| Author | |
marianne
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 22 2006
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
|
| Posted: Aug 01 2007 at 10:08pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
I read in one of my books that Montessori didn't believe that children under 6 should read about anything that isn't in the real world or that isn't real. This would mean no talking animals, no dragons, no unicorns, ect... I'm still new to Montessori Methods, and consider our homeschool literature-based all the way, including all kinds of fiction and elaborate stories for my young children. I think that this philosophy is kind of sad actually. She would actually disapprove of Peter Rabbit?!
__________________
\
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
montessori_lori
Forum Pro
Joined: June 06 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 322
|
| Posted: Aug 01 2007 at 10:23pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Marianne, I get this question a lot. I don't think that Montessori meant we couldn't read Peter Rabbit. It helps to keep in mind the historical context - in her day, fairy tales were grim and gruesome. Very different from today.
What I take from this is to not put an emphasis on fairy stories, fantasy, etc. My daughter likes to sometimes pretend to have a "friend" around who isn't there. It's cute, but I don't encourage it or play along myself.
I would also distinguish between reading your child a fun story with talking animals - where you are not actually telling them that it's real - and telling them that there is a Santa Claus when you know it's not real. There's a difference between those two; the latter is definitely frowned on in Montessori.
I knew some kids whose parents encouraged every single flight of fancy they had, and they were extremely messed up. They didn't know where reality ended and fantasy began. Most of us are not like that with our kids.
Also, keep in mind that every child is different and many start to distinguish between fantasy/reality at young ages.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
lapazfarm
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 21 2005
Location: Alaska
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6082
|
| Posted: Aug 01 2007 at 10:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Remember, we are homeschoolers. Our role as Mom supersedes our role as teacher. We may teach with Montessori methods, but we can mother however we darn well please! 
__________________
Theresa
us-schooling in beautiful Fairbanks, Alaska.
LaPaz Home Learning
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AndreaG
Forum Pro
Joined: March 25 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Aug 01 2007 at 10:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think that in reality she wasn't that strict- she was just reacting to the popular idea that children couldn't handle real information. I seem to recall reading somewhere that her grandson remembered her reading him fairy tails before age 6!
I don't see it so much as a prohibition against fairy tales and Peter Rabbit, as a suggestion to supply more fact based books for young children. My babies and toddlers have always preferred those sorts of books with real photos (although I get SO tired of reading the captions!) and my preschoolers love books like the "Read and Find Out About Science" series. Young children are at a developmental stage where they are trying to seperate reality from fantasy and I think we do a disservice not to help them in this.
So all that to say- I agree with Montessori on this, but definitely still read Jamberry and Peter Rabbit, and Goldilocks and the Three Bears to my little ones.
__________________
Andrea
GrayFamilyCircus
Read Through the Catechism in a Year- For Moms!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
montessori_lori
Forum Pro
Joined: June 06 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 322
|
| Posted: Aug 01 2007 at 10:40pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I agree with AndreaG - under age six, my kids usually prefer books about real things, esp. with real photos. But we read the classic fictional stories too.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Eleanor
Forum Pro
Joined: June 20 2007
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 12:51am | IP Logged
|
|
|
It's funny that you posted this now, as I was just thinking about the subject earlier today. We were at the library (for the first time in a while  ), and I was having a hard time finding realistic fiction that was suitable for our little ones. Most of the stories were fantasy-based, or else they dealt with "heavy" themes like racism or marital separation. Of the few titles that I felt were appropriate, a lot had those ugly cartoonish illustrations that are so popular these days. After finally coming up with a few lovely books, I was thinking that it might be helpful to start a thread with a list of beautiful, realistic storybooks for preschoolers. (And maybe I'll still do that, unless someone else gets around to it first.  )
As Andrea said, the reason why Maria Montessori generally discouraged fairy tales at the primary level is that young children are still developing the ability to distinguish "real" from "imaginary." They don't usually have a solid grasp of this distinction until age 5 or 6. Until then -- and especially at age 2 or 3 -- if something fantastical is presented to them (trains that talk, dogs that wear clothing, etc.), they'll be inclined to assume that that's how it is in the "real world." The only exception would be if they've already gained a very strong familiarity with the objects or creatures in question -- in that case, they'll instantly recognize that the situation is absurd. (For instance, even a young toddler will laugh at a picture of a woman with a shoe on her head.) But this isn't usually the case with the types of fantasy situations presented in children's books. Most of the time, a very young child is going to take these as fact, while a slightly older child is likely to be confused and unsure as to what to think of them.
