M A S A R Y K U N I V E R S I T Y

F A C U L T Y O F E D U C A T I O N

Department of English Language and Literature

Montessori Pedagogy in learning and teaching the English language in Czech lower secondary schools

Bachelor thesis

Brno 2016

Supervisor: Author: Mgr. Jana Zerzová, M.A., Ph. D. Kateřina Birková

Abstract The aim of this Bachelor thesis is to deal with a different approach to the teaching and learning of the English language at lower secondary schools by the Montessori Method. The theoretical part investigates the process of learning a foreign language, second language acquisition and introduces the basic principles of Montessori education that can be applied to teaching and learning any foreign language. In addition to this, a brief insight into how such a lesson should be conducted is introduced. The pragmatic component of the thesis focuses on the response of the target question of what the real Montessori lessons look like in reality, and how the Montessori principles are upheld. To conduct the qualitative research and apply the method of case studies, thirty observations in two lower secondary schools and interviews with two teachers were conducted. The observations and interviews took place at the Montessori lower secondary schools Polabiny in Pardubice and Gajdošova in Brno. To confirm the validity of the research, the school curriculum documents were evaluated. The observation demonstrates that the learning and teaching of the English language, using the Montessori system, becomes a challenging option for Montessori teachers.

Keywords: Montessori Method, alternative education, second language, second language acquisition, first language acquisition, lower secondary school, English language

Anotace

Cílem této Bakalářské práce je celkový náhled na výuku anglického jazyka na druhém stupni základních škol typu Montessori. Teoretická část se obecně zabývá výukou cizího jazyka, procesem učení cizího jazyka a představí principy Marie Montessori aplikovatelné na výuku jakéhokoliv jazyka. Také krátce představíme jak by měla skutečná Montessori výuka vypadat. Praktická část práce si klade za hlavní cíl odpověď na otázku jak probíhá výuka anglického jazyka dle Marie Montessori ve skutečnosti a jak jsou dodržovány principy Marie Montessori. Metoda případové studie kvalitativního výzkumu byla podpořena třiceti hodinami observací a dvěma rozhovory s učiteli anglického jazyka. Observace se uskutečnily na základních školách Polabiny v Pardubicích, na Gajdošově v Brně. K umocnění výsledku práce jsou hodnoceny vzdělávací dokumenty zkoumaných škol. Observace ukazuje, že výuka anglického jazyka Montessori Metodou je pro vyučujícího náročným úkolem.

Klíčová slova: Montessori metoda, alternativní výuka, cizí jazyk, osvojování cizího jazyka, osvojování mateřského jazyka, 2. stupeň základní školy, anglický jazyk

Prohlášení Prohlašuji, že jsem bakalářskou práci vypracovala samostatně, s použitím pouze citovaných literárních pramenů, dalších informací a zdrojů v souladu s Disciplinárním řádem pro studenty Pedagogické fakulty Masarykovy univerzity a se zákonem č. 121/2000 Sb., o právu autorském, o právech souvisejících s právem autorským a o změně některých zákonů (autorský zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů. Bakalářská práce obsahuje autorčiny vlastní překlady citovaných zdrojů. Souhlasím také, aby kopie této práce byla uložena na Masarykově univerzitě v Brně v knihovně Pedagogické fakulty a zpřístupněna ke studijním účelům.

Brno November 2016

______

Kateřina Birková

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my supervisor, Mgr. Jana Zerzová, M.A., Ph.D., for her support, patience and her valuable comments through the compiling my thesis.

I would like to thank to the teachers of both schools, where my observations occurred, and who helped me gain information about Montessori Pedagogy.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 1 2 Theoretical Part ...... 3 2.1 Second language acquisition research ...... 3 2.2 Second language acquisition and learning ...... 4 2.2.1 Natural approach to learning...... 5 2.2.2 Individuality ...... 6 2.3 First language acquisition ...... 7 2.3.1 Language in childhood, according to Maria Montessori ...... 8 2.4 The Montessori approach to learning a foreign language ...... 11 2.5 Montessori principles ...... 13 2.5.1 Prepared environment ...... 13 2.5.2 Teacher...... 13 2.5.3 Stages of development ...... 14 2.5.4 The absorbent mind ...... 14 2.5.5 Sensitive periods ...... 15 2.5.6 Freedom and discipline ...... 15 2.5.7 Control of error ...... 15 2.5.8 Heterogeneous classroom ...... 16 2.5.9 The rapport between teacher and student ...... 16 2.6 Overview of Montessori lessons in teaching a foreign language ...... 16 2.6.1 Individuality ...... 17 2.6.2 Brevity, simplicity, and objectivity...... 17 2.7 Teaching a foreign language ...... 18 2.7.1 Productive skills ...... 19 2.7.2 Receptive skills ...... 19 2.8 SLA and Montessori Method ...... 20 3 Practical Part...... 22 3.1 Research Methodology ...... 22 3.1.1 Objective of the research ...... 22 3.1.2 The research sample...... 23 3.1.3 Methodology of the research ...... 23 3.1.4 Interviews...... 23

3.1.5 Observations ...... 24 3.2 Characteristics of the research environment ...... 24 3.3 ZŠ Gajdošova Brno ...... 24 3.3.1 The school curriculum ...... 24 3.3.2 Observations ...... 26 3.3.3 Summary ...... 27 3.3.4 Interview ...... 28 3.3.5 Results of the research ...... 28 3.3.6 The example of procedure of one of the observed lessons ...... 33 3.4 ZŠ Polabiny Pardubice ...... 34 3.4.1 The school curriculum in Montessori classes ...... 35 3.4.2 English school curriculum ...... 36 3.4.3 Observations ...... 36 3.4.4 Summary ...... 38 3.4.5 Interview ...... 38 3.4.6 Results of the research ...... 38 3.4.7 The example of procedure of one of the observed lessons ...... 43 3.4.8 Presenting a three-period lesson ...... 44 3.5 Comparison of the findings ...... 45 3.6 Research questions ...... 47 3.6.1 How are the English lessons conducted within Czech Montessori schools? …………………………………………………………………………...47 3.6.2 Is it possible to maintain the Montessori concept in English classes?...... 47 4 Conclusion ...... 48 5 Resume ...... 50 6 References ...... 51 Apendices………………………………………………………………53

1 Introduction

Teaching and learning English as a foreign language (L2) 1 has become crucial nowadays, especially because English has become a global language for business. Many multinational companies place a lump sum in the Czech stock market and high standard of communication skills are required. Furthermore, after the Velvet revolution, Czech people can travel worldwide and can find employment abroad.

Surely, the importance of teaching and learning the English language has increased enormously. The question is how to approach the teaching itself and how to motivate the students rather than to discourage them. There are many different types of alternative teaching and learning in schools nowadays, which have been evolving over time. Contemporary society prefers alternative methods to the old traditional teaching methods. These alternative methods allow students to be actively involved in the learning process. Individuality is fully respected and gradually grows; the environment of the classroom is carefully prepared to suit the children’s needs in order to work peacefully at their own pace.

The necessity of school reforms, along with the need and desire for alternative methods arose at the end of the 20th century due to the parents and teachers’ demands. There are many different alternative schools, from pre-schools to secondary schools, in the Czech Republic and they are located in towns with higher density in population. One of the alternative approaches currently popular in the Czech Republic is the Montessori Method.

Maria Montessori concentrated on the education of very young children. The system in the Czech Republic is conducted by the Montessori o.s. located in Prague, where they organize a number of various courses for the public or teachers. Located in Prague, there is also the multinational company Montessori Institute Prague, located in Prague that belongs to the Association Montessori International-AMI which is located in Amsterdam. The aim of the worldwide Montessori Institute is the preservation and realization of the genuine philosophy of Maria Montessori. They emphasize a thorough knowledge and presentation of the Maria Montessori material as she invented it.

1 L2 Second language

1

The aim of this Bachelor thesis is to draw attention to the teaching and learning of the English language as L2 by the Montessori Method at some of the state primary schools in the Czech Republic. The main problem the author had to deal with is that there are many Montessori primary schools in the Czech Republic but only a few have lower secondary education – Základní škola (ZŠ)2 Na Beranku, Prague; ZŠ Gajdosova, Brno, ZŠ Kladno and ZŠ Polabiny Pardubice. Furthermore, there is not such a project, which would define teaching and learning the English language using the concept of Maria Montessori.

The practical part is based on the method of conducting a case study using qualitative research by the realization of thirty observations and two interviews with the teachers at Montessori based schools. The thesis is supplemented with the school curriculum documents to support the validity of the research. The comparison of the observations, interviews and school documents is included. The thirty observations of the language classes took place in ZŠ Gajdosova in Brno and ZŠ Polabiny in Pardubice. The author of the thesis observed fifth and sixth graders. Unfortunately, during the period of writing the Bachelor thesis, the Montessori school in Prague decided to request an administrative fee for observations there. This resulted in the author removing ZŠ Praha from the list of potential schools to include in observations.

The theoretical part focuses on the basic information about Krashen’s theory about second language acquisition, the importance of the first language in human life that is highly connected with the Maria Montessori’s principles. Maria Montessori suggested to preserve natural child’s development. Her philosophy and the description of how her method should be maintained in the lessons, are introduced.

The Montessori Method of teaching is a wide-ranging system, extensively depicted in books on this subject. This thesis can help both students, parents understand the basic principles of the Montessori Method, and how these principles can be applied in learning and teaching a foreign language.

2 ZŠ Základní škola

2

2 Theoretical Part

The theoretical part of the thesis provides a framework of the theory that invokes learning and teaching a foreign language. A brief description of second language acquisition is provided and considered using different point of views. Not only does the subchapter draw the reader’s attention to the differences between conscious and unconscious learning, but also to the natural approach to learning a foreign language. The natural environment supported by Maria Montessori connects her concept with the first language acquisition put forward by Noam Chomsky. The importance of developing language in childhood underlines the natural learning of a foreign language. The Montessori principles are introduced here in order to develop a reader’s view on the Montessori approach to a natural educational process. Furthermore, this chapter offers an overview of Montessori lessons. All the information provided was obtained from available literature. The theoretical part will have regard to the practical part, and further, in the conclusion, both parts are compared.

2.1 Second language acquisition research

Second language acquisition (SLA)3 is a linguistic discipline that investigates how people learn a foreign language. Rod Ellis in his book Understanding SLA provides a thorough introduction into this field:

Second language acquisition (SLA) is not a uniform and predictable phenomenon. There is no single way in which learners acquire a knowledge of a second language (L2). SLA is the product of many factors pertaining to the learner on the one hand and the learning situation on the other. Different learners in different situations, learn an L2 in different ways (1985, p. 4).

He also defines SLA as a “subconscious or conscious processes by which a language other than the mother tongue is learnt in a natural or a tutored setting” (Ellis, 1985, p. 6).

Professor and linguist Stephen Krashen underlines this theory and believes that the process is fundamentally natural to human beings, regardless of the differences between the native language and a subsequent one (An introduction to the work of Stephen Krashen (n.d.)).

Muriel Saville-Troike (2006), in her book Introducing Second Language Acquisition, states a similar view on SLA and says that “the scope of SLA includes informal L2 learning

3 SLA Second Language Acquisition

3 that takes place in naturalistic contexts, and formal L2 learning that involves a mixture of these settings and circumstances” (p. 2).

Krashen and Muriel Saville-Troike support Rod Ellis’s opinion when he (Ellis, 1985) claims:

SLA stands in contrast to first language acquisition. It is the study of how learners learn an additional language after they have acquired their mother tongue. It is not surprising that a key issue has been the extent to which SLA and L1 acquisition is similar or different processes (p. 5).

Rod Ellis (1985) does not intend to contrast SLA with foreign language acquisition either. He says that “SLA embraces both untutored (and ‘naturalistic’) acquisition and tutored (or ‘classroom’) acquisition. It is, however, an open question whether the way in which acquisition proceeds in these different situations is the same or different” (p. 5). Nevertheless, American linguist Stephen Krashen can see differences between tutored and untutored acquisition, in other words, the divergence between the learning and acquisition.

