publicly funded montessori programs around the world

​As the increase in demand for universal childcare continues in Canada, one option remains fairly untouched for Montessori schools: publicly funded Montessori programs. Public schools in Canada offer free education to children as young as four-years of age. Why would we not consider extending the service of public schools to include education and care for children as young as three years, and offer Montessori programs?
 
Montessori programs are known for their scientific approach to child development and have consistently supported a love of learning with children. Children eagerly learn self-help skills, social skills, community skills, and academics without the need for homework or standardized testing. Children with different learning styles flourish in Montessori settings. However, due to a lack of public programming, Montessori schools are mainly privatized in Canada.
 
As a sound and responsible educational method, parents should be given the opportunity of choice when it comes to the early learning pedagogy their children will be enrolled in. When it is only available through the private sector, then it is not a choice for many families. Luckily, there are countries who have implemented publicly funded Montessori programs and we can learn a lot about what works and what doesn’t. The countries I will be looking at are: the United States of America, Thailand, the Netherlands, and India.

---

​U.S.A.
 
The USA and Canada have a relationship like siblings. They respect one another, but behind closed doors they like to point out what the other is doing wrong. As a Canadian, I would love to brag about our public school system and suggest our American brothers and sisters listen up, but I cannot. I am not about to complain about the Canadian public school system, and I will acknowledge there are many hard-working and dedicated educators supporting our children within them, however, what we are lacking is choice. This is where America is far ahead of us in education: their citizens have the choice of a publicly funded Montessori education for their children.
 
The PFMPs in America are not perfect, they are more of a work in progress, but some progress is better than none. There are challenges with having publicly funded Montessori programs as I have listed below. Montessori bodies are trying to solve these challenges and Canada can learn from these lessons. Five common challenges for PFMP’s are:

1. Lack of clear and unified standards of Montessori schools, due to the Montessori name not having a copywrite. This means, there is no body to ensure the quality of the Montessori program in each publicly run school (Gerker, 2023).
2. Mandated requirements for schools in America do not consider the different pedagogical requirements of Montessori programs (Gerker, 2023). For example, the 3-hour work cycle is an important part of Montessori pedagogy but may not be allowed in public school districts.
3. The ‘No Child Left Behind’ legislation demands standardized testing which opposes Montessori pedagogy and endangers the child’s development in the Montessori environment (Gerker, 2023).
4. Lack of funding to provide a fully equipped Montessori classroom (Brown, 2015, para. 9).
5. Schools with trained Montessori teachers may not have administrators who are not Montessori trained (Brown, 2015). This can cause tension between the teachers and administration and prevent the teachers for providing the most authentic Montessori experience possible.

 
The Montessori Public Policy Initiative (MPPI), which is a joint project of AMI/USA and AMS, has created guidelines to help the American government implement successful Montessori programs in Public Schools. Here are some of their recommendations from their January 2023 publication, “Broadening policy for mixed delivery: incorporating Montessori programs in state quality improvement systems”, along with recommendations/alignments I see needed for Ontario (bold).

1. Montessori accreditation needs to be valued as an ECE education/diploma. This means Montessori teachers will not be earn both a Montessori diploma and their teaching license in order to work. In Ontario, AMI and MACTE accredited Montessori Casa guides may be allowed to work in a Montessori school as a director-approved RECE. This needs to be available for Infant-Toddler trained Montessorians as well because centres are being forced to hired RECEs which results in untrained professionals heading Montessori classrooms.
   
2. Childcare licensing regulations need to expand to include Montessori care, and certain licensing regulations should be exempt for Montessori schools. In Ontario, the CCEYA (Childcare Early Years Act), enforces ECE daycare pedagogy in Montessori schools. These two pedagogies are very different while both showing concern for the child’s wellbeing. It is difficult for Montessori schools to be authentic while not being allowed to follow their pedagogy (for example, 1:8 adult to student ratio for daycares vs. the suggested 1:15 adult to student ratio for Montessori schools).
3. Rethink how to assess a child’s progress (tests). Testing can impede the natural flow of the Montessori classroom and prevent the child from learning for himself on his own time. Progress can be evaluated with other means and these should be explored with Montessori educators. Standardized testing is not enforced in Ontario private Montessori schools, but there is a concern that, if publicly funded, there could be pressure from the government to enforce testing to ensure public money is not being wasted.
4. Regulations for Montessori schools need to be understood and implemented to keep the standards high, authentic, and universal. As in America, and throughout the world, there is no one body that ensures the quality of all Montessori programs in Ontario. Developing consistent standards, guidelines, and expectations for Montessori programs is essential in order to ensure a quality and authentic experience for children.

