6. Brain Development and Montessori Theory - The Links
by Helen Prochazka, PhD
Introduction
This is the decade of the brain, and recent technological advances, particularly computer-based brain imaging techniques, have been pushing back the frontiers of knowledge about the structure, development and workings of the human brain. These discoveries have had a high media profile, and the starting point for this article was a growing awareness that much of what was being reported seemed to come as no surprise to Montessori practitioners.
To investigate why this should be so I revisited Montessori's thinking on the brain in the light of current research. The models described below, I venture to suggest, have implications for our work with children in the early years.
I would like to make clear that the brain is not my field of expertise, and I am not in a position to evaluate the research in question. All I have attempted to do in this article is to indicate how some recent discoveries seem to link with the Montessori understanding of the processes of mental development, and at this point I should like briefly to set out a historical context for the remarks which follow.
Maria Montessori lived from 1870 to 1952, and was an educationist, rather than a psychologist. She approached her work from a strong scientific background of clinical observation gained from her medical studies and subsequent academic career in mental health. She applied her observational skills to the children she was working with, and from what she observed she gradually elaborated her theories of child development and education which she supported with reference to the research of the day. Montessori was first and foremost a practitioner, engaged in what today we would call 'active research'. Her theories followed on from her observations.
Montessori's structural model
The structural model of brain development elaborated by Maria Montessori was based on a rooted conviction that, starting from the moment of birth, the infant is hard at work, actively constructing the very substance of his psyche. By 'psyche' she meant everything pertaining to the child that was non-physical: cognitive abilities, personality, character, emotions, spirituality and social tendencies.
She considered that the child was possessed of 'a true constructive energy, a dynamic power' and speaks of the child undertaking 'an impressive work of inner formation' (1988). Her whole approach to her work was underpinned by the belief that the most important period of life is not the age of university studies, but '...the period from birth to the age of six. For that is the time when man's intelligence itself, his greatest implement, is being formed. But not only his intelligence, the full totality of his psychic powers.' (1988:21)
Her observations convinced her that the child started from nothing and created: 'We are not dealing with something that develops, but with a fact of formation, something non-existent that has to be produced, starting from nothing...' (1988:21) but she also emphasised that this process of construction for the first three years of life was essentially a hidden one, continuing predominantly unobserved and unobservable by adults. She saw this, coupled with the understanding that the child's psyche is completely unlike that of the adult, as the key to what she termed 'the secret of childhood.'
The analogy she devised to explain her conception of how the child's psyche develops was the 'spiritual embryo', a vivid image which encompasses the idea of inexorability, miraculous growth and sudden emergence, as if newly born, into a form comprehensible to adults. Just as the physical embryo develops unseen in the womb, to appear fully formed at birth, Maria Montessori saw the emerging psychological traits of the child as the embryonic form of the spirit, born ready for future development in an adult-orientated and adult-directed world at around three. She felt that the period before the age of three was inaccessible to adults to safeguard the integrity of the structural process: 'He has the chance to build up a complete psychic structure before the intelligence of grownups can reach his spirit and produce changes in it.' (1988:6)
The emphasis placed by Montessori on construction is borne out by recent discoveries about the workings of the brain. We now know that the many millions of neurons, or nerve cells in the brain, possibly as many as ten billion, function together, to transmit, or inhibit nerve impulses. The main channels for the firing of the impulses are the axons, sheathed in myelin, like long, insulation-covered wires. Also extending from each cell are varying numbers of dendrites, branched like trees, in arrangements that may be fairly simple, or in great profusion. Through its dendrites the neuron receives messages from sense organs, or from other neurons, combines and processes the information, and responds by either increasing or decreasing the pulses of electricity it passes down the axon.
The electrical impulses cause a flow of chemicals to cross the gap at the end of the axon to the next neuron, so passing a message on. The gaps between the axons and dendrites of different neurons, the synapses, appear to function like valves controlling the message flow, sifting, sorting and combining as part of the tissue of communication pathways. The numbers are mind-boggling some neurons may have as many as 20,000 synapses on their dendrites. A small one might only have 2,000.