My husband and I found this difficult to believe when we first heard about it, so we've had an ongoing "research project" of observing our daughter's responses to these types of stories, and sometimes directly asking her questions about them. Well, let's just say we've been surprised! At 3.5 years old, she's quite sharp when it comes to learning and applying facts about the natural world, but she's still very confused about reality vs. fantasy. Even if she understands our explanations about specific points (e.g., real mice live in holes, eat seeds, and make squeaking noises; they don't talk, wear clothes, or make buttonholes out of cherry-colored twist), it doesn't address the larger situation. This point really hit home for me a few weeks ago, when the two of us were watching a nature documentary, and having an ongoing, detailed conversation about the subject matter... and then she suddenly turned to me, toward the end of the program, and asked, "Are those rabbits real, or pretend?" 
Our children enjoy non-fiction books, but I've also tried to find good fiction that deals with real-life situations, like Shirley Hughes' "Alfie" stories. Since those sorts of books are so few and far between, we also have quite a few stories with animal characters who live and behave (more or less) like ordinary human children: Miffy, Maisy, Paddington Bear, etc. But I'd really prefer to wait until age 5 or so to introduce characters like Peter Rabbit, who have a strange and unpredictable mixture of human and animal characteristics. Same goes for fairy tales, and stories about fantastical creatures like elves and dragons.
Somehow, these intentions were set aside (as with so many other things), with the result that we've recently found ourselves on the Beatrix Potter bandwagon. This was my fault; I discovered the lovely videos, and just couldn't resist sharing them with the children. I think I'm going to have to "misplace" all the books and videos on a high shelf, and substitute some very appealing new books in their place. We already did that, successfully, with Winnie the Pooh, which found its way into our house several months ago. My daughter had become pretty much obsessed with it, to the point of driving us nuts. At that age, she really didn't even understand the stories; I think she was just excited because my husband read them with funny voices, and sang the songs from the Disney movies. Anyway, we told her that she could only have Winnie the Pooh as a special treat on Sundays. She asked for it once, and then forgot about it completely.
I don't think my children will be missing anything if we choose to wait until age 5 or 6 before introducing (or re-introducing) these stories. It's my understanding that most of them were originally written for older children anyway. Of course, if you're having a family story time with multiple ages, it might not be possible to avoid fantasy entirely. In that case, it would just be a matter of balance and emphasis.
Fantasy stories, such as fairy tales and folk tales, are often used in Montessori classrooms at the elementary level. So, it's not about "banning fantasy" -- it's more a question of making sure that the children have the opportunity to learn about the true characteristics of the thing (whether it's a train, a rabbit, or whatever), ideally in a hands-on way, before we start presenting them with fanciful variations on it. When it's considered in that light, it seems to make a lot of sense, even though it's in direct conflict with the "prevailing wisdom" about the needs of young children. In this respect, it's like many other aspects of Montessori. It really is a mind-altering philosophy... and the more I've learned about it, the more radical and beautiful it seems.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Land O' Cotton
Forum Pro
Joined: July 02 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 251
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 5:48am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm going CM with literature for us. We have a basket of what is probably "twaddle", and I let him look at those if he chooses. I also have a basket of "easy readers" that I use to (hopefully) encourage his own free reading. These books, of course, are mostly what CM would consider "twaddle", but it gets him reading, and that's most important right now.
I started off with Five in a Row, and there's some great units for children's books over at homeschoolshare.com. For this year we'll be using some older literature and just see how it goes. It looks like the Thornton Burgess animal stories are really a hit around here. I don't think he really enjoys some of the fairy tales, and I just don't read some of them to him. My rule of thumb is if it sounds a little "off" to me, I don't want it going into my child's mind. KWIM?
I'm doing my best to incorporate Dr. Montessori's theory into our homeschool, but I think for literature CM is what will work best for us. A mix of things is good!
__________________
Vicki
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ambermelody
Forum Newbie
Joined: June 30 2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 6:14am | IP Logged
|
|
|
i was thinking about asking this very question just today too.
how weird?!
i must say we've definitely put the "brakes on" our fantasy reading this year. And I use the term fantasy losely! - Talking Bears etc - I think there is a lot of merit to the Montessori principles in regard to reality/fantasy & I think we've gained a lot by starting to get out LOTS and LOTS (!!) of How/Why/Where books from the library, but we still do need storybooks & it certainly requires a little work to find realistic ones.