 
These concerns are found throughout the world while introducing PFMPs. America should be applauded for pursuing PFMPs even though there are many difficulties to overcome. Although each current PFMP may differ from one another, it still gives the families choice and accessibility for another philosophy of learning. 

---

Thailand
 
In 2004, the Association Montessori Internationale, the Montessori Association of Thailand, and the Thai government, joined to create a pilot project to bring Montessori education into public schools. In 2007, Thailand had opened 65 primary Montessori programs in public schools. Teachers and administrators were offered training to ensure the high-standards of AMI and MAT would be met.
 
Every year the success of these programs was seen as more opened and more training centers were demanded. In 2018, 75 people were enrolled in the primary teacher training course, of which, “20 [were] educators from the government system of children’s orphanages and a large contingent of government school teachers [also attended]” (Montessori Public Schools Thailand Initiative | Montessori EsF, n.d., para. 6).

Between 2015 and 2018, the administrator’s course was made available to “the government school sector, private schools and government-run orphanages” (Montessori Public Schools Thailand Initiative | Montessori EsF, n.d., para. 7). Thailand’s dedication to providing quality PFMPs is obvious by the integration and partnership of the government and high-quality Montessori standards put in place by AMI and MAT. This promises fruitfulness and may provide other countries with a template for success.

---

The Netherlands
 
“A Montessori education complements the general Dutch approach to parenting – where children are given opportunities to make discoveries for themselves, where independence is encouraged, and where you are allowed to be yourself” (Davies, 2014, para. 5).
 
In the Netherlands, public education is provided for children starting at the age of 4. This is the same as in Canada, but the difference is what is offered. In the Netherlands there is “a variety of schools to choose from: classical, Montessori, Steiner, Dalton, Jenaplan, and more” (Davies, 2014, para. 2).
 
The reviews for Montessori schools in the Netherlands is favourable and the children have been performing better than those who attended standard public school programs. (Davies, 2014). However, there are still concerns parents need to be aware of, especially if looking for a PFMP with authenticity.
 
Davies (2014) notes that although these Montessori programs do provide environments that focus on independence, cosmic education, nature, and no homework, there are other important qualities that may be lacking.
 
One concern is a lack of dedicated teacher training. Teachers are provided Montessori training during their regular teaching training but are not immersed in a Montessori-only teaching-training course created by a recognized Montessori body, such as AMI or AMS.
 
Another concern is a lack of funding. Montessori materials are expensive and should be in perfect condition at all times. The reality of a publicly funded school is money will not be plentiful. This results in many of the materials being well worn, incomplete, or absent from the classroom.
 
This contributes to another common concern: the use of workbooks. In the primary age, workbooks are not a part of the Montessori curriculum as the children are taught through using hands-on materials from the shelves. However, in the Netherlands, workbooks are used, possible as a way to compensate for the lack of materials due to poor funding.
 
Teacher training and adequate funds for running a high-quality Montessori program are the two main concerns for PFMPs in the Netherlands, but these are not isolated here. These concerns need to be considered when creating PFMPs in other countries. 

---

India
 
Maria Montessori and Mahatma Gandhi respected each other’s work and influenced India’s educational system in the early 1900s. Montessori focused her educational intentions on creating a peaceful world, while Gandhi focused his on preventing the English from diluting Indian culture and pride (Debs, 2022).
However, “while nation-building was the first central framing of Montessori in India, it was gradually eclipsed by the elite frame that has remained dominant to today” (Debs, 2022, para. 13). Due to the high cost of training and materials, it is believed the Montessori education was only available to the people who could afford it. This caused a separation of public and private Montessori schools in India. Due to the lack of training and materials, the public Montessori schools became diluted and less authentic.
 