The neurons do not act individually, but in concert with thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of others, together either activating, or inhibiting the transmission of the electrical and chemical impulses. The process of transmitting impulses has been likened to the action of waves, a simile which allows the description of impulses that flow off at a tangent, waves that divide, fleetingly joining other waves to create incredibly complex, possibly abortive, patterns before subsiding. Not surprisingly, fifty years ago the nearest Montessori came to describing this amazingly complex process was to say 'a kind of mental chemistry goes on within him.' (1988:24)
What is particularly interesting, however, for the present discussion, is to consider the processes by which the connections between the cells, through the synapses, are formed. It is now known that these pathways are established in response to stimuli, and strengthened through repetition.
Studies of brain growth reveal spurts of growth at different stages of development. The first short spurt of very rapid growth is in the womb, between 12 and 18 weeks. This is when the neurons multiply to their adult number when the baby is probably least influenced by external factors. The responses of the foetal brain to changes in sound, light and touch were uncharted in Montessori's day, but today we know that the brain is active before birth.
At birth the brain comprises about 14 percent of the baby's total body weight, compared with 2 percent in the adult, but this equates to twenty five percent of its adult weight. The major growth spurt occurs between the 6th month of pregnancy and the age of 2, evidenced by the fact that at 6 months the brain is about fifty percent of its adult weight, and by two and a half, seventy five percent. Growth is still very swift until around five years when it has reached about 90 percent of its adult weight in comparison with a body weight of about half its adult value. Brain growth continues steadily, if less fast, until the age of about 10, when it is about ninety five percent of its final adult weight.
During the major growth spurt in the first two years the neurons are developing their dendrites, their synaptic connections, and the myelin sheaths of the nerve fibres, the axons, without which impulses cannot be conducted.
The myelinisation process of the part of the brain controlling physical movement, the motor cortex, is something which begins to happen a few months after birth. The motor nerve fibres are not able to conduct impulses until their myelin sheaths are in place, and so a full range of movement is not possible. This delay is seen as essential for survival, to enable the infant to acquire a working perception of his world before he begins to be mobile in it. Aware of this physiological process Montessori asserted: '...there are psychic patterns of behaviour which have to be laid down before he begins to move. Thus the starting point of infant mobility is not motor, but mental.' (1988:66)
Montessori's process model
Montessori's process model is based on the idea that a child between the ages of birth and six has what she termed an 'absorbent mind'. To explain this she used the analogy of a sponge, and proposed a model of learning whereby the child absorbed impressions from the environment surrounding him. This was by no means passive absorption, however. Her model is predicated on a complex interrelationship between the child's emergent psyche, the spur to learning presented by stimuli from the environment, and the challenge the child instinctively sets himself in order to acquire the learning. This is what we might term, on a conscious level, 'finding the problem'. It is precisely this idea of finding the problem that has been instrumental over the last 25 years in extending definitions of intelligence. (Hatch and Gardener, 1996:90).
In this process of absorbing impressions the elan vital, the vital urge or life force, plays a key role. This is an overpowering force which drives the human being from the moment of conception to develop and grow, ensuring he or she is in learning mode. This is the force which activates the brain's potentialities, termed by Montessori 'nebulae' or clouds, an image she drew from astronomy to convey her conception of as yet formless swirling masses, representing the infinite potential of the forming mind.
Perhaps we can equate her nebulae to the neural architectures that contemporary cognitive neuroscience sees the genes providing for the brain. It is not yet fully understood how the genes affect the definition of the functional areas of the brain, and although these are pre-ordained, the very plastic nature of the brain for the first few years of life means that the functional areas can be reconfigured. The human genome is underspecified in terms of allocating function, but it seems as though different types of neural architectures are suited for different tasks, with propensities to be different specialists.