2.2 Second language acquisition and learning

Krashen’s research concentrates mainly on non-English speakers and bilingual language acquisition. He claims that there is a significant difference between second language acquisition and learning. Stephen Krashen (1981) states, that “an adult has two distinct and independent ways of developing competence in a second language” (p. 17) and he depicts those (1981):

The first way is language acquisition, a process similar, if not identical, to the way children develop ability in their first language. Language acquisition is a subconscious process; language acquirers are not usually aware of the fact that they are acquiring language, but are only aware of the fact that they are using the language for communication. The result of language acquisition, acquired competence, is also subconscious. We are generally not consciously aware of the rules of the languages we have acquired (p. 1, 2).

In other words, the acquisition is a deep immersion in the natural environment of the target language by definition and accordingly it is labelled as implicit learning. Whereas explicit learning, the second way, is according to Krashen (1981), a complexion of rules and grammar acquired by conscious learning.

Krashen’s theory (1981) consists of five hypotheses:

 the Acquisition – Learning hypothesis

4

 the Monitor hypothesis  the Input hypothesis  the Natural Order hypothesis  the Affective Filter hypothesis

The Acquisition – Learning hypothesis has already been mentioned above. Krashen seems to recognize the difference between acquisition and learning. The Monitor hypothesis concentrates mainly on the explicit learning and monitoring of the spoken language. It is based on the rules and grammar acquired in the learning process, under certain conditions, which are sufficient time, focus on form, and correct grammar rules (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 36). The Natural Order hypothesis states that the “predictable sequence” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 36) acquired in the learning process does not mean that every learner acquires it in the same order. In other words, some students learn grammatical structures earlier than the others do. In the Input hypothesis Krashen speaks about “comprehensible input i+1” (1982, p. 20) when “i” represents the level of language and “1” “step beyond the acquired level” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37). Nevertheless, the comprehensible input does not necessarily mean that the learner will be successful in the learning process and this is noted in Krashen’s (1981) Affective Filter hypothesis. It means that learners with a low affective filter become more efficient in the learning process without being ashamed or embarrassed. This approach is a key of the Montessori concept (chapter 2.5) about the educational environment that should provide a relaxed atmosphere. The relaxed atmosphere supports the natural learning process.

2.2.1 Natural approach to learning

The learning process of a mother tongue is one of the first natural properties in human beings and differs in each individual. Maria Montessori stressed the preservation of a natural process in developing human society.

Steven Krashen and Tracy Terell (1988) illustrate that the main goal of the natural learning of a language is communication. The Natural approach consists of using Krashen’s five hypotheses (1981) completely as follows: comprehensible input precedes the productive skills, the teacher speaks in a target language and the students in the pre-production stage4 can reply in their mother tongue or in a target language with errors, the teacher does not correct mistakes unless the miscommunication has serious consequences, the only correction takes

4 one word answers from students or pointing at pictures

5 place in student’s written homework, the succession of grammar rules is not recommended, certain structures are introduced casually (p. 58) and the learning environment resembles a family environment. The concept of Maria Montessori elaborated a theory about the personal individuality and the aptitude for learning that is present in the child naturally.

2.2.2 Individuality

Across the world, children vary, therefore, learners of the first language and foreign language vary too. A common feature of foreign language learners is that all of them have acquired their first language naturally. The difference is however, in their “personality, motivation, learning styles, aptitude, and age” (Ellis, 1985, p. 97).

To support the natural learning process, we have to focus on motivating children in a creative environment. Not only Maria Montessori but also Friedrich Froebel (2004) “believed that children possess an interior spiritual force that stimulated their self-activity” as mentioned in her The Montessori Method book (2004, p. 40). Both focused on the learning environment starting with the kindergarten education.

Many children throughout the world have been positively influenced by the comprehensive educational development of the Montessori Method. The emphasis of universal tendencies and the ability to gain knowledge is one of the most important parts of her vision of good education. The individuality of a child intensifies in her method enormously. Each child possesses a right to nourish and develop in the best possible and efficient way.

The crucial question is that if there is an ideal way to acquire a second language naturally. The majority of linguists agree on the importance of a second language. On the other hand, they disagree on how the SLA occurs. Are we born with a prerequisite to learning languages or do we acquire a prenatal set of phrases? Rod Ellis (1985) points out that “the route of development in first language acquisition matches that of SLA. This issue became known as the L2 = L15 hypothesis” (p. 8). This states that the learning process of the mother tongue and a foreign language does not differ considerably.

5 L1 first language

6

2.3 First language acquisition

The theory of the first language acquisition is introduced in this chapter. The connection between the natural learning of the mother tongue in a family environment underlined in the Montessori Method and learning a foreign language is noted.

As a child progresses, he/she needs a tool to allow them to communicate within society. Preschool children master the basic structures of their mother tongue and learn new vocabulary on a daily basis. The language acquisition focuses on establishing a social environment. The acquired complexity of learnt words broadens by learning new language skills in primary schools where the children develop their reading and writing skills using different registers etc. (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 8).

American linguist and the founder of Universal Grammar, Noam Chomsky (Ellis,1985), clearly underlines the predisposition of language principles that would support the mother tongue after childbirth. “This is because the data available from the input are insufficient to enable the child to discover certain rules” (Ellis, 1985, p. 192).

Lydia White (1981) extends Chomsky’s view on Universal Grammar about the relationship between the child’s innate ability and “developing perceptual abilities” at different developmental stages of their lives (Ellis, 1985, p. 198). Every child perceives different input data at different stages of their own childhood. Working at their own pace is vital for individuality according to Maria Montessori. Patsy M. Lightbown and Nina Spada (2006) in their book How languages are learnt confirm the Chomsky’s opinion that “… children are born with a specific innate ability to discover for themselves the underlying rules of a language system on the basis of the samples of a natural language they are exposed to” (p. 16). Chomsky’s name is connected with the Critical Period Hypothesis (Lightbown & Spada, 2006) – the hypothesis about the ideal period of human life when a person can acquire a complete command of a language if stimulated in a language sufficient environment. It is almost impossible to achieve the aim without a supporting environment (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 17). Both views are in support of the Montessori System about the prepared learning environment, explained later in the subchapter 2.5.1.

Some developmental psychologists and psycholinguists concentrated on the relationship between the innate ability for learning the language and the surrounding environment. One of the first protagonists was Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky, who emphasized the importance of

7 social interaction between children and adults and the children with other children (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 36). Patsy M Lightbown and Nina Spada (2006) claim that Jean Piaget stressed the relationship between the child’s environment and the child’s natural discovery of the world. Lev Vygotsky pointed out that “thought was internalized speech and speech emerged in social interaction” (2006, p. 20).

In 1980, a number of studies were presented across the world. One of them was a multicultural research set out to investigate “the children’s learning environment” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 20) in dissimilar surroundings. Researchers noticed that parents usually modify their language while speaking to their children or that commonly parents repeat or paraphrase their child’s utterances grammatically correct to avoid misunderstanding (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 20). The results show that “in every society, children are in situations in which they hear language that is meaningful to them in their environment. In addition, they achieve full competence in their community language” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 20). To put it another way, children have the constant opportunity to learn their mother tongue within their own family at early stages of their lives and that remains until they utter their first word.

2.3.1 Language in childhood, according to Maria Montessori

This chapter deals with the natural process of learning a mother tongue during childhood according to Maria Montessori. The natural ability of subconscious learning of a mother tongue is complicated. However, children acquire it very easily. A Montessori process in “linguistic gymnastics” (2004) can be applied when learning a foreign language while teaching pronunciation.

Learning language L1 is the third technique, after motor education and sensory education, “of the natural physiological and psychical development of the child” (Dr. Montessori’s own handbook, 1914, p. 18). A teacher presents the didactic material in strict order to focus the child’s attention, occupy their senses, and provoke further education, “to associate the language with these perceptions” (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 158)cannot be omitted.

Maria Montessori’s approach to learning a language is depicted in detail in her book, The Montessori Method (2004), where she mentions its complete mechanism. The process begins at the age of two and finishes at the age of seven. Within this time, a child perceives all

8 the stimuli for psychomotor, auditory, memory and language development. To acquire it later would be a vain hope of being successful (2004, p. 227).

Providing that the mother tongue is established in childhood easily, there is a high possibility of perfectly reproducing any foreign language when the learner is under the age of seven.

Maria Montessori emphasized in Dr. Montessori’s own handbook (1914) the fact that speech relates to the sense of hearing. Learning sounds and noises influences the further sounds of a foreign language.

The teacher must be careful to pronounce clearly and completely the sounds of the word when she speaks to a child, even though she may be speaking in a low voice, almost as if telling him a pronunciation. The teacher, when she teaches them, pronounces slowly, separating the component sounds of the word pronounced (1914, p. 70).

The Montessori Method outlines the chronological sequence of acquiring a language in childhood. Her sequence complies with the sequence suggested by Steven Krashen’s (1981) five-hypothesis theory. Firstly, children acquire their productive skills and then gradually move to consciously learning grammatical rules. Secondly, they learn to compose the spoken word. The students learn by hearing and visualizing the symbol of the letter to translate the sounds of speech into signs and become phonemically aware (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 230). The phonemic awareness is fundamental for further reading skills. Thirdly, sufficient reading is followed by the composition and study of writing styles. Finally, students should possess the power of conveying their views (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 230).

It means that young students are exposed to a wide range of vocabulary and comprehensible input, on a daily basis while encouraged to express their critical thinking in their lessons. Adam Cooney and Samantha Jones (2011) in their article are in agreement with the Montessori concept (chapter 2.7) about the sequence of speaking and listening education that precedes writing and reading.

Before the end of the sensitive period (subchapter 2.5.5) for the language, the analysis of speech is advisable. The child could hear perfectly, but the incorrect pronunciation can cause “erroneous auditory perception” (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 230). The correction of motor channels should be fixed before the defects are incorrigible (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 230). Imperfection in speech can cause the students stress, anxiety in performance of productive skills

9 and a reluctance to cooperate. The exercises of lips, tongue and teeth need to be prepared to enable the formulation of a language.

The introduction of the “linguistic gymnastic” (2004, p. 231) how to correct language defects outlined in her book The Montessori Method (2004):

 Exercises of silence – Irritability, frustration, anxiousness etc. are usually a result of constant noise. Dr. Montessori remarked that a learning process appears more efficient in a peaceful environment. She insisted on practicing silence within the lesson. The students were able to learn full awareness of themselves and their classmates.

Anxiety in the learning process has been included in Krashen’s, The Affective Filter hypothesis (1981), that would approve of the Montessori relaxed environment. Correct pronunciation releases the anxiety of communication in the target language. Students can deeply immerse their mind in the activity and complete it successfully.

 Lessons – The educator distinctly pronounces a few words and requires the repetition of the word’s sounds aloud by the student. The student needs to associate the word with the object preceding the pronunciation.

The choral repetition can release the anxiety of mispronounced words as well as reinforce the correct pronunciation. Associating words with a real object helps to memorize the brand new vocabulary. Conducting such a lesson induces the prepared environment for a further learning process.

 Exercises in graphic language – To “analyse the sounds of speech and cause them to be reported separately in several ways: that is, when a child learns the separate letters of the alphabet and when he/she composes or writes words, repeating their sounds which he/she translates separately into composing or written speech” (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 231).

The translation of sounds and composing the words are a helpful instrument for their further interpretation and correct pronunciation.

 Gymnastic exercise – It consists of respiratory exercises and articulation.

Respiratory exercises involve the movement of the lips, tongue, and use of teeth. Practice starts by including whole class, but finishes individually. Individual problems are approached

10 with a respect to the student’s needs. The right function of respiratory muscles forms the right pronunciation of the important consonants.

Learning a mother tongue in a sufficient environment can be relevant to learning a foreign language.

2.4 The Montessori approach to learning a foreign language

In this chapter, a brief explanation of the Montessori approach to learning a foreign language is outlined. Maria Montessori focussed all her research on acquiring a mother tongue. However, her books were not only rendered, but also edited in English terminology following parliamentary procedure in order to apply her successful methodology in English speaking countries. Because of this, learning the English language as a foreign language can be conducted the same way as learning a mother tongue language.