Gijubhai Badheka and Tarabai Modak discovered the beauty of the Montessori method and aimed to make it more accessible for the non-elite in India. They created an affordable training centre, established an Indian company to make Montessori materials, and translated many of Montessori books into Indian languages (Debs, 2022). Sadly, these advancements created tension between Montessori and the works of Badheka and Modak. Montessori was “tightening restrictions on Montessori societies and training programs around the globe, viewing them as part of her intellectual property on which her income depended…. [and was] displeased that Indian training, materials, and translations had been created without her permission” (Debs, 2022, para. 19). This resulted in the continuation of authentic Montessori education being provided mainly to the rich.
 
Since then, Montessori schools in the public system became aligned with traditional daycare pedagogies. A lack of funding for teacher training and materials meant advancement in this field was very slow. The Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) in India created a public daycare system serving over 16 million children, based on Modak’s system, in 1975. “As an educational program, ICDS’s results have been more mixed: relying on minimally trained and poorly compensated staff has led to educations instruction and Montessori implementation tiered according to children’s socioeconomic status” (Debs, 2022, para. 45).
 
In 2004, the government of India started to train Montessori teachers and open classrooms for children of low socio-economic backgrounds. This is a welcome initiative, but it is still not perfect as it only provides Montessori education for the primary years, unlike the private Montessori schools that offer education through high school. However, these schools “emphasize academic gains, [and are] documenting lower absentee rates and smoother transitions into elementary school” (Debs, 2022, para. 57).
 
India has continued to progress with the goal of PFMPs. “Indian government bureaucrats have also determined that public Montessori can help sustain public education programs that otherwise face declining enrollment due to competition from private schools” (Debs, 2022, para. 58). The Chennai Corporation Montessori program announced in 2021 that it had planned to expand its 66 schools to 100 in the near future. Debs (2022) concludes, “successful public Montessori expansion is dependent on gradual, long-term growth with the support of a number of constituents: educators, policymakers, and funders who can support the upfront costs of training and materials while securing sufficient buy-in from the public” (para. 57).

---

What does this mean for Canada?
 
The public demand for the Montessori method has ebbed and flowed over the years, seemingly due to two factors: benefits of the philosophy and the cost of providing a high-quality program. Using the information learned from America, Thailand, the Netherlands, and India, we can anticipate challenges that have impeded PFMPs throughout the world. We can engage our school systems and governments in conversations that highlight the need for public Montessori education in Canada. The AMI is active in Canada and has a training centre in Toronto, Ontario (Foundation for Montessori Education). There are also AMI-certified schools in Toronto who are able to provide information on what is needed to run a successful Montessori school and program. It is possible to have the federal government and AMI-Canada collaborate on how to implement PFMPs in our country. Considering the increased demand for affordable daycare, and the lack of real-estate for the private Montessori schools to grow in parts of Canada, connecting Montessori schools with public schools seems to be the next logical step even it we trip and stumble along the path. 

---

References

Brown, K. (2015). Montessori programs in urban public schools: Policy and possibilities. EDCI Policy Brief, February 2015. Urban Education Collaborative. Brown_Policy (public-montessori.org)
​
Davies, S. (2014, December 8). Montessori Schooling in the Dutch Public System. Amsterdam Mamas. https://amsterdam-mamas.nl/articles/montessori-schooling-in-the-dutch-public-system/
 
Debs, M. (2022). Montessori in India: Adapted, Competing, and Contested Framings, 1915–2021. History of Education Quarterly, 62(4), 387–417. https://doi.org/10.1017/heq.2022
 
Gerker, H. E. (2023). Making Sense of Montessori Teacher Identity, Montessori Pedagogy, and Educational Policies in Public Schools. Journal of Montessori Research, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v9i1.18861
Montessori Public Schools Thailand Initiative | Montessori EsF. (n.d.). Montessori-Esf.org. https://montessori-esf.org/project/montessori-public-schools-thailand
 
MPPI, (2023). Broadening Policy for mixed delivery: Incorporating Montessori programs in state quality improvement systems. (2023). MMPI. https://montessoriadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/MPPI-QIS-report-1-23-23.pdf-FINAL.pdf