In the Montessori model, because the child's brain is actively receptive to ever present stimuli from the environment, the clouds of potentialities, the propensities, are switched on to learning mode by the life force. The child is thus impelled to interact with the environment and sets about mastering it and incarnating it. '...the things he sees are not just remembered; they form part of his soul.' (1988:56)
Speaking of the nervous system as the 'liaison' between the inner needs of the body and the external environment, Sillick emphasises that it is 'not a simple stimulus-response affair. It is a constant two-way communication between the body and the external world, from inner to outer and back to the inner world... The information transaction between the organism and its environment, as it increases quantitatively and qualitatively, results in the capacity for learning.' (1996:84)
But why should the child respond to one particular stimulus rather than another? Here we need to focus on the idea of the individual being predisposed to receive the stimulus and act upon it, being pre-programmed, as if the child's hard disk is already configured to respond to a particular stimulus at a particular time. For example, research has shown that within 30 minutes of birth a baby can distinguish between the phonemes [b] and [p], an ability that lasts until the age of about a year,and plays a key role in language acquisition. It is also the case that if the same stimulus appears at a different time, one that is not optimal for learning, it will not trigger such intensity of response, and then the learning that takes place will be less efficient, less focused, less effective.
We are talking here of the 'critical periods', 'windows of opportunity' for optimal learning that are now identified by cognitive neuroscientists. Ninety years ago Maria Montessori described them as 'sensitive periods' and observed their effects, as the children in her care, predisposed to learn, armed with nebulous potentialities, and highly sensitive to stimuli in the environment displayed fixed determination to engage in an activity, or pursue an interest to the point of adult exasperation and lack of patience.
For Montessori these sensitivities were the key to understanding how the child's mind is formed. She was quite clear that 'it is not the mind itself that these sensitivities create, but its organs' (1988:47) and that this form of sensitivity was so intense as to lead the child to perform a specific series of actions over and over again in concerted focus.
This phenomenon can be explained now that the function of repetition in brain development is acknowledged as the means whereby connections established and used become significantly strengthened. If they are not, they are lost. The sensitive periods of the Montessori model are passed through in order. Each sensitivity is specifically focused and disappears once the relevant mental development has occurred. Sometimes they overlap, and they vary in length according to the individual child. They are universal. They occur in all children, and the external manifestations are indicative of the great internal development taking place unseen. 'It is these 'inner sensitivities', the sensitive periods, which enable the absorbent mind to construct itself.' (Montessori, 1989:61)
That the construction of the mind is an unconscious process is obvious when we contrast the outward indications of the workings of the child's mind with those of the adult's. Adults bring to bear attention, will power and intelligence to their activities. The infant has not yet developed his intelligence, has a very limited attention span compared with a grown-up, and has no will-power as yet. The inescapable conclusion is that the mind of a child under three is completely different from that of an adult. This led Maria Montessori to conclude that: 'a psychic functioning different from that of the conscious mind can exist in the unconscious.' (1989:61)
At what point does the unconscious mind become conscious? According to Susan Greenfield 'the more complex the brain, the greater the consciousness'. The three properties inherent in Greenfield's definition of consciousness help us to explain the change. If consciousness does indeed result from concerted activity by neurons located in different areas of the brain in response to some stimulus, and if it is the sum of the unspecialised neurons working together, the degree of consciousness will depend on how many neurons are entrained around some kind of epicentre (1998:214). Her stone in the puddle image helps us to visualise the ripples of neurons extending outwards from the epicentre it represents.
But what does she mean by 'epicentre'? Again we come back to neuronal connections in the brain, because Greenfield sees the epicentres as 'circuits of neurons' that refer to the outside world, neurons where connections have already been established that give great flexibility and versatility to moments of consciousness. Giving childhood as an example of small neuronal assemblies because of limited connections leads her to suggest that 'less mature brains are much more dominated by whatever epicentre is triggered from the outside', and leads her to conclude, mirroring Montessori, 'the immature brain in the first year of life, and to a certain extent in the further 9 years, is very different from our adult waking brains.' (1998:222).
Profiling the type of consciousness that would be characteristic of a small child Greenfield speaks of 'raw phenomenal consciousness ...an absorbing awareness of the outside world... One would not have a lot of 'internal resources' of reflection and memories and thoughts.' (1998:225)
The change from 'unconscious' to 'conscious' is a gradual process happening as the child grows and brain connections are made, but accumulated observation by Montessorians over many years, and in all parts of the world, identifies a marked, often very sudden transition from one phase of mental development and thinking process to another at around the age of three years. It is as if all the parts of a symphony practised separately until now suddenly come together, and a thinking person emerges.