It is challenging to learn L2 by using the Montessori Method as her didactic materials were developed mainly for speakers of L1. There is no existence of a book where Dr. Montessori pursues the matter of learning a second language. Montessori followers recommend using her didactic material in the same manner as the L1 is naturally taken up if the Montessori cycle complies. In the teaching field, there is a disposition to think that there are two different approaches depicting a teacher in Montessori schools abroad. The first one is more popular. It introduces the language, its grammar and structure using explorative classes of interest to children. The second approach is full immersion in a target language that means all subjects are taught in L2. The children become bilingual and fluent in L2 (Montessori training, n.d.).

Maria Montessori preferred learning through a combination of as many senses as possible “from visual to stereognosis6” (The Montessori Method, 2004, p. 163). It results in the child being able to classify things around them and experience the outside world on his/her own. Maria Montessori understood that manipulation of objects leads to a better understanding of the unknown environment. A child is given the opportunity to acknowledge the world not through the mouth, but through the senses. In support of this theory, Patsy M. Lightbown and Nina Spada (2006) have also invoked this belief when they mention the comprehensible learning languages include learning through the sense “ to see” (2006, p. 24).

6 touching and/or lifting the objects; used for three-part lessons, that consist picture with labels

11

During the sensitive period, the human senses are important. Young children are extensively interested in their surroundings, firstly, they listen, see then touch and taste then later on they are interested in giving names to different things around them as Montessori & Gutek (2004) follow in Dr. Montessori’s own handbook:

But a special opportunity for training in clear and exact speech occurs when the lessons are given in the nomenclature7 relating to the sensory exercises. In every exercise, when the child has recognized the differences between the qualities of the objects, the teacher fixes the idea of this quality with a word. (2004, p. 70)

The use of senses can exploit learning of a foreign language. Seeing the differences between objects, touching them, tasting real food, or listening to different noises, extend or reinforce the learnt vocabulary if the learning environment is in the target language.

In the 19th century, the French physician Edouard Seguin developed his three-period lesson and inspired Maria Montessori by his results. “He discovered ways to increase children’s cognitive abilities and believed in the importance of developing their self-reliance and independence” (Montessori services, n.d.).

It is worth mentioning that a three-period lesson is a spontaneous communication between the educator and the student conducted in an informal way and environment. This leads one to suppose that Maria Montessori inclined to a natural immersion in a target language as much as possible. The ideal situation would be teaching all the subjects in a second language. The immersion programs accelerate bilingualism.

The three-period lesson consists of:

 Introduction (Naming)  Identification (Recognizing)  Cognition (Remembering)

The educator introduces an object (the educator handles the object) and pronounces its name clearly and simply without additional words. The association between the object and the word is important to establish. The second stage follows immediately. The teacher says the word and requires the child to point at the object. The teacher verifies and confirms the child’s understanding until the child corrects it himself/herself. If the child has any difficulty, the

7 the act or process or an instance of naming

12 teacher without comment lets the child delay the learning until another day. The third period consists of a final verification from the educator by calling for a reply to the question “What is it?” This stage could be repeated several times. Maria Montessori realized that such a technique could be applied to any area in a curriculum. Should the teacher discover that the learning causes difficulty for the child, the teacher should happily postpone any further steps in that particular learning (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 158).

2.5 Montessori principles

The aim of this subchapter is to outline the Montessori principles that are present in every lesson conducted by the method. Her principles become the main part of the learning process. The Maria Montessori Method defines several fundamental principles. However, the main thought is that children learn best when their environment supports their natural abilities and their desirability for acquiring new facts (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 16). A structured and well-organized classroom means allowing the children independent learning and free movement in the classroom.

2.5.1 Prepared environment

The environment that best allows children to thrive is very simple,it is clean and tidy. Each room should be habituated to the child's demands. Spending most of their time in such an environment motivates children to attain higher results. Montessori claims, “The environment holds the attraction that will polarize the will of the children” (Montessori, 1949, p. 395). A teacher is highly responsible for the class environment. Dr. Montessori focused on the “cleanliness and order” (1949, p. 395) of the classroom, but also on the material. New material should substitute the damaged one. The environment should be “full of interesting stimuli” (Montessori, 1949, p. 395). The ideal classroom environment is a spacious room with tables and chairs easily moved around for direct communication among the students. The students can freely move around during their lessons (Montessori, 1912, p. 81).

2.5.2 Teacher

“To perpetuate her method and to ensure that it was being introduced without distortion, Montessori turned her attention to teacher preparation. She established a training school to help prepare Montessori directresses “(Montessori & Gutek 2004, p. 22). She determined herself to train “educational associates” (Montessori & Gutek 2004, p. 22) who were obliged to become

13 loyal and committed to the Montessori Method in its purity. This is to stress, that a trained teacher is a key to successful teaching of the Montessori Method.

According to Henry Holmes in the introduction of Maria Montessori’s book (1912, p. 5) the Montessori teacher “must watch, assist, inspire, suggest, guide, explain, correct and inhibit”. In addition, the teacher is also a “guardian of the prepared environment” (Montessori, 1949, p. 395). Furthermore, the teacher should be positive, representative, and attractive.

2.5.3 Stages of development

Montessori studied the human mind that changes in a different periods of time and “these periods are distinct from one another” (Montessori, 1949, p. 24). During their growth, a child’s psychic changes several times, but the type of mind remains the same. There are four periods described in Montessori’s book The Absorbent Mind (1949). Only the period from 6- 12 years will be introduced here due to the aim of the thesis. It was stated that, “it is the period of calm and serenity” (1949, p. 25) without any psychic transformations. Children strengthen their position in society by extending communication skills (Montessori, 1949, p. 25).

Maria Montessori claimed the importance of the natural growth of a child during each period that will enhance a whole human being. Nevertheless, her method is primarily concentrated on the absorbent mind.

2.5.4 The absorbent mind

The absorbent mind is a special way of thinking. Any child in its first six years can learn any language if he/she is entirely immersed in it by their surroundings. Simply, the child develops his/her identity regarding his/her culture without realizing it. As a result, Maria Montessori focused on the education of the first six years of a child’s life with ease, rather than at a later age with difficulties. The child, via an absorbent mind collates new facts, which are presented to him/her without questioning or criticizing them, whereas an older child would require further information or reasoning. The concentration on a specific task and its repetition, drives the children’s nervous system to its complementation and further to a fixation of a brand new skill (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 51). These are fundamental parts of human beings and such development supports the child to being able to adapt to their new world and become independent.

14

A teacher should not disrupt the absorbent mind of children in this learning process. The disruption could cease the natural progression in a learning process. In other words, students lose their own motivation.

2.5.5 Sensitive periods

During the first six years of their lives, children have periods of sensitiveness to a specific natural process they are engaged in entirely. Such activities are “sensory training, language learning and exercising motor skills and acquiring social adaptation” (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 52). Montessori observed children and realized that in every period a child is focused on certain activity; the mind is completely absorbed by it until the activity fulfils the child’s mind. Such a discovery was overwhelming for that time. Zelinková considers that “Many psychologists claimed that the ability to concentrate intensely on an issue for a long period is the key to universal education” (1997, p. 27).

2.5.6 Freedom and discipline

Freedom and discipline work together. The child is disciplined if he/she is satisfied within himself/herself. The most important characteristics are good manners, politeness, and a willing obedience. Maria Montessori refused to either praise or punish children at any time of their education. A willing obedience leads to freedom of action and consequently to the absorbent mind (Montessori Society, n.d.). Zelinková (1997) implies that Maria Montessori was criticized for emphasizing the individual at the expense of their socialization (1997, p. 25). However, Montessori expresses her view in the book Dr. Montessori’s own handbook (1914, p. 78) that a child “… is sociable to the extent of wanting to share with everyone his successes, his discoveries, and his little triumphs. There is, therefore, no need of a teacher’s intervention. “Wait while observing.” That is the motto for the educator” (1914, p. 78). A Montessori teacher should not be an obstacle to the student, their discovery, and success. Montessori (1949) clearly states that, “the essential thing is for the task to arouse such an interest that engages the child’s whole personality. Children, whose moral sensitivity is developing normally, demonstrate spontaneous discipline, continuous and happy work, and social sentiments of help and sympathy for others” (Montessori, 1949, p. 206).

2.5.7 Control of error

Human nature is prone to make all kinds of mistakes. It is important to learn from them. Constant corrections from their teachers decrease the students’ interest and motivation.

15

Students become anxious about making mistakes. What is more important according to Maria Montessori is to become friendly with the error as they make corrections spontaneously through life. We correct all our errors “through growth and experience” (Montessori, 1949, p. 367). Maria Montessori “designed her material to give children instant feedback on their progress” (Montessori training, n.d.). Daily manipulation with objects grows confidence and reduces any anxiety to commit an error. Subsequently, children can easily work with error, adjust it, and aim for natural perfection to become intelligent members of society.

2.5.8 Heterogeneous classroom

Human society consists of people of all ages; they are not distinguished or divided into groups. Proper Montessori classrooms are heterogeneous; the interaction amongst the students is balanced. The older and experienced students find themselves as real teachers and the younger students take their leadership naturally. Children respect each other, and do not intervene unless it is necessary. Adults do not distinguish necessity when they offer help. Any encouragement and consolidation are naturally accepted by a person of the same age rather than by an adult (Montessori, 1947, p. 336).

2.5.9 The rapport between teacher and student

Maria Montessori criticized the authoritative approach being used in traditional schools. She condemned pedagogues for restrictive methods in education. Such a restricting environment cannot be productive. Respecting children is fundamental for establishing a tremendous rapport between a teacher and a student. The Montessori teacher trusts their students’ abilities. They are alert to a student’s development in order to help them succeed. The centre of attention is on the students. Guiding and facilitating is the teacher’s role here. Dynamic, engaging into the subject matter followed by their own conclusion and critical thinking skills should be heightened. The student is said to reveal his/her true nature, if he/she commands their full attention in the appropriate work. The Montessori teacher focuses on child learning, not on teacher teaching.

The Montessori principles are a fundamental part of the Montessori Method. A trained teacher should conduct the genuine Montessori lesson according to her principles.

2.6 Overview of Montessori lessons in teaching a foreign language

This chapter refers to the main points of the Montessori concept that are maintained through learning and teaching by the Montessori Method. Furthermore, the chapter notes how

16 the individual lessons should be conducted. Before the lesson is given, the educator reacquaints themselves with the fundamental principles and is aware of the possible changes in his/her lesson plan due to any unexpected student’s decisions. The individual lessons precede any collective learning.

Having outlined the Montessori principles (chapter 2.5) the Montessori lesson should be given in such an environment that would demonstrate the student’s natural abilities for learning. Before the lesson begins, the educator ensures that the classroom environment is well organized and clean as well as having the appropriate teaching materials. “In this method the lesson corresponds to an experiment” (Montessori & Gutek 2004, p. 123). The truth is that having the appropriate training is necessary for a Montessori teacher to manage such lessons. The individual approach is necessary and subsequently, can contribute to collective rule.

2.6.1 Individuality

Personal identity and individual work are emphasized in the Montessori learning process. The students are not obliged to remain in their places. Their free movement and independence are perceived as the instinctive inclination of human beings. Collective learning is rare (Montessori, 1912, p. 108).

2.6.2 Brevity, simplicity, and objectivity

The main characteristics of the Montessori lessons are:

 Brevity – The fewer words used by the educator, results in a better lesson being performed. The teacher should plan teacher talk time in advance and reduce it as much as possible.  Simplicity – The simplicity is related to brevity. The absolute truth and no vain words being used are recommended.  Objectivity – The educator should be objective. The centre of attention is the students, “the teacher’s personality disappears” (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 108).

Montessori educators are compared to that of being observers. However, they are still the fundamental part of an educational process. The educators support the students to reach higher levels of education. The pure Montessori teacher “observes whether the child interests themmselves in the object, how he/she is interested in it, for how long, etc., even noticing the expression on his face” (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 124). It is necessary to be aware of maintaining the independence. If it is not acquired this way, then the natural approach to the

17 learning is surpassed by the intended learning, which Stephen Krashen (1981) named as explicit. Maria Montessori (2004) confirmed the existence of two important issues for a Montessori teacher. The first is not to insist on revising mistakes and the second one is not to reveal the mistake to the child by telling him/her that they made a mistake. If the educator does so and insists on repeating and correcting the child, the child’s natural state can change. A Montessori educator does not comment on the errors, smiles, clears the material away and then digress from the topic (Montessori & Gutek 2004, p. 125).

