Hoppa till sidinnehåll
Lärarprofessionen

Möjligheter och begränsningar: Om lärares arbete med montessoripedagogiken i praktiken

Publicerad:2016-10-11
Uppdaterad:2016-11-29

Per Gynther fokuserar på lärarnas möjligheter till lärande med montessoripedagogiken. Avsikten med avhandlingen är inte endast är att skapa kunskap om vad som utgör möjligheter och begränsningar i lärarnas vardagliga arbete, utan också vad som utgör möjligheter och begränsningar till lärande i arbetet.

Författare

Per Gynther

Handledare

Professor Jon Ohlsson, Stockholms universitet Docent Annika Ullman, Stockholms universitet

Opponent

Professor emerita Christina Gustafsson, Uppsala Universitet

Disputerat vid

Stockholms universitet

Disputationsdag

2016-10-21

Titel (se)

Möjligheter och begränsningar: Om lärares arbete med montessoripedagogiken i praktiken

Titel (eng)

Possibilities and limitations : Teachers work with Montessori education in practice

Institution

Institutionen för pedagogik och didaktik

Possibilities and limitations : Teachers work with Montessori education in practice

This study examines processes connected to teacher’s transformation of the Montessori theory and it’s described application to a daily practice. The aim is to create knowledge about what constitutes possibilities and limitations for teachers in their daily work with Montessori education. This does not only refer to what constitutes opportunities and limitations in teachers’ everyday work with teaching, but also to what constitutes opportunities and limitations for teachers to learn at work. The theoretical framework is based on action theory and theories on adult learning and connects to a tradition called workplace-learning in which learning is considered to take place in, but also between, individuals. This approach indicates that the contextual conditions which the teachers were imbedded in are important to identify. The study was conducted in four different Montessori-environments and involved nine Montessori teachers. The methods used were participant observation, interviews, informal conversations and review of teacher produced material and documents.

Possibilities and limitations in teachers work were related to if they had access to Montessori materials or not. In work with Montessori materials teachers identified the children’s abilities to a greater extent than they did when other materials were in use. This identification directed their interventions. When the teachers did not have access to Montessori material their method often appeared to be the same as “individual work” with the provided material. Furthermore, interventions of the teacher were then significantly often procedural rather than content-related, although the teachers clearly expressed that they wanted to go into a dialogue with children about the treated subject area. The survey therefore contradicts with the opinion that Montessori-teachers withdraw in favor of Montessori materials that sometimes has been brought up by interpreters of the pedagogy. Rather, teachers stepped back when other materials were in use. The study also shows how a prerequisite for a collective development-oriented learning among the teachers was dependent on whether teachers made their own private understanding of the pedagogy available to each other. At times, however, teachers took the use of the materials for granted. Some of the teachers also deliberately refrained from making their personal understanding available to others due to the fact that they then could be seen as a less competent Montessori-teacher. This maintaining of a “false” collective understanding is seen as an expression of an institutionalization of teaching practice which was maintained by sanctions from the environment if the individual didn´t recognize the institutionalization in question. Since teacher’s “space for action” in this way was limited, the institution created conditions that prevented a possible development of the working methods in use. In those cases when conditions for a collective development-oriented learning were more favorable, it was clear that the teachers did not perceive Montessori education as a given method but rather saw it as a ”model” for teaching in which the teachers had to interpret and define their own method from. The teachers thus came to take advantage of a potential “space for action” which was not noticed when the pedagogy was seen as a method.

 

Forskningsbevakningen presenteras i samarbete med

forskningsinstitutet Ifous

Läs mer
Stockholm

Specialpedagogik i grundskolan

Välkommen till Skolportens fortbildning för dig som möter elever i behov av stöd i grundskolan. Välj om du vill delta i Stockholm eller digitalt! Ta del av den senaste forskningen om bland annat AI och framtidens digitala skola, neurodiversitet och hur vi implementerar ett specialpedagogiskt förhållningssätt i hela verksamheten.
Läs mer & boka
Åk F–9
7–8 maj
Digital temaföreläsning

Arbeta mot hedersrelaterat våld och förtryck i skolan

Skolportens digitala föreläsning med Issis Melin, för dig som vill lära dig mer om arbete mot hedersrelaterat våld och förtryck i skolan. Föreläsningen fokuserar på hur elevhälsoteamet kan identifiera hedersrelaterade beteenden, samt hjälpa utsatta elever att komma ur sin situation. Ta del av denna föreläsning mellan 22 april–5 juni!
Läs mer & boka
Åk F–Gy
22 apr – 5 jun
Dela via: 

Relaterade artiklar

Relaterat innehåll

Senaste magasinen

Läs mer

Nyhetsbrev