So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that we're probably somewhere in the middle - trying to swim a little to the M side of things! And I loved Eleanor's quote:
Eleanor wrote:
| In this respect, it's like many other aspects of Montessori. It really is a mind-altering philosophy... and the more I've learned about it, the more radical and beautiful it seems. |
|
|
Wow. I feel like that too. It is beautiful & awe-inspiring in many ways...
__________________
Amber
Mama to 2 beautiful boys (1 & 3)
Bangalow, Australia
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
mary theresa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Nov 08 2006
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 766
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 6:28am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Eleanor wrote:
It's funny that you posted this now, as I was just thinking about the subject earlier today. We were at the library (for the first time in a while ), and I was having a hard time finding realistic fiction that was suitable for our little ones. Most of the stories were fantasy-based, or else they dealt with "heavy" themes like racism or marital separation. Of the few titles that I felt were appropriate, a lot had those ugly cartoonish illustrations that are so popular these days. After finally coming up with a few lovely books, I was thinking that it might be helpful to start a thread with a list of beautiful, realistic storybooks for preschoolers. (And maybe I'll still do that, unless someone else gets around to it first.
|
|
|
I've been thinking of this too! And I also have a hard time at the library! Makes me feel like just getting my 16 mos old the "fake" stuff just to get her some books!
Thank you so much for your post Eleanor! It was so great to read! I haven't introduced any fantasy and don't plan to (at least what I can help) but I know that resolve will get harder as she gets older.
I wanted to add that I have heard the "only reality" argument used regarding Jesus and Mary and spiritual realities also. These things are REAL. Before age five or six a child could confuse them with things that are not, since they do not "see" them in real life. But if they are surrounded by books/videos etc of only reality, books of Jesus and the saints, etc included, then the firm understanding of the REALness of these people, grace, Jesus' love, etc is more solidly founded.
Does that make sense?
I'm glad this thread was started. And yes, Eleanor, I think you should start that thread about books for preschoolers! 
__________________
Mary Theresa
mother to 3 little girls --March '06, Dec '07 and Jan '10
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
marianne
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 22 2006
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 7:26am | IP Logged
|
|
|
AndreaG wrote:
I think that in reality she wasn't that strict- she was just reacting to the popular idea that children couldn't handle real information. I seem to recall reading somewhere that her grandson remembered her reading him fairy tails before age 6!
I don't see it so much as a prohibition against fairy tales and Peter Rabbit, as a suggestion to supply more fact based books for young children. My babies and toddlers have always preferred those sorts of books with real photos (although I get SO tired of reading the captions!) and my preschoolers love books like the "Read and Find Out About Science" series. Young children are at a developmental stage where they are trying to seperate reality from fantasy and I think we do a disservice not to help them in this.
So all that to say- I agree with Montessori on this, but definitely still read Jamberry and Peter Rabbit, and Goldilocks and the Three Bears to my little ones. |
|
|
Yes - this makes sense. We do also read lots of reality based books. My boys LOVE those big picture books about 100 different kinds of trucks, for example.
__________________
\
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
marianne
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 22 2006
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 7:28am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Eleanor,
Yes, please, start a thread with picture book ideas! That would be wonderful.
__________________
\
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AndreaG
Forum Pro
Joined: March 25 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 9:47am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I've appreciated everyone's thoughts on this, I just wanted to add that, like Marianne said in the original post I was initially skeptical about this element of montessori philosophy, but like Eleanor commented so beautifully I have come to really appreciate it after observing my children and their responses to various types books over the past 8 years. What Lori said about emphasis makes alot of sense and that is the approach we take, as I do have older kids and family read-aloud times.
As far as reading lists I have really liked the Little Saints Preschool curriculum book lists, which are organized by theme. They do include some non-realistic stories like Beatrix Potter, but for the most part they are very good, educational, wholesome, picture books for preschoolers. I bring the list to the library and have it ILL'ed to avoid the pitfalls that Eleanor mentioned with selecting books from the shelves in the children's section.