The simplicity of the lesson is, for some teachers, very difficult to plan. Montessori explained an example of an arithmetic lesson when the teacher taught that two and three make five. She could not recollect the development of the math, but she remembered when the teacher inappropriately used cardboard dancers to aid the children’s attention was inappropriate for the math (Montessori & Gutek, 2004, p. 126). This happens when the educators elaborate their instructions and mislead the students.

Classroom freedom offers the possibility to choose the material, where to work, who to work with and how long to work with the chosen material. This freedom is a gift in a Montessori class, but also has rules to be complied with. If discipline is gained through their liberty, the children have their own responsibility for their learning progress. This kind of freedom decreases a rebellion, according to Dr. Montessori (1914, p. 86). The individual week/ month plans need to be accomplished at the students’ own pace, but the teachers encourage their students to fulfil the necessary requirements.

2.7 Teaching a foreign language

This chapter deals with the learning and teaching of a foreign language using the Montessori Method. Teaching a language consists of practicing the productive skills (speaking, writing) and receptive skills (listening, reading). We know that there is no exact concept for learning a foreign language by Maria Montessori. However, this chapter summarizes the Montessori concept of learning a mother tongue. The chapter is divided into subchapters according to differing language skills.

18

2.7.1 Productive skills

Vocabulary

Manipulation of the objects (subchapter 2.3.1) or using visuals, also described by Ligtbown and Spada (2006, p. 24), is a great opportunity to extend the L2 vocabulary. The teacher introduces the basic vocabulary that is broadly used by the students in their mother tongue. Nomenclature cards can simplify the memorization of brand new vocabulary. The language learning intensifies the vocabulary from simple meaning words to more complex phrases. The lesson should involve some physical movement, and spontaneous communication should be conducted in a three-period lesson way (chapter 2.4).

Pronunciation

Pronunciation (subchapter 2.3.1) is a key to acquiring the correct accent of a foreign language. The detailed process of how to correct defects is outlined in “linguistic gymnastics” (chapter 2.3.1). The teacher repeats the sounds of the word clearly and slowly. Correct pronunciation releases anxiety in the natural learning process, which can become more efficient in future.

Writing

Writing and Reading in L1 is maintained before writing in L2. Preparation for handwriting exists from the complete beginning of the Montessori Method through Practical Life (Montessori, 1912). Young learners can use the Movable Alphabet.8 The old ones can be creative and write their own stories, anecdotes etc.

2.7.2 Receptive skills

Listening and Reading

The reading program by the Montessori Method is rather comprehensible and has four parts: phonics, visualizing, reading comprehension, and reading for meaning. The phonetic sound is mastered first, and then the Movable Alphabet is introduced. Three letter phonetic words are structured (like pig, rat, log etc.). To maintain independent work the students are offered phonetic objects and later on, the children work with visuals. A further step in reading is matching the reading picture with the object and then with a picture. Reading ability improves

8 a box divided into components containing the lower case lesser of the alphabet cut out in cardboard (plastic). The vowels are blue and the consonants are pink

19 and students read the phrases and sentences that match with the pictures again. Visualizing reading comprehension is for early readers who have a short descriptive text with the strong verbs that allow the children to conjure strong visual images. The vivid images trigger the students’ interests in developing reading skills. Maria Montessori preferred attractively illustrated books about real life, educational books, or books with interesting topics (1912).

Language learning by the Montessori Method incorporates a mixture of different natural approaches. The final version of the most suitable process has not yet been discovered.

2.8 SLA and Montessori Method

Maria Montessori (1912) demonstrated the evidence of a certain mechanism important for developing language in childhood. Furthermore, she honestly believed in a significant role that family and a friendly environment plays, which was understood as a fundamental principle for natural development in any possible way. Maria Montessori (1912) claims that crucial evolution occurs in the early stages of human lives. Her arguments were in favour of Chomsky, Piaget and Vygotsky, who also emphasized the value of a caring environment in a child’s life (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 18, 22) .

Stephen Krashen’s theory (1981) could support the idea of Maria Montessori regarding having a prepared environment that accommodates the learners’ natural abilities. His method defines an ideal target language as “comprehensible input” in low anxiety situations, containing messages that students really want to hear. These methods do not force early production in the second language, but allow students to produce it when they are "ready", recognizing that improvement comes from supplying communicative and comprehensible input, and not from forcing and correcting production (Krashen, 1981). His view connects the natural development in a learning process that is also summarized by Tracy Terell (1977) who suggests three general guidelines that would agree with the Montessori principles. These are that “all classroom activities should be devoted to communication with a focus on content, no speech errors should be corrected, and students should feel free to respond in L1” (1977, p. 331). Both linguists prefer, acquisition in the classroom, to conscious learning.

The Montessori Method inclines to learning certain skills in the child’s sensitive periods when the children are hungry for comprehensive knowledge, but also that they have a great aptitude for learning languages because they can easily acquire native pronunciation, intonation

20 and become confident and fluent in a foreign language. That is a logical reason why a majority of adult learners consider learning a second language very difficult.

21

3 Practical Part

The author’s own children were the reason for choosing the topic of the Bachelor thesis. The popularity of the Montessori Method has risen nowadays and the author’s interest regarding alternative learning of the English language has grown and developed. The author completed the basic course of Montessori Pedagogy for parents where she gained access to information about the Montessori Method. The attraction to the Montessori Method remains.

The aim of the thesis is to draw attention to the learning and teaching of the English language and the integration of the Montessori Method in lower secondary Montessori schools in the Czech Republic. In particular, how English lessons are conducted in Czech Montessori schools.

Firstly, the objectives and the methods of the research are introduced. Further, a brief insight into the school curriculum documents of each school will be analysed. In addition, the comments on thirty observed lessons at Montessori schools accompanied by interviews with the teachers of each school will be provided. The interviews and the observations are based on the same set of questions (Appendix A). The findings of the observations and interviews of both schools are compared. Finally, the author responds to the research questions, and the theoretical and practical part of the thesis is summarized.

3.1 Research Methodology

3.1.1 Objective of the research

The objective of the thesis is to compare the learning and teaching the English language in the spirit of Maria Montessori and actual English lessons conducted at lower secondary Montessori Schools in the Czech Republic.

The main research question is how are English lessons conducted within a Czech Montessori school?

The specific research question is, is it possible to maintain the Montessori concept in English classes?

The results of the thesis should not be generalized to all Czech Montessori Schools due to the minor number of research schools that were used. Nevertheless, the thesis could serve a purpose for more extensive research in the future.

22

3.1.2 The research sample

The author carried out the research in two primary schools, one being ZŠ Gajdošova in Brno and the other being ZŠ Polabiny in Pardubice. There were a couple of reasons for the choices of observed schools. The first and most important reason was that only three primary schools carry the name of Maria Montessori in the Czech Republic. The second reaso was the geographical positions of the towns along with the teacher’s agreement to have an observer present in the classrooms. The reason that two schools were included was that the only experienced lower secondary Montessori school situated in Prague, that has the longest history in the teaching and learning of the Montessori concept, introduced a new policy, which resulted in them charging an admission fee for observation of any of its lessons. Therefore, the author removed its name from the intended list of the Montessori schools due to the high price when related to the number of observed examples that would have taken place. The author observed the sixth grade in ZŠ Brno where the number of students was 25 out of which there were 12 females and 13 males. In ZŠ Pardubice, there were 15 students out of which there were 9 females and 6 males.

3.1.3 Methodology of the research

The Practical part seeks the answers to the main objective question how are English lessons conducted within the Czech Montessori schools. The investigation used the predefined procedure to reach a conclusion. The author of the thesis was independent, unbiased, and critical enough to evaluate the results. One of the methods of qualitative research, according to Hendl (1997, p. 243), is a case study of selected schools.

The qualitative methods used in the thesis are the author’s observations in the above- mentioned primary schools and the in-depth structured interviews prepared before the observations occurred. The amount of thirty observations and two interviews with the observed teachers helped the author collect sufficient data for the thesis. The qualitative research, especially a case study, reveals to the reader the complex and detailed information about the research field (Gavora, 2000, p. 142). To support the qualitative research the examination of the school curriculum documents was included.

3.1.4 Interviews

In-depth interviews were conducted in a friendly environment of each school. To create a relaxed atmosphere the general topic related to Montessori teaching was discussed in the first

23 two questions. Open questions followed immediately and at the end of the interview, anonymity was ensured. The set of 20 questions (Appendix A) was prepared in advance but during the interview, some relevant additional information appeared which is typical for a case study. The interviews were conducted in Czech and were translated by the author into English at a later stage. The interviews lasted about two hours each, but the questions related to the Montessori concept were discussed regularly after each observation. The author of the thesis spent approximately a year collecting sufficient information to finish the research.

3.1.5 Observations

The observations occurred in the classrooms in order to get not only the precise idea of how the English lesson is conducted with a spirit of Maria Montessori but also to experience the prepared environment and the rapport between the students and teachers and vice versa. The arrangement for thirty empirical observations was made. The author spent the same quantity of time at both schools during the year. The author monitored the classes of the fifth and sixth grades. In ZŠ Brno the students were divided into two groups between the grammar teacher and the assistant responsible for practising speaking skills and grammar rules during speaking activities. In ZŠ Pardubice one teacher conducted all the English lessons. The observation sheet (see Appendix A) was arranged according to the theoretical part of the thesis and used in both cases.

3.2 Characteristics of the research environment

3.3 ZŠ Gajdošova Brno

The state primary school is situated in Brno – Židenice. The school was built in 1905. Nowadays the state school includes kindergarten maintaining the Montessori principles. Approximately 580 students attend the school. The building is large and beautifully designed. The Montessori classes are separated from the traditional classes. The corridor of the school is decorated with student’s projects. A few corners of the corridor are equipped with tables and chairs; a few are transformed into relaxing areas. Students can move freely and spend their time wherever they want. There is one Montessori class in each grade.

3.3.1 The school curriculum

This subchapter defines the proposed curriculum by the school. The school curriculum is public and available to download from the school’s website. The author focused on the key

24 facts of the Montessori concept. The relevant information will be processed in the summary together with the observations and the interviews.

The Montessori principles are introduced to the children in the kindergarten. The students can continue their education in the primary school where the sensitive periods, the absorbent mind and prepared environment should be maintained. The school curriculum implements the fundamental philosophy of Maria Montessori relating to the educational process. Namely, it is the emphasis on individuality, inner motivation, and prepared environment, including the didactic material, work with error and independent learning. The specific characteristic of the Montessori learning process in ZŠ Brno class was independent work with unconscious acquisition already mentioned by Krashen (1981). The student can choose where, when, who with and what they will study. Nevertheless, the curriculum defines that the educator controls independent work. In other words, children should finish their work if he/she independently chose it. The teacher gradually assesses the students orally, but does not give grades. The teacher and the student agree on the evaluation of progress, note it on an assessment sheet and insert it in the student’s portfolio. The frequent family conferences provided by the school allow parents to see the teacher’s evaluation or child’s self-assessment. The school curriculum emphasizes the importance of parent’s involvement in the learning process. The parents receive basic information about the Montessori principles at regular seminars and have the opportunity to participate in school events. Parents are allowed to join the class whenever they wish and express their views to the teacher. Teachers collaborate with parents. Parents are usually those who have the best knowledge of their own children and as such can validate this information. This two-way communication is valuable for both sides.

Maria Montessori (1912, p. 21) addressed a problem concerning praising children in her methodology because she noticed little lasting effect regarding their grades. The school curriculum forecasts the mechanism of control of error when students independently assess their own progress and correct their own mistakes. The daily routine starts and ends with the “communication ellipsis” where students can share their thoughts, or discuss their discipline issues. The students summarize daily their own achievements or failures. This gives the teacher the opportunity to learn about the student’s awareness of the learning process and act accordingly, for instance by giving them a second chance to improve their failures. Maria Montessori recognized the importance of not being afraid of making mistakes and being able to correct it on our own. The school curriculum suggests providing heterogeneous classes at the primary school; however, the lower secondary school is not mentioned here.

25

English lessons should be conducted in a target language as much as possible. Such teaching increases communicative competence in a school environment. The ability to understand and use the English language effectively is a good strategy to understand different cultures.