It seems to us that the key to this change is to do with the development of a reliable memory. Most adults have very few recollections pre-dating their third birthday, but can remember clearly incidents in their lives from 3 onwards, another sign that there has been a change in the psychological processes around this time. With a more effective memory it becomes possible to sort and categorise information. It seems that this is the focus that the thinking of three year olds takes, as they set about eliciting huge quantities of information and language from adults in response to their endless 'Why?' questions.
Even though the thinking processes are becoming conscious the critical, or sensitive periods still continue, and the stimuli from the environment are still the trigger. What kind of stimuli are we talking about? They seem to be multi-sensory, and probably strike the child in the same way as, for example, if you begin to think of buying a particular model of new car, you suddenly see them everywhere, or if you become interested in Thai cuisine, in the supermarket you are drawn to shelves of ingredients that you never even noticed previously.
For the last several years Montessori educators have been examining their approach in the light of Howard Gardener's theory of multiple intelligences. He defines intelligence as 'uncommitted neurobiological potentials for processing particular kinds of information' (in Wharburton, 1999:220). Many of his findings resonate with what Montessorians know from observation, although an obstacle to complete congruence of ideas lies in the Montessori conviction that the unity of the personality is paramount, that all aspects of the child's psyche combine to form a whole self, a soul, that is balanced and harmonious, at one with all aspects of the environment surrounding it, and developing and growing to realise its full potential in all areas.
It is important, therefore, that we extend Montessori understanding of how children's minds work by superimposing Gardener's ideas on our own, to create a working overlay for closer examination of key aspects of children's intelligence focused on by Maria Montessori. I propose to touch briefly on three of these, namely the mathematical mind, the hand as the instrument of the mind, and the social embryo.
Montessori's observations led her to put forward the view that small children have 'a mathematical mind', a term she adopted from the French philosopher Pascal (1988:169). She recorded the reactions of a 4 week old baby seeing his father and his uncle together for the first time. He had seen them both separately on previous occasions, but was startled and unsettled by seeing them together for the first time. They reassured him by separating, and standing apart from each other. The baby kept looking from one to the other seemingly until he was secure in his understanding of the fact that there were two men, and not just the one he had previously encountered (1966:61-62). Montessori cited this as an example of the beginnings of reasoning, but in the light of recent research into infant numerosity it can equally well be attributed to 'dishabituation', or stirring of interest by novelty. (Butterworth 1999:112-116).
Butterworth and his colleagues have demonstrated the existence of the mathematical brain, and so, armed with this definitive understanding, as educators we can now be more confident in interpreting our observations of children. But to look only for very early awareness of number is, I think, too limiting. And this is where Gardener's definition of logical / mathematical intelligence is one to consider closely (Hatch and Gardener, 1996), allied as it is to Montessori's comment that precision itself seemed to hold the children's interest, and that order and precision were the keys to spontaneous work (1988:169).
Let's consider next Montessori's adage 'the hands are the instruments of man's intelligence'. Traditionally this has been taken to mean that through the progressive refinement of the movements of the hand learning took place. In the light of what we now know about how the brain is formed this becomes infinitely more significant, because of the brain being actually constructed through movement. The great importance that the hand plays in mental development and learning is borne out by the much larger areas of the motor cortex concerned with manual dexterity that can now be shown by brain imaging techniques. Montessori insisted on the need to educate the functioning of the hand, to develop its movement, and on a larger scale to guard against separating body from mind in the curriculum for fear of breaking 'the continuity that should reign between them' (1988:130). She identified a sensitive period for movement lasting from birth to 6, critical for the development of the mind, because, to quote Sillick, 'the child's movement of his or her whole body prepares the neural pathways for cognitive development, language acquisition and creative expression...' (1996:85). Again this resonates with Gardener's visual / spatial awareness, and bodily kinesthetic intelligences. (Hatch and Gardener, 1996)
The notion of the 'social embryo', an analogy similar to the spiritual embryo already described, summarises the Montessori view of the child's social development and his growing awareness of self. Again we are dealing with an individual in the process of growing and maturing towards adult norms of behaviour. Again development is directly bound to processes of construction in the mind.