__________________
Andrea
GrayFamilyCircus
Read Through the Catechism in a Year- For Moms!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CatholicMommy
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2007
Location: Indiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1254
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 10:25am | IP Logged
|
|
|
(my post is a conglomeration of thoughts as I've developed them over the years)
mary theresa wrote:
I wanted to add that I have heard the "only reality" argument used regarding Jesus and Mary and spiritual realities also. These things are REAL. Before age five or six a child could confuse them with things that are not, since they do not "see" them in real life. But if they are surrounded by books/videos etc of only reality, books of Jesus and the saints, etc included, then the firm understanding of the REALness of these people, grace, Jesus' love, etc is more solidly founded.
Does that make sense? |
|
|
This is exactly what I was going to say after reading the initial post, as well as agreement that it's not that Montessori avoids all fantasy and fairy tales, instead she holds off until the child is capable of getting the point of the story, rather than focusing on the realism confusion.
It is so much easier to believe something as fact (ie Christ's life), when you are only surrounded by reality.
Also, I don't think Montessori meant that NO children under age 6 could handle fantastical fiction - just that it didn't have a place in the classroom. Outside of the classroom, in the loving embrace of family reading time, with appropriate exposure and explanations (ie discussing the point of the story before and after), it can certainly have a place which will not disrupt the development of reality.
I have an 8yo tutoring student who is only now realizing the difference between reality (and potential reality) and fantasy (impossible). She is quite confused about the entire matter - and her family just came back into the church and the poor girl can't quite figure out if those Bible 'stories' are real or not. I've been working with her, but it's going to be an uphill struggle. In discussing the matter with her mother, I discovered that some of the top reading and tv choices since the girl was born have included the following (I'm not blaspheming any of them (some are better than others) - only the lack of balance): Franklin, Power Rangers, SpongeBob, Elmo, Dora, Peter Rabbit, etc - basically, every cartoon on Nickelodeon, Disney, some from Cartoon Network, Saturday morning cartoons.... a few "real people" shows thrown in for kicks, which does not help matters actually - when a child is surrounded by mostly non-reality, the little bit of reality is not recognized as such.
Short story for our family: There are plenty of good choices available - so many (when they can be found!) that we just don't have room for them in our house. I have saved one hard-bound version of Peter Rabbit, a hardbound complete set of the original Pooh bear stories, as well as other "classics" like that (we have the entire set of Wizard the Oz books) - but they are to be saved for older ages.
Just a theory of mine, especially as it relates to a lot of the cartoons and odd illustrations of today's choices: the person who developed these choices (wrote, illustrated, etc) I think did them for him or herself - a work of his/her own creation. They were not necessarily developed for the child directly. And in a lot of ways, these adult creations supplant the child's imagination and creativity... A child left with no tv and only 'good' books, will develop an excellent imagination and perhaps come up with some really crazy, off the wall stuff - but it comes from the child, not from someone telling him how it should be.
I don't know how to present dinosaurs to my son - or I haven't until recent months but I've not yet been able to pull anything together to teach him very much about what I want him to learn, other than a small 'toob' of figures. However, he knows about dinosaurs - and he acts out some of their behavior telling me that 'he's a dinosaur' - he didn't get it from tv or anyone telling him how to do it (though he's really intuitive about it!), therefore he is not locked into any particular train of thought that may or may not be the truth. His dinosaurs are animals - they do not talk. One daycare child "made" a dinosaur figure talk and my son let him know that dinosaurs are animals and can't do that. At 3, that's exactly what he needs to know. The other child (age 4) was quite perplexed and insisted that "yes they do!"
Ok, I'll stop typing now - I'm not sure why I'm going on so long, other than avoiding packing!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
montessori_lori
Forum Pro
Joined: June 06 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 322
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 10:53am | IP Logged
|
|
|
One thing we did was talk a lot about the difference between fantasy and reality pretty early on. My son, at 6, has a really good grasp of the difference between the two. When I was teaching, I knew kids who were 9-10 years old who still believed in Santa. I found that kind of strange and I knew I didn't want that for my kids.