3.3.2 Observations

Observations were made using the set of 20 prepared questions (see Table 1) relating to the Montessori principles and learning the English language. During the fifteen observations, the author noted the frequency of the Montessori principles used in the observed lessons in the table (see Table 1).

The English lessons in ZŠ Brno take place twice a week plus the conversation classes with a native speaker. The native speaker is not a graduated teacher. However, Maria Montessori emphasized the full immersion in a target language and the employment of a native speaker would comply with her view. The students are divided into two groups. Each group consists of seven students and after 45 minutes, the teacher changes the groups. It means that there is one double lesson and two 45-minute lessons of English language per week. The teacher presents the grammar and the assistant practises taught grammar rules. The cooperation between the teachers works well. This would explain why the classroom management did not need to change.

Table 1 The questions asked in the interview with the data observed in English lessons

Questions Yes - often Seldom No 1. How long have you been teaching English? Were you Montessori trained? 2. How should real Montessori lesson be taught? 3. Is the Montessori concept maintained in x the lessons? 4. Is English spoken throughout the whole x lesson? 5. Is the learning environment prepared? x

26

6. Is the classroom management changed x throughout the lesson? 7. Is the child’s individuality respected? x 8. Do students have freedom of movement? x 9. Do the students have a choice of work? x 10. Do the students work independently? x 11. Do the students express their own views? x 12. Are productive skills practiced? x 13. Are receptive skills practiced? x 14. Does the teacher use a three period x lesson? 15. Does the teacher involve sensory x exercises? 16. Does the teacher use nomenclature x cards? 17. Are the students relaxed in the x classroom? 18. Is the communication ellipsis used? x 19. Does the teacher praise the students? x 20. Is the class heterogeneous? x

3.3.3 Summary

The first question concerns the teacher’s experience of the Montessori Method and her own education. The education and the Montessori training is the fundamental principle of teaching and learning by the Montessori philosophy (Standing, 1962, p. 54). Maria Montessori emphasized the genuine realisation of her method by training educators herself. The second question reveals the knowledge about how a Montessori lesson should be conducted. The remaining 18 questions are based on the Montessori principles. The author focused on the frequency of the Montessori key principles used within the English lessons. The teacher was asked the same set of questions in an interview. Questions from three to five concern the prepared environment and the immersion in a target language. Immersion program allows students to establish a relationship between words and meaning in a target language. Questions

27 six to eleven reveal whether the centre of attention is on the student. The student centred lessons are highlighted in the Montessori concept. Questions twelve to sixteen show the teacher’s aim of the lesson and material used. The immersion of target language supports the natural development of learning a foreign language. Questions seventeen, eighteen and nineteen relate to the student’s feeling in the classroom. The positive environment increases the future results in the learning process, according to Maria Montessori. The last question is related to the Montessori philosophy about the mixture of different ages in the classroom. Heterogeneous classes are in support of Maria Montessori due to the diversity of learning styles of students reminding us of their real world.

3.3.4 Interview

The teacher was asked to the same set of 20 questions. She received the set of questions by email prior to the interview taking place. The interview took place in her classroom in a friendly environment. The teacher was relaxed and helpful in providing detailed information about her teaching of the English language in spirit of Maria Montessori. The teacher replied to all the questions, but in a different order because she felt that some questions were easier to respond to than others. Therefore, she started with those she felt were the easiest.

3.3.5 Results of the research

This subchapter deals with the collected data during the fifteen observations, the interview and the school curriculum, evaluated in the subchapter 3.3.1.

To create a relaxed environment the first questions of the interview related to the teacher’s background and knowledge of English. The interviewed teacher admitted that she is neither educated in the English language nor in the Montessori Method. One of the key principles of the Maria Montessori method is the teacher’s genuine training in her method as well as in the target subject. The natural approach to learning the English language emphasizes the importance of communication in a target language, which is impossible to maintain in this case. Furthermore, the school curriculum recommends conducting the lesson in a target language as much as possible.

The teacher was asked the second question about how a genuine Montessori lesson should be conducted. Due to the lack of the training in Montessori education, the teacher is not aware of the complete Montessori philosophy. She briefly depicted the main principles she knows from the school curriculum and added more information about the need for a positive

28 environment and inner motivation. The observations reveal the absence of the majority of the Montessori principles and which ones that will be processed further.

The third question explores whether the Montessori principles are maintained throughout English lessons. The observations prove that the Montessori principles are applied in a few English lessons, namely freedom of movement, relaxing atmosphere and respecting the students’ views, but the key principles are missing such as the student-centred class and working with error. Students-centred classes support their independence as well as the work with error. Daily manipulation with the material that is designed to correct mistakes immediately reduces the anxiety to commit an error in the future and lead the students to have their own responsibility. The interview revealed that the teacher supports the student’s freedom of movement, individuality and respects their views. However, respecting the individuality of the students is problematic due to the time management in the class as pointed out by the teacher. Individuality is highly recommended by the school curriculum, the student has the privilege to choose what to do in the lesson, who to work with, where and when. In fifteen observations, the author did not observe a lesson where the students were given a chance to choose their work, where to work or who with. The teacher has the privilege to provide the work, according the weekly plan, if the student seems undecided about his/her work. This approach is in agreement with Maria Montessori as well as with the school curriculum. However, in reality, it cannot work as the lessons are teacher-centred. Such classes are not objective as the teacher’s personality becomes active and student’s individuality disappears. The observation shows no existence of absorbent mind. Although the student’s work is not disrupted either by the teacher or by a bell ringing, the teacher regularly checks the allowed time for the lesson. The importance of the absorbent mind is described in the school curriculum; however, the reality does not comply with it. The students had only twenty minutes with the teacher to cover the grammar rules and this is a short time to absorb their minds.

The fourth question is related to the immersion of a target language. The observation shows that the teacher speaks in English sporadically; this might be due to lack of English that the teacher knows. The Montessori concept about learning a foreign language is in agreement with Krashen and Terell’s (1983) views about the immersion of a target language; however, the observations reveal that this is missing. Nevertheless, the conversation classes once a week are conducted by a native speaker as mentioned above. Although Krashen’s theory (1981) about the comprehensible input would be fulfilled partly, the Monitor hypothesis about the explicit learning and monitoring of the spoken language with a native speaker would be sufficient. The

29 school curriculum covers the importance of knowledge of the target language and supports the idea about thethe need for s natural environment. Interactions between teachers and students in meaningful context increase the ability to use a target language sufficiently. However, the reality contradicts the curriculum documents.

The fifth question relates to the Montessori principle of having prepared environment, which is covered in the school curriculum. The teacher assumes that there is no opportunity to prepare the learning environment, although it is tackled in the school curriculum. She supposes that it is easier to maintain at a lower primary school, where each grade has only one teacher. The classroom was a smaller size than traditional classrooms. The open shelves offered a wide range of literature and materials related to different subjects. Although the shelf related to the English language offered five dictionaries, it was difficult to find different material or Montessori didactic material. The tables and chairs were randomly placed, but easily moveable. The classroom gives the impression of chaos. Nevertheless, the relaxed atmosphere was welcoming and that is an important principle for successful learning. To support the pleasant environment the students call their teacher by her first name. The teacher has an opportunity to become a guider rather than an educator. Being close to the students can induce a positive rapport between the teacher and students, who can feel free to share their thoughts.

The sixth question examines the learning process in the classroom and dealing with disruptive behaviour. The observation reveals no existence of such behaviour that would require any changes. It might be due to regular changes of the learning environment and teacher every lesson. The teacher admitted that the lessons run smoothly. The school environment without competing is in agreement with the Montessori philosophy. Maria Montessori was in support of cooperation among students rather than having a competitive environment where stronger students can overshadow the weaker ones.

Questions seven to eleven concern the child’s individuality and how it is valued. The school curriculum implemented the respect of individuality in Montessori classes. The individuality is supported by all the key Montessori principles depicted in Theoretical part (chapter 2.6.1). The school curriculum covers the student’s individuality throughout the Montessori principles. The observations show that the teacher respected the student’s individuality in relation to the topic. When the independent work was planned, the teacher supported individuality and independence. In other words, individuality was maintained only when planned. In addition to this, the students could not choose what work they wanted to do,

30 which opposes the school curriculum and the Montessori philosophy about the student’s privilege to choose what to do, who with, where and when. If the student’s mind is absorbed, the interviewed teacher supposes that she should respond to any student requests, politely and without disrupting their independent work. That would be partly maintaining the Montessori principle. The absorbent mind, according to the Montessori Method, must not be disrupted either by the ringing at the end of the lessons. The students, therefore, can work at their own pace and perceive the data at different stages of their learning process. Nevertheless, in fifteen observations, the teacher sent the students to a different classroom to practise speaking skills with an assistant. The students, therefore, did not have a chance to absorb their mind in any activity.

The twelfth and thirteenth questions reveal the emphasis on language skills. While observing the productive skills, the main part of the English lessons concentrated on the explicit learning hypothesis introduced by Steven Krashen (1981), when conscious learning focusing on the form and grammar rules occurred. The productive skills were mainly practiced with the teacher’s assistant for twenty minutes and the receptive skills were included when working with student’s projects,worked on at home that were presented a month later. The teacher explained the grammar rules and the assistant practiced the acquired skills by speaking with half of the class in a different room. Krashen (1981) named it as the Monitor hypothesis (subchapter 2.2.). The role of the assistant was to monitor the spoken language. The observations showed that receptive skills were used sporadically in the lesson. There is no mention of language skills in the school curriculum in Montessori classes. However, generally the school curriculum covers the importance of the productive and receptive skills in learning a foreign language. The interview reveals that the teacher is aware of not practicing certain skills in her lessons, mainly due to time management. It might be due to dividing the lesson between two teachers. Nevertheless, the observations proved there is a close cooperation between the main teacher and the assistant.

Questions fourteen, fifteen, and sixteen are closely connected to the Montessori material that can be implemented in the learning process of a foreign language. The findings show that neither the presentation of new vocabulary by the three-period lesson of the Montessori concept nor the nomenclature cards were performed in any of the observed English lessons. The manipulation of objects did not occur in any of the observed lessons either. The interviewed teacher assumed that this material is presented in lower primary school. The teacher did however present homemade material in her lessons, as there is no Montessori didactic material

31 for learning a foreign language provided by the school. In the author’s view, the three-period lesson can be performed with homemade materials too, and then it would comply with the Montessori spirit. The school curriculum covers the use of the Montessori material into the prepared environment. The didactic material is maintained according to the subjects in the classroom. The observations show that there are different corners where we can find materials related to a certain subject. The students are allowed to choose the material whenever they wish. The material should support the child’s natural desire for discovering, touching it and understanding the correct manipulation with it. The more attractive material the teacher uses, the greater the student’s attention. Nevertheless, the material related to the English language in the classroom only amounted to five dictionaries

Question seventeen shows the student satisfaction with their learning. The students appeared relaxed and enjoyed the lesson. They asked questions without hesitation, and the teacher replied politely. Krashen (1981) in his five hypotheses clarifies the Affective Filter hypothesis where he explains the evidence of the learner with a low affective filter and the connection with the efficient learning process. The main aim of the teacher is to release the tension in the classroom to achieve positive results in learning. The interviewed teacher supposes that the teacher, the students themselves and their cooperation create the effective learning environment.

Question eighteen relates to the Montessori concept about preceding disruptive behaviour by presenting the students with an opportunity to reveal their issues, thoughts, or satisfactions. The communication ellipsis is placed in the middle of the room, but it was not used in any of the observed lessons. The school curriculum includes the use of a communication ellipsis as a close link between the teacher and the students. It should be used regularly in the morning lesson and at the end of the school day. The students are welcome to express their views or issues. The teacher considers using the ellipsis in dealing with inappropriate behaviour. The teacher deals with issues in the mother tongue and allows other students to make comments.

