.
U.S. Department of Education (2010). Transforming American Education: Learning
Powered by Techonology. Alexandria: U.S. Department of Education.
Vallerand, R.J., and Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational styles
as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality, 60(3), 599-620.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., and Deci, E.L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal
contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 4(1), 19-31.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K.M., and Deci, E.L. (2004).
Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 246-260.
Wentzel, K.R. (1999). Social-Motivation processes and interpersonal relationships:
Implications for understanding motivation in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 76-97.
Wentzel, K.R. (1991). Relations between social competence and academic achievement
in early adolescence. Child Development, 62(5), 1066-1078.
Copyright (c) 2016 Luz Marie Casquejo Johnston
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
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