Great point about Bible stories - it's wonderful to be able to reassure kids that those are very real!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
marianne
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 22 2006
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 11:52am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Wow - you all are so thoughtful about everything you do, and I really appreciate the discussion. I can certainly follow this train of thought and I can see how adults might think this could be confusing to some kids. However, all of my children have been positively immersed in fantasy storybooks (as well as reality based books) since they were born, and I can assure you that none of them think that rabbits, bears, dinosaurs, ect. can talk or wear clothes or behave like people. I just double checked to be sure by asking my 4 and 2yos some of those questions to them as they passed through the room. When reading Puff the Magic Dragon, I have pointed out that dragons are pretend. They've asked questions like "Are pirates real or 'tend? Are sharks real or 'tend?" We teach them pretend vs. real all the time, and while we live and also have fun in reality, pretend is usually pretty fun, too. Not only do we teach it, but they experience reality 23 hours out of a day, so they are learning about reality on their own, and the maybe one hour of storytime that they get a day does not cause them to believe that there is a dragon dressed up as a pirate somewhere out there, although it's fun to *imagine* that. The fact that in 4 years they have never seen a real rabbit talk far outweighs their experiences of being read to about Peter Rabbit.
Not trying to be disagreeable here, just having a hard time swallowing this idea. Will keep pondering, though...
__________________
\
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
earthmaven
Forum Pro
Joined: June 19 2007
Location: Illinois
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 12:06pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Maybe I'm veering off in a different direction that should have its own thread, but his has got me thinking of some of the books we've loved the most around here. There are definitely some books with a message that makes them keepers, whether they "fit" in the imaginary or real camps. And like Marianne, neither of my children (4 and 7) have ever had the slightest difficulty knowing the difference! There are wonders to be gained from all types of literature if it's well written, beautifully illustrated, and speaks to us in a way that we feel matters.
Two that come to mind here are Bill Peet's Wump World and Dr. Seuss's The Lorax. Those books, to me, send a message of environmental sustainability and responsibility to even very young children in a way that is highly accessible and truly beautiful.
Another favourite is the James Herriot Treasury for Children depicting his experiences as a Yorkshire vet in the 1930s to the 1960s. These stories of animals and the farmers who work with them have inspired many wonderful talks about history, nature, culture, food..you name it!
Just a couple of thoughts...
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Meredith
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 08 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2355
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 4:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh man, I'm not sure HOW I could have missed this thread yesterday dear ones, so sorry I am going to chew on his a bit before I respond, as I have QUITE a bit to say about living books In the meantime, there is already an entire list dedicated to Picture Books here in thein Picture Book Disvoceries Forum!
I'll pop back in here a little later with some thoughts, I know you're all dying to hear what I have to say 
__________________
Meredith
Mom of 4 Sweeties
Sweetness and Light
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Eleanor
Forum Pro
Joined: June 20 2007
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 8:29pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Okay, I've started a thread in the Picture Book forum, where we can share our realistic storybook discoveries.
Looking forward to Meredith's post. With such a tantalizing sneak preview, maybe I should make some popcorn.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 8:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I don't want to mess up Eleanor's post in Picture Book Discoveries, so I'm adding a comment here.
Beatrix Potter has been mentioned several times as an example of fiction that MM might not approved.
I recently finished reading The Tale of Beatrix Potter by Margaret Lane. (Notice the publisher is Frederick Warne Publishers, the same company that first published her books, and she was engaged to Norman Warne.)
Anyway, this biography made the point that the appeal of Beatrix Potter was her reality in her drawings. Yes, animals can't talk, but her drawings are very accurate of nature, and most of them depict real places and things in her life (furniture, geography, houses). And even though the animals mimic some human characteristics, their actions are still written in keeping with their animal natures.
I found that point fascinating, and I was eager to reread her books again looking at it from this angle.
It's a rambling and far-reaching point, but in my mind I would think that Potter's books would be acceptable for young ones in this light. There is no magic or unrealistic events. Perhaps I'm stretching it a bit too far... 
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to  & ds1  '03 & ds2  '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Meredith
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 08 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2355
|
| Posted: Aug 02 2007 at 8:50pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Eleanor wrote:
| Looking forward to Meredith's post. With such a tantalizing sneak preview, maybe I should make some popcorn. |
|
|
Yeah, well, you'll have to be patient, as I was up all night with a toddler I'm trying to wean befroe I leave for the Conference so I'm only going on about 3 hours sleep 
I'll try and be somewhat eloquent tomorrow for ya'll !! While you're waiting, pull out a copy of Go to Sleep Daisy by Jane Simmons for your littlest ones!
Blessings and Good night!
__________________
Meredith
Mom of 4 Sweeties
Sweetness and Light
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Nurturing the Years of Wonder
Topic: How do y'all feel about children's lit