Nineteenth question details information about how the students are praised. Maria Montessori claimed the importance of praising children orally in a positive way, but sporadically and that was observed in the lessons. The students were satisfied with their appraisal from the teacher. Although the school curriculum suggests not grading the students at all, the students receive their grades at the end of each term. Student self-assessment should

32 have priority over the teacher’s grade as the school curriculum pointed out. Nevertheless, the reality is different, the Czech educational systém has a requirement for grade measurement. The students have their self-assessment sheets in their portfolios to be aware of their strengths and weaknesses in a certain subject. The non-competitive environment is a base for an efficient learning process within the classroom; therefore, the teacher should avoid grading students. The observations revealed that the teacher follows the school curriculum.

The last question reveals the Montessori philosophy about heterogeneous classes. Heterogeneous classes are a version of adult society. Each child has its own place in it and natural respect to the older classmates. The class environment is that of a family atmosphere where the younger children learn from their older siblings. The older ones behave as protectors. The observation revealed the nonexistence of such classes in ZŠ Brno. The school curriculum covers having heterogeneous classes as part of the primary school only. Therefore, there is no existence of heterogeneous classes in the lower secondary school in Brno. The reason for this might be that heterogeneous classes would bring a greater pressure on a teacher to deal with different individualities and learning styles within the classroom.

3.3.6 The example of procedure of one of the observed lessons

This subchapter depicts one of the English lessons observed in ZŠ Brno. The procedure is detailed and a little of the Montessori principles are noticed there.

The teacher greeted the students and started the lesson in Czech analysing the previous lesson and the students’ homework. Ten minutes later the students were given additional homework. The students agreed on the date of its submission. The discussion was in their mother tongue and the teacher talk time was about 5 minutes. Not all the students participated in the lesson; two of them sat apart from the rest of the class and studied on their own. It was explained later that these students were sixth-graders and they already knew the taught grammar.

The students were given pieces of paper with an adjective and they had to find a person with its higher degree in the comparative or the superlative. The speaking activity lasted five minutes. The students practiced the productive skills in conscious learning.

The teacher instructed the students to open their textbooks and invited them to do grammar exercises independently. After that, the teacher checked the students understanding

33 by asking some questions related to the exercises. If the students did not understand the vocabulary, they could use their dictionaries.

The students actively participated in a speaking activity called “Chinese whispers”. The teacher split the class into two groups. The students sat in rows facing the whiteboard. A teacher handed a piece of paper with a word written on it to the last student in the row who then whispered the word to the student next to them who then repeated the word to the next student. This continued for the whole group with the last student writing the word on the board. Points were scored for correct words.

Work with a textbook followed. The students had to make a question from the given phrases and question their colleague. The next task was writing three sentences using the comparative or the superlative. The students could choose one sentence to read aloud.

The class atmosphere was relaxed; the students did not disrupt the learning process. However, a few students suddenly stood up and moved freely around the classroom but without any disruption. The teacher was willing to answer any questions, but before doing so, she asked other students for a reply. The teacher frequently switched into using Czech language.

After 45 minutes, the observation of the same group of students occurred. The students changed classrooms and were seated on a carpet practicing the past tense whilst playing a board game. The classroom was decorated simply, tidy, and quiet. This time, the teacher spoke in English throughout the whole lesson, student discipline however, decreased. The teacher dealt with noisy students and asked them to calm down. If the teacher had to warn a student a second time she did so by writing the name of the disruptive student on the whiteboard. If the student’s name appeared there, it meant a type of punishment.

During the observation, when something went well, the students praised each other or clapped their hands to show their mutual appreciation.

3.4 ZŠ Polabiny Pardubice

The state school is situated in Pardubice. The school consists of several different small buildings, which surround a pleasant green area, where students can relax during their breaks. The capacity of the school is approximately 600 students. The Montessori building is small; some classrooms are small and overfilled with different homemade Montessori materials. The corridor appears old-fashioned.

34

3.4.1 The school curriculum in Montessori classes

This subchapter defines the proposed curriculum by the school. The key facts of the Montessori concept will be focused on. The received information will be processed in the summary together with the observations and interviews.

The school curriculum, elaborated on the school web site, draws the reader’s attention to the Montessori philosophy. The Montessori pedagogy is introduced to children in the kindergarten. The primary school education continues developing the detailed Montessori concept and combines it with the methodology of the required Czech curriculum.

According to the school curriculum, students are valued as unique individuals. Each child works at his or her own pace; the teacher guides them through the learning process and individualizes their learning plan. The concept of sensitive periods is accommodated and recognized by a trained educator. The teacher should not disrupt the absorbent mind. The students should have sufficient time to finish their work without being disrupted. The prepared environment accommodates students’ choice of work, where they work, who with and when. The environment should suit the needs of its students; the didactic materials have their own place. Learning in such an environment induces the responsibility for the completion of any chosen work. The curriculum establishes boundaries related to the weekly/monthly plan that the students learn to comply with. The concept that freedom of movement is a natural characteristic of human beings and is supported in ZŠ Pardubice. The school curriculum covers all the philosophy of Maria Montessori, including the attitude of the educator. The teacher approaches the students with respect, the teaching plan complies with the Montessori concept and covers the three period lesson, and any new topics are introduced step by step. The daily routine starts and ends using a “communication ellipsis”. The main aim of it is to relax the students, allow them to share their thoughts, or plan the learning process. Such daily routines implemented in the lessons create harmony for future learning. The students collaborate in learning groups or work independently. Their own projects are presented in class and the students motivate each other. Their own responsibility for their own learning process teaches them to work with error. The teacher reminds them that making mistakes is a part of the process and can positively influence their learning. The designed didactic material allows the students to control their own errors. The students are not praised by grades during their time at lower secondary school. Parent meetings are held frequently and the parents have an opportunity to observe their own children during their learning process. The parents are informed about the

35 different behaviour in their child when their parents see a behaviour which is not a norm. The relationship between parents and teachers is based on mutual respect. Parents are those who know their children most and teachers are experts on the theoretical knowledge of the Montessori system.

3.4.2 English school curriculum

The children start with the communication skills of the English language in the kindergarten, which is a good way to acquire correct pronunciation. The English language is taught from the first grade of the primary school. The receptive skills are introduced in the third grade. To maintain the Montessori principles a native speaker is not only present in the kindergarten, but also in the lower primary school. The main aim is that the children are naturally immersed in a foreign language environment. Later on, a non-native teacher introduces more complicated grammar rules using the student’s mother tongue. This is the point when the conscious learning described by Krashen (1981) occurs and does not completely comply with the Montessori philosophy. The children work on projects, and gradually accept responsibility for their own work. The teacher introduces new vocabulary at this time which are broadly words in the students’ mother tongue. This procedure complies with the Montessori view of presenting brand new vocabulary (chapter 2.2). Krashen’s hypothesis (1981) about “comprehensible input” points out the communication skills at the beginning of the learning a foreign language and that is implemented in ZŠ Pardubice. Conscious learning according to Krashen (1981) should be introduced later and this is mentioned in the school curriculum regarding writing and reading skills that occur later.

3.4.3 Observations

The observation is based on the same set of 20 prepared questions used at the other school relating to the Montessori principles and learning the English language. During the fifteen observations, the author noted the information into the table. Table 2 below reveals the frequency of the Montessori principles used in the observed lessons in ZŠ Pardubice.

The English lessons are taught three times a week, according to the state curriculum. However, the parents can pay an extra fee for their children to have lessons with a native speaker in conversation classes at lower secondary school. The teacher has no assistant. There is one 90-minute lesson and one 45-minute lesson. The students at primary school are immersed in the English language more; they have sport lessons conducted by an English native. There are no more than 15 students.

36

Table 2

The questions asked in the interview with the data observed in English lessons

Questions Yes - often Seldom No 1. How long have you been teaching English? Were you Montessori trained? 2. How should real Montessori lesson be taught? 3. Is the Montessori concept maintained in x the lessons? 4. Is English spoken throughout the whole x lesson? 5. Is the learning environment prepared? x 6. Is the classroom management changed x throughout the lesson? 7. Is the child’s individuality respected? x 8. Do the students have freedom of x movement? 9. Do the students have a choice of work? x 10. Do the students work independently? x 11. Do the students express their own views? x 12. Are productive skills practiced? x 13. Are receptive skills practiced? x 14. Does the teacher use a three period lesson? x 15. Does the teacher involve sensory x exercises? 16. Does the teacher use nomenclature cards? x 17. Are the students relaxed in the classroom? x 18. Is the communication ellipsis used? x 19. Does the teacher praise students? x 20. Is the class heterogeneous? x

37

3.4.4 Summary

The first question concerns the teacher’s experience of the Montessori Method and her own education. The education and having had Montessori training is the fundamental principle of the teaching and learning by the Montessori philosophy. Maria Montessori emphasized the genuine realization of her method by training educators herself. The second question reveals the teacher’s knowledge of how a Montessori lesson should be conducted. The rest of the questions are based on the Montessori principles. The author focused on the frequency of Montessori key principles used within the observed English lessons. The teacher was asked the same set of questions during an interview with the author. The following questions three, four and five concern the classroom environment and the immersion in a target language. Questions six to eleven reveal whether the centre of attention is on the student, student centred lessons are highlighted in the Montessori concept. Questions twelve to sixteen show the teacher’s aim of the lesson and material used in the lesson. The immersion of a target language supports the natural development of learning a foreign language. Questions seventeen, eighteen and nineteen relate to student’s good feeling whilst in the classroom. A positive environment increases good results in the learning process according to Maria Montessori. The last question is related to the Montessori philosophy about the mixture of different ages in the classroom. It is known that younger students respect the older students more than they respect the teacher. It is perceived that heterogeneous classes induce the real world based on diversity.

3.4.5 Interview

The teacher was asked the same set of 20 questions. She received the set of questions by email before the interview occurred. The interview took place in her office in a welcoming environment. The teacher was relaxed and helpful to provide detailed information about her teaching the English language in the spirit of Maria Montessori.

3.4.6 Results of the research

The fifteen observed lessons occurred in ZŠ Pardubice in a relaxed atmosphere. The lessons were evaluated in the table (see Table 2) and the same set of questions was used in the interview with the teacher. The evaluation of the school curriculum is included.

The first two questions were concerning the teacher’s background and knowledge in English language, and her knowledge of the Montessori philosophy. The observed teacher not only graduated in English language, but also learnt the Montessori Method of teaching. This

38 education strongly supports the Montessori concept about teacher training. The knowledge of the Montessori philosophy sustains the learning environment in the classroom. Teacher preparation maintains the Montessori spirit.

The second question reveals the knowledge about, how the real Montessori lesson should be conducted. Because the teacher of the English language is trained in the Montessori Method, she is aware of the main principles. The teacher assumes that the lesson should be student-centred. Maria Montessori would agree with such a lesson. The teacher’s personality disappears and the lesson becomes objective (subchapter 2.6.2). The students should have the possibility to choose what they want to learn and work with during the lesson although the students need to fulfil the weekly/monthly plans. The teacher cannot maintain studen-centred classes nowadays due to the lack of time. The observations revealed that the teacher prepares homemade materials, because there is no such a Montessori material, and plans her lesson. The children work in pairs, groups and change materials in time sequence. The teacher recognises the importance of speaking in the target language as much as possible. The observation reveals that the teacher used the mother tongue sporadically. From Krashen’s (1981) point of view, the focus is mainly on the Monitor hypothesis, which means practising grammar rules in speaking with focus on form. However, the teacher immersed the students into the target language by speaking only in English to them. The comprehensible input preceded the productive skills. The students received brand new vocabulary at the beginning of the lesson and then they practised it by saying them. The introduction of brand new vocabulary occurred in a three-period lesson. The teacher monitored the speaking activities and interfered only when necessary. The teacher followed the main Montessori principles in all the fifteen observations and conducted the lessons in complete immersion in a target language the lesson.

The third question revealed the reality of whether the Montessori concept is maintained during the English lessons. The results of the observations show the presence of the Montessori principles in most of the lessons although the teacher does not agree with the author. She understands that the precise outlay of a foreign language lesson is missing. The observed lessons respected the child’s individuality and the students worked in groups, or independently, they worked with authentic materials and collaborated with classmates. The teacher guided them through the lesson; the centre of the class was the student’s work. The students controlled their mistakes themselves, the homemade material was prepared according to the Montessori concept. The students took over their responsibility as regards to their learning and the teacher monitored their skills. The communication ellipsis was used, at the beginning of the lesson and

39 at the end and this follows waht is outlined in the school curriculum. Most of the mentioned Montessori principles complied with the school curriculum and the teacher confirmed this.

