Maria Montessori

By Jessica Weiss

Maria Montessori is known for developing a style of education that prioritizes child agency, sensory materials, and respect for individual developmental paces. It is not widely known, however, that her method was inspired by her work with children that were labelled as “idiots” or “mentally defective.” Montessori’s observational and clinical approach began in Roman asylums and a training institute for teachers of children with developmental disabilities. This work provided her with the materials and implicit drive for recognizing the capabilities of those with disabilities [1][2]. 

Born in 1870, Montessori became one of Italy’s first female physicians, volunteering in psychiatric and pediatric clinics in Rome. She worked with institutionalized children with a wide range of sensory needs [1]. These experiences prompted her to study the 19th-century French special-education scholars Jean-Marc Itard and Edouard Seguin, whose techniques for working with developmentally disabled children were directly absorbed into the Montessori curriculum [2]. Montessori also directed the Orthophrenic School where she learned that by systematically observing children’s spontaneous activities and then designing activities that matched those interests, measurable developmental improvements could be documented [3]. These early career experiences shaped the foundation of her later pedagogy.

Montessori’s “scientific pedagogy” approach entails close observation, controlled materials, and the cultivation of autonomy and concentration [1][2]. These methods treated children with cognitive and sensory impairments as individuals whose capacities could be graded through sensorial engagement rather than discipline and quiet obedience. This meant adapting tasks to unique motor and perceptual levels by using tactile letters, graded manipulatives, and routines that encouraged independence in daily life. Montessori’s techniques laid the foundation for person-centered practices in later special education [4]. Ultimately, Montessori challenged prior institutional assumptions that certain children were inherently incapable. While most institutions relied on isolation, Montessori emphasized dignity [1][3].

Reports from Montessori’s early Roman clinics documented notable outcomes. Some children, who were previously only considered for custodial care, passed state examinations and became literate after individualized sensorial work [1][3]. These successes confirm Montessori’s claim that properly arranged environments and respect for developmental processes could evoke real cognitive and social change. Reviews and research on the Montessori method has found overall positive effects on executive function, social skills, and engagement in children with sensory-processing differences or intellectual delays [4][6].

While Montessori’s clinical and classroom ideology can be viewed as an early form of disability advocacy, critics have identified key issues. Some researchers argue that pedagogical practices can carry disciplinary power, too. By emphasizing repetitive practice and normalized motor routines, the Montessori method risks imposing new forms of behavioral conformity [3][5]. Some also argue that Montessori herself is among a lineage of special-education reformers whose practices sometimes blend independence with normative concepts of improvement. Moreover, the global institutionalization of Montessori schools has produced elitism and unequal access. While her methods began in poor urban neighborhoods, Montessori’s clinical schools later became associated with private schooling, thus restricting their disability-affirming care potential in locations where resources are limited [5]. 

Although contested, there is no doubt that Montessori’s legacy has had some positive effect on disability advocacy. Firstly, modern classroom studies and programs suggest that Montessori techniques can help students reach developmental goals when they are combined with more contemporary disability-affirming approaches [6]. Second, Montessori’s insistence on individually curated environments align with the philosophical stances of disability advocacy which foreground opportunity and participation over deficit [2][4]. However, the Montessori method relies on adequate teacher training, materials, and policy to ensure that practices can be reached beyond the more privileged [5][6].

Montessori’s early clinical work with children labeled as “defective” encouraged her to create a pedagogical system that reframed society’s assumptions about the education of children with disabilities. Her “scientific pedagogy” combined rigorous observation with material-based learning, influencing modern special education care. At the same time, historical critiques acknowledge that progressive techniques can be exclusionary in practice. Today, scholars believe that the Montessori method is both a resource and a challenge. While it offers concrete methods to support inclusion, it also requires normalization and accessibility. Ultimately, Montessori’s emancipatory approach for education, while it has logistical drawbacks, creates a framework for disability advocacy that highlights individual rights, agency, and equity.

Bibliography

[1] Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori Method: Scientific Pedagogy as Applied to Child Education in “The Children’s Houses” (A. E. George, Trans.). New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company.

[2] Pesci, F. (2022). “Maria Montessori’s training in Rome: Anthropological studies and aspirations for social reform.” Educació i Història, 42, 167-188.https://raco.cat/index.php/EducacioHistoria/article/view/412217

[3] Verstraete, P. (2017). “Silence or the sound of limpid water: Disability, power, and the educationalisation of silence.” Paedagogica Historica, 53(5), 491-505.  https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00309230.2017.1296475

[4] Marshall, C. (2017). “Montessori education: A review of the evidence base.” npj Science of Learning, 2, 11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6161506/

[5] Long, T. (2022). “Children with Disabilities Attending Montessori Programs in the United States.” Journal of Montessori Research, 8(2), 43-59. https://journals.ku.edu/montessoriresearch/article/view/16407

[6] Courtier, P., et al. (2021). “Effects of an Adapted Montessori Curriculum on Academic and Executive Function Outcomes.” Child Development, 92(6), 2310-2324. https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cdev.13575