The fourth question relates to the learning process of a foreign language. We learnt about the Montessori idea about inducing a natural environment for target language lessons. The findings of the observation revealed that the students of ZŠ Pardubice are immersed in English language for the entire lesson. The teacher showed good communication skills that provide a comprehensive input of the target language. Furthermore, the lessons comply with Krashen and Terell’s (1983) theory about the preference of acquisition. In other words, the informal communication between the teacher and the students occurred on a daily basis. According to the school curriculum, the teacher is allowed to use a mother tongue in cases of conscious learning. The teacher admitted that if the grammar rule are complicated, for example, teaching conditionals, she speaks in Czech.

The fifth question explores the prepared environment. The description of the learning environment was mentioned in the text above. The interview revealed the teacher’s awareness about having the classroom, the materials, and her lesson plan prepared. The school curriculum requires the maintenance of a relaxed environment and the teacher acted successfully, in accordance with this principle. The prepared environment covers also the teacher’s rapport with the students. The teacher’s role is important, he/she should motivate, support and respect the students at all times. The observations revealed that the teacher has a close relationship with her students. She is aware of their strengths and weaknesses and therefore can support them successfully.

The sixth question examines the learning process in the classroom and dealing with disruptive behaviour. The observation revealed no existence of such behaviour that would require any changes. However, the teacher referred to the changes of the classroom management regularly to maintain the dynamics of the lesson. Total Physical Response activities, singing songs or rhymes are used. Taking the freedom of movement into consideration, the students could move freely during the lessons. The Montessori system is based on a good teacher-student relationship which is designed to decrease any discipline problems in the future. That is why the students are allowed to use the teacher’s first name. In the observed lessons, the teacher used learning centres where the students could practise different communication skills.

40

The respect of the child’s individuality reveals questions from seven to eleven. The school curriculum implemented respect of individuality in Montessori classes in many aspects. For instance, the absorbent mind of the students should not be distracted, the supportive environment should be sufficient, the sensitive periods understood, the liberty of work choice, and the freedom of movement maintained. The interview shows that the teacher tried to be their friend rather than their educator. She respected their decisions, their moods and did not judge them. She believes that we all have our bad days. It is all part of our natural development, that each of us was born with aspiration to become independent. The children desire entirely independent activities where they can enforce their views. Maria Montessori would agree with the teacher’s view about not interfering in the learning process and accepting the child’s moody days are a part of their natural development. The observations showed evidence of the presence of independent work in learning centres where the students could choose what work they wanted to do, who with or for how long. Each student worked at their own pace as proposed by Lydia White (1981), who explained that each individual perceives input data at different stages. However, the students were limited by time constraints and were supposed to change their learning areas during the lesson. The students expressed their thoughts freely and discussed any issues they had at the beginning of the lesson as well as in the end when they summarized the positive and negative points of the learning process of the particular lesson.

The twelfth and thirteenth questions reveal the focus of the English lessons. The goal of naturally learning a foreign language is communication addressed by Steven Krashen and Tracy Terell (1983). The observed lessons and the interview prove that productive skills are practiced extensively in the English lessons. The learning process occurs in an informal way, using an ordinary communication pattern without any emphasis on grammar rules. In other words, the teacher communicates with students and discusses their issues in the target language on a daily basis. The learning process of the teaching languages follows a strict sequence from the productive to receptive skills. The school curriculum documents emphasize the need for a balance between acquisition and conscious learning. The teacher is aware of the importance of conducting the entire lesson in a target language. The school curriculum suggests the use of the target language in lower secondary schools at all times in order to induce the natural environment for a target language. The native English comes once a week and conducts some lessons. Nevertheless, the teacher of the English language in lower secondary school is allowed to use a mother tongue if complicated rules are presented.

41

Questions fourteen, fifteen, and sixteen investigate the use of the Montessori material that can be implemented in the teaching and learning of a foreign language. In most of the observed lessons the teacher modelled the three period lesson (chapter 2.4) while introducing new vocabulary. All stages were covered, the student’s mind was absorbed in the activity, and brand new vocabulary was easily acquired. The teacher monitored the children while they tested each other in groups. The collaboration between the students and the guidance of the teacher worked, according to the Montessori Method. The students rarely used nomenclature cards. Whilst being observed, some students did work with the nomenclature cards in some of the learning centres when introducing the topic of life stages, pets and hobbies. The students chose which partner to work with and tested each other. Working with nomenclature cards, invites manipulation with them and hence the teacher implemented the sensory exercises. The interview revealed that the students find the learning centres enjoyable; the learning environment supports a positive attitude to the learning process. The students become active in seeking the answers to their questions until they are satisfied. The curriculum covers the Montessori material in the prepared environment and the teacher complied with it completely. The teacher checked the classroom in advance whether the homemade material laid on the prepared trays (see Apendix C). The students could see what they would learn in the lesson.

Question seventeen shows the student’s satisfaction with their learning. The students appeared relaxed and enjoyed the lesson. The Krashen’s Affective Filter hypothesis (1981) requires a relaxed environment to achieve prominent results in learning process. The teacher states in an interview that her positive approach can affect the learning process in her lessons. She assumes that a friendly atmosphere and the good mood of the teacher produce good results from her students. Maria Montessori described that the teacher should be positive, representative, and attractive. The teacher appears positive, helpful and confident. The school curriculum tackles the prepared environment, including the classroom atmosphere.

Question eighteen explored whether the communication ellipsis was used. The ellipsis is placed in every classroom. The findings reveal the regular use of an ellipsis, the students freely expressed their thoughts and ideas at the beginning of the lesson, and at the end; they self-assessed their work during the lesson, spoke about what they learnt and what was difficult for them. The school curriculum included the use of communication ellipsis as part of the Montessori philosophy. The teacher believes that communication strengthens the relationship between a teacher and students.

42

The nineteenth question investigated how students are praised. Maria Montessori claimed the importance of praising children orally in a positive way but sporadically. The observation shows that the teacher did praise the students. The school curriculum shows that students are not graded throughout a year; the students receive a written assessment at the end of the year. The interview confirmed the evidence of a written assessment and the teacher emphasised that this suited both the parents and the students. The teacher assesses each individual, reveals the strengths and weaknesses of the student and the student’s self-assessment is considered, too. The student, according to Maria Montessori, becomes responsible for his/her own learning.

The last question refers to the Montessori philosophy about the need for heterogeneous classes. Unfortunately, the observation revealed the nonexistence of such classes in ZŠ Pardubice. The school curriculum covers heterogeneous classes; however, such classes only exist in the lower primary school. The interviewed teacher had experience of heterogeneous classes last year and she believes that they had a positive impact on the students. They were more collaborative, supportive towards the younger students, and interactive. Unfortunately, it is impossible to have heterogeneous classes in higher primary schools in ZŠ Pardubice nowadays.

3.4.7 The example of procedure of one of the observed lessons

This subchapter draws attention to one of the observed lessons. The detailed procedure of the lesson reveals the Montessori principles in reality.

Before the lesson started, the teacher was in the classroom to check whether the required material was prepared and the learning environment would meet the student’s needs. The teacher greeted the students “Hello!” In addition, asked them to sit around the “Communicative ellipsis” and asked the students differing questions, then she let the students ask their classmates their own questions. The activity lasted about ten minutes. The teacher communicated only in English, instructing the students when it was necessary.

The teacher offered several different types of activities to the students and expected them to decide what they wanted to do. The activities included practicing their receptive and productive skills. The students made their choices and about five learning centres were created. They had an opportunity to choose the place where to work, on the floor or sitting behind a desk. The teacher remained with one group, presented the grammar, and then proceeded to

43 practice it with a speaking activity with the students. She set up a period of five minutes for each centre and after the given time the groups were changed.

The independent learning in the learning centres lasted for the entire lesson. The students worked without disruption, helped each other, and used English as much as possible. While working independently the students were allowed to ask questions about any unknown vocabulary using their mother tongue, but the teacher tried hard to explain it by gestures, visuals or pointed at the Czech corner where the mother tongue is allowed to be used by the teacher.

The lesson ended with the students sitting back in a circle and the teacher summarized the lesson and asked the students for their feedback.

The learning material was prepared on trays (see Appendix D) with the instructions of how to use it, helpful phrases to use while speaking in pairs or the learning centres were also supplied. The main reason was to allow the students to control their errors themselves.

The teacher had prepared real objects on the trays (see Appendix E) that were introduced during previous lessons with the use of nomenclature cards. Nomenclature cards are used for presenting new vocabulary in the class.

3.4.8 Presenting a three-period lesson

The teacher introduced a topic, namely, Life stages by asking a question: “Where do you live?” The students gave one-word answers. Then the teacher started the presentation of new words by using some visuals of different stages of life. She also wrote the words on the board. The students were able to focus on the activity, so the teacher could go through all the steps of a three-period lesson. The teacher prepared a rug for the presentation. The students were seated surrounding the rug in a circle and awaited the presentation.

 Introduction (Naming): The teacher placed cards with pictures on the rug. She pointed and named the first card. She said, “The baby is born”. She repeated it several times very slowly and clearly. The students were allowed to manipulate with the card.  Identification (Recognizing): The teacher moved hands away and asked one student: “Please, show me the card showing where the baby is born”. The student pointed correctly at the card, the teacher continued by using other cards.

44

 Cognition (Remembering): The teacher pointed to a card and asked a student “What is this?” If a student was confused or did not know, the teacher went back to the second step. As soon as the student replied correctly, the teacher moved on with the lesson.

3.5 Comparison of the findings

The identical feature of both Montessori schools, that were observed, is their determination to allow the students to experience an alternative teaching and learning methodology. In the following subchapters, the differences between the two schools invite comparison. The main features of the Montessori Method are her principles. The comparison of the principles will be adequately described in the following comparison of the findings.

Both schools offer a welcoming environment with a relaxed atmosphere, although both of them do not possess the ideal size of classrooms. The classes are rather small to maintain the didactic material the simplest way, as described by Dr. Montessori (chapter 2.5.1). Nevertheless, ZŠ Pardubice supplies the range of Montessori material that is kept simple on trays. A detailed check of the prepared environment was done prior to the beginning of the lesson as required by Montessori as well as by the school curriculum. The students of ZŠ Pardubice do not have to change their learning environment in contrast to those in ZŠ Brno; they have only one teacher of English language who adjusts the lesson to the Montessori requirements. Neither of the observed teachers is a native speaker. However, both of them have experience with teaching the English language. The teacher at ZŠ Brno is neither educated in Montessori methodology nor in English language. On the other hand, the teacher at ZŠ Pardubice graduated in English language and has Montessori training. It may give an explanation as to why the ZŠ Brno teacher used English sporadically in contrast to the ZŠ Pardubice teacher who induced a natural learning environment in a target language, which could remind students of the environment while acquiring a mother tongue as described by Chomsky (Lightbown & Spada, 2006) in chapter 2.3.

The positive attitude of the teachers builds a positive and relaxed environment for the learning process. The supportive environment is more cooperative than competitive. The mutual respect lowers the affective filter in Krashen’s hypothesis (1981), as described in chapter 2.2, and influences the teaching and learning. The learning environment is regularly checked by the teacher in ZŠ Pardubice whereas the teacher in ZŠ Brno does not have the time to do so. The reason for this might be due to the size of the school and the number of students. Both teachers agree on the non-existence of the basic Montessori concept of learning a foreign

45 language in the lessons. Maria Montessori invented her own didactic material that could be also used for teaching a foreign language according to the teacher in ZŠ Pardubice. The materials they both use are homemade. However, the teacher in ZŠ Pardubice believes that the basic key of the Montessori Method is her principles and natural approach to the children’s upbringing and this is certainly preserved there. The teacher in ZŠ Brno sees the importance of employing a native speaking teacher who would naturally approach the students in informal communication. However, both of them are inclined to think that it is not possible to conduct a lesson of English language in the Montessori spirit yet. Regarding the brevity (subchapter 2.6.2) used in the lessons, the ZŠ Brno teacher had a dominant role in the classroom, unlike the ZS Pardubice teacher who reduced teacher talk time and concentrated on a pair, group or independent work within the whole lesson. In ZŠ Brno, the simplicity and brevity (subchapter 2.6.2) of the Montessori Method proved correct while mentioning that this is the most difficult task to accomplish. The establishment of classroom management is not essential to be altered during the lesson as the teachers, due to the high-quality relationships between themselves and their students, experience few disciplinary problems.

Learning through the five senses provides a better appreciation of the world and this facilitation was certainly attained in ZŠ Pardubice. Personal interest in every child in the classroom is a keystone to a developing harmonious relationship; it includes calling on the teachers by their first names. Both observed teachers do not intervene in the learning process while the students are deeply immersed in it. The productive skills are the main aim for the students to practice for both of the teachers. The social environment requires the exchange of messages rather than grammar rules. Heterogeneous classrooms are not usual in the Czech Republic; however, the first attempt was made in ZŠ Pardubice in the primary school where the first three grades were united. The students of different ages learn naturally from each other. In both schools, the students can express their thoughts, expectations, and comments on teaching, etc. on a communication ellipsis. The teacher at ZŠ Pardubice believes it is not essential to be in disagreement with the students. Those who complete the Montessori pre-school are aware of the rules of the ellipsis. Both observed teachers try to comply with the school curriculum documents that states how the Montessori Method should be implemented in the learning process.

46

3.6 Research questions

The focus of this subchapter concentrates on responding to the main and the specific research questions. The findings of the research will be incorporated and together with the theoretical part will be commented on.

3.6.1 How are the English lessons conducted within Czech Montessori schools?

The observed Czech Montessori schools provide their own school curriculum documents where the Montessori principles of the Montessori philosophy are set out. The strict Montessori principles are difficult to maintain within Czech schools. The main problem of Czech schools is that they do not employ native speakers. Furthermore, some teachers of English language are not even educated in the target language. The immersion in a target language is not only limited by using a mother tongue but also by the number of English lessons available in lower secondary schools. There are English assistants employed by some schools who give extra conversation classes. However, there are not enough. The learning environment does not comply with the requirements of Maria Montessori. Czech schools are limited by space and do not allow spacious classes. It might be a question of the financial investment of a particular school. Although the school curriculum document outline the main principles of the Montessori Method, many of them are not maintained. The reason for this might be the teacher’s insufficient knowledge of the Montessori concept or their having to strictly keep to the Czech educational standards. Nevertheless, the key principles are maintained, such as the student individuality, the student’s freedom of movement, the student’s choice of work, independent work, and relaxed environment. Observing the two particular schools, findings revealed an incomplete compliance with the philosophy of Maria Montessori, mainly in ZŠ Brno. The idea of heterogeneous classes is useful, but is rarely seen in the Czech Republic.

3.6.2 Is it possible to maintain the Montessori concept in English classes?

In my view, the Montessori concept can be maintained in English classes. As mentioned above, Maria Montessori did not create a methodology for teaching English as a foreign language. She focused on teaching and learning a mother tongue and language generally as a tool for communication. The English teacher, who is aware of the Montessori philosophy, is responsible for conducting the lesson in the spirit of Maria Montessori if the school conditions support her/him.

47

4 Conclusion

Learning and teaching in the spirit of Maria Montessori have become popular in the Czech Republic. A number of schools try to introduce the alternative approach to teaching. The Montessori System introduces a new insight into teaching and learning generally. The concept is not only about the new methodology, but also about a new attitude towards the students. The Maria Montessori Method demonstrates the high priority of knowledge of human life rather than curriculum content. The emphasis on acquisition rather than on conscious learning in the theoretical part proves the immense importance of the natural environment and natural development of the child acknowledged by Maria Montessori. The utilization of the sensitive periods allows students to approach the language with easiness and confidence.

The main aim of this bachelor thesis is to draw attention to the teaching and learning of the English language in the spirit of Maria Montessori. In addition, I was interested in how such lessons should be conducted, and what they are like in reality. The comparison of two Czech lower secondary schools, where the learning and teaching are carried out in the Montessori spirit, was made and different results are noted and compared. It is important to remember that only two Czech primary schools were examined. The Montessori concept appears to envisage her principles based on the long-term research and the observations of children learning and developing their skills in a prepared environment. Maria Montessori noticed the developmental changes in the growth of human beings and named them as “sensitive periods” during the different periods of each individual. The whole conception of her method is fundamentally based on retaining individuality.

The establishment of a natural environment and further deep immersion of a target language would satisfy the Montessori criteria. Comprehensible input and social interaction with a native speaker is highly recommended by Montessori; however, the results of the research confirm that the possibility of employing a native speaker is very difficult. Comprehensible input given by a non-native speaker is obtained mainly in ZŠ Pardubice. Nevertheless, productive skills are mainly emphasized in both observed schools.

Our society includes various types of people with different characters, religions and habits, which are natural; therefore, heterogeneous classes are preferred and naturally highlighted by the Montessori concept. Although ZŠ Pardubice introduced heterogeneous classes at their primary school, the concept abstained from the possible resulting problems in the educational process at the lower secondary school.

48

A positive point would be the flexibility of the teachers to preserve the student’s individuality and their freedom of movement. In addition, the personal rapport with the students and relaxed atmosphere increases the efficiency in natural learning. The students at both examined schools have the privilege of being able to express their thoughts, satisfactions, but also disagreements with the teachers and their peers.

The observed schools differ in many ways; however, both schools promote an alternative method of teaching in a thriving environment. The research reveals the need for improvements to implement the genuine Montessori vision in the learning process in Czech schools.

49

5 Resume

This Bachelor thesis is concerned with teaching and learning the English language in the spirit of Maria Montessori at lower secondary schools in the Czech Republic. The theoretical part focuses on the introduction of the Montessori principles, the first and second language acquisition. The close connection between the first and second language acquisition is apparent.

The practical part of the thesis consists of the evaluation of the school curriculum, thirty observations and interviews with two teachers of the lower secondary schools. Firstly, the school educational documents reveal the school approach to the learning and teaching of the English language according to the Maria Montessori Method. Secondly, thirty lesson observations investigate a real implementation of the Montessori principles. Finally, the interviews manifest the teachers’ awareness of the method used in their lessons.

The findings show that the Montessori principles support the natural growth of every human being within a learning process. However, this alternative method of teaching at Czech Montessori schools is challenging and sometimes too complicated to implement in lessons. To implement the genuine vision of Maria Montessori is nearly impossible to achieve at Czech schools nowadays.

Resumé

Tato bakalářská práce se zabývá výukou anglického jazyka v duchu Marie Montessori na 2. stupni základních škol v České republice. Teoretická část se zaměřuje úvodem na principy Marie Montessori, osvojování mateřského a cizího jazyka.

Praktická část této práce obsahuje ohodnocení školních vzdělávacích dokumentů, třiceti observací a rozhovory se dvěma učiteli základních škol. Nejprve školní vzdělávací dokumenty odkrývají přístup školy k vedení výuky anglického jazyka Montessori metodou. Třicet observací následně zkoumá skutečné zahrnutí Montessori principů do výuky. Nakonec rozhovory poukazují na uvedomělost učitelů o využití Montessori metody v jejich výuce.

Výsledky ukazují, že Montessori metoda podporuje přirozený vývoj člověka ve vzdělávacím procesu. Nicméně, tato altenativní metoda výuky na českých školách je náročná a někdy příliš komplikovaná začlenit do výuky. Začlenení autentické vize Marie Montessori je skoro nemožné docílit v dnešní době na českých školách.

50

6 References

An introduction to the work of Stephen Krashen. (n.d.). Retrieved June 28, 2016, from http://esl.fis.edu/teachers/support/krashen.htm Atkinson, D. (2011). Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition. London: Routledge. Category, B. (n.d.). Montessori Services. Retrieved August 14, 2016, from http://www.montessoriservices.com/ Center, N. A. (n.d.). NAMC Montessori Teacher Training Blog. Retrieved August 14, 2016, from http://montessoritraining.blogspot.com/ Cooney, A., & Jones, S. (2011). Maria Montessori on Education. Retrieved August 10, 2016, from http://www.newfoundations.com/GALLERY/Montessori.html

Dö rnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum. Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Elman, J. L. (1996). Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Gavora, P. (2000). Ú vod do pedagogické ho vý zkumu. Brno: Paido. Hendl, J. (2005). Kvalitativní výzkum: Základní metody a aplikace. Praha: Portál. Choděra, R., & Ries, L. (1999). Výuka cizích jazyků na prahu nového století. Ostrava: Ostravská univerzita. Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. M. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd and 4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ludwig, H. (2000). Vychováváme a vzděláváme s Marií Montessoriovou: (praxe reformě pedagogické koncepce). Pardubice: Univerzita Pardubice.

51

Maria Montessori on Education - NewFoundations. (n.d.). Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.newfoundations.com/GALLERY/Montessori.html

Montessori, M., (1949). The Absorbent Mind. Adyar-Madras-India: The Theosophical Publishing House. Montessori, M., (1912). The Montessori Method. (A.E. George, Trans.). New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company. Montessori, M., (1914). Dr. Montessori’s Own Handbook [EBook #29635]. Available from Gutenberg.org Montessori, M., & Gutek, G. L. (2004). The Montessori method: The origins of an educational innovation: Including an abridged and annotated edition of Maria Montessori's The Montessori method. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. MONTESSORI LANGUAGE: Speaking, Writing, Reading. Newsletter #16, April, 2014. From The Michael Olaf Montessori Company. (n.d.). Retrieved February 10, 2016, from http://www.michaelolaf.net/newsapril2014.html North American Montessori Center, NAMC. (2009). Classroom Guide. Canada: Dale Gausman. Online Montessori Materials. (n.d.). Retrieved January 17, 2016, from http://www.jnanamudramontessorimaterials.com/?fp=eMDtv+s1xbjmAZctbn/0ncOLn hjEPms2QgwFbtYSOqACWKP3ccvxR2TnwtydR8EPu+LddrPmWsN7Tu4kDSBl+A == Principles and Practice – Stephen Krashen. (n.d.). Retreived January 30, 2016, from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf Rýdl, K. (1994). Alternativní pedagogické hnutí v současné společnosti. Brno: Marek Zeman. Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing second language acquisition (7th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Standing, E.M. (1962). Maria Montessori, her life and work. New York: New American Library. Terrell, T. D. (1977). A Natural Approach to Second Language Acquisition and Learning1. The Modern Language Journal, 61(7), 325-337. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1977.tb05147.x White, L.(1981). The responsibility of grammatical theory to acquisitional data (pp. 214-271). In N. Hornstein & D. Lightfoot (Eds.), Explanation in linguistics. Zelinková, O. (1997). Pomoz mi, abych to dokázal: Pedagogika Marie Montessoriové a její metody dnes. Praha: Portál.

52

Appendix A

Table 1, 2 in the Czech language

Otázky použité v rozhovoru s učitely a shrnutí frekvence použitých Montessori principu z observace

Otázky Ano - často Zřídka Ne

1. Jak dlouho učíte anglický jazyk? Absolvovala jste kurz pro učitele Montessori pedagogiky?

2. Jak by správně měla být vedena Montessori hodina ?

3. Je Montessori pedagogika dodržována ve výuce?

4. Probíhá komunikace v anglickém jazyce celou výuku?

5. Je ve třídě připravené prostředí k výuce?

6. Mění se organizace výuky během hodiny?

7. Je respektována osobnost studenta?

8. Mají studenti volnost pohybu?

9. Mají studenti možnost volby práce?

10. Pracují studenti samostatně?

11. Mohou studenti vyjádřit svobodně vlastní názory?

12. Jsou produktivní dovednosti procvičeny?

53

13. Jsou receptivní dovednosti procvičeny?

14. Používá vyučující třífázovou výuku?

15. Zahrnuje vyučující do výuky smyslová cvičení?

16. Používá vyučující názvoslovné karty?

17. Jsou studenti uvolněni ve výuce?

18. Používá vyučující komunikativní kruh?

19. Chválí vyučující studenty?

20. Je třída věkově smíšená?

54

Appendix B

Nomenclature cards – sample Life stages

be born

be born

55

Appendix C

Prepared tray for teaching new vocabulary - Life stages

56

Appendix D

Prepared tray for speaking activity – dominoes.

57

Appendix E

Prepared tray with real objects.

58