In his reflections on the development of consciousness, and the neurobiological processes involved, Singer concludes that one's awareness of self arises only through the interaction of one's own brain with the brains of others. He says, 'the experience of one's own individuality, the ability to experience oneself as an autonomous individual with subjective feelings is to be seen as the result of social interactions, and hence of cultural evolution' (1998:242).
Human interaction with the baby starts from birth, and the neural mechanisms for self-awareness are likely to be developed before the brain is mature enough to remember and recall anything of this process. Furthermore, the process is unrepeatable because as it happens it directly influences the way the processing structures of the brain develop. Singer concludes that 'the specific human connotations of consciousness are likely to be the product of cultural evolution', and suggests that the subjective mental aspects of consciousness are the result of a social learning process (1998:242). This thinking echoes Montessori's conviction that '...there exists in this inert being a global power, a 'human creative essence' which drives him to form a man of his time, a man of his civilisation'. She signposted the way for Singer and others when she asserted that this was a 'progress unaided by any hereditary transmission of acquired characteristics.' (1988:53)
At birth the infant is totally dependent on his parents to meet all his needs, whereas by six he has attained a degree of functional independence and is increasingly aware of himself as a social individual. We need to remember that the degree of social autonomy children can aspire to is culturally conditioned. It depends where and when they are born as to where and when, and the degree to which they become able to reconcile their needs as individuals with their responsibilities as members of society. The first years of life are the formative ones in this regard, when the child soaks up information about the culture and social norms prevalent in the society in which he lives. He is very much of his place and time, as Montessori emphasised.
The implications for education
Given that Montessori's observations, and the models developed from them can now be substantiated in this way, it seems there is merit in reevaluating the educational approach that she developed in response to what she observed, and in particular its theoretical underpinnings.
The concept of the prepared environment is fundamental. Early years educators all recognise the significance of quality settings for effective early learning. Montessori practitioners take this further. They aim to perfect a learning environment that will meet the needs of all children, as individuals, regardless of the stage of learning they are at. The environment must 'call' to the children, it must actively engage their interest, it must be accessible to them, fresh, stimulating, clearly seen, uncluttered and, above all beautiful, for it appeals to the innermost depths of the developing soul. The environment provides the stimulus that is seized on by those nebulous potentialities for learning.
Crucially the child has to be free within the environment, free from time constraints, free from pressure to learn, free from competition. Each individual must be free to choose whatever interests him, to do with it as his inspiration directs, and for as long or as short a time as he instinctively feels is necessary.
The life of the small child, particularly his intellectual life, has an ebbing and flowing pace that does not harmonise well with the hectic lives of today's parents. Unconsciously driven by his learning urge the child has no concept of appropriate time and place. He is impelled to reach out and explore all the manifestly exciting and fascinating aspects of his environment without conscious thought. His whims are not rational, in an adult understanding of the term. They are clues to the current sensitive period and need to be understood and examined as such. And it is important to understand that he is soaking up all aspects of his environment, not just the positive learning experiences carefully arranged for him, but everything around him: language, behaviour, attitudes, prejudices. He is enthused, enamoured of, addicted to his environment. He loves what he finds there, and however humble and seemingly insignificant his interests and preoccupations, they are the very matter of his mind through his activity in the environment he is building his intellect, his emotions, his personality. Montessori summarised the process: 'The immense influence that education can exert through children has the environment for its instrument, for the child absorbs his environment, takes everything from it, and incarnates it in himself.' (1988:61)
People are a key part of this environment, and for the social embryo to develop fully the infant needs to be a valued part of the social scene. Research shows how her language develops best when she is surrounded by adults communicating with each other, and with her, from the earliest days of life. As an active observer privy to the everyday rituals of living she soaks up the culture of the time and place that is her own, and the adults in the environment can enrich her experiences by being with her. There is no need to do way out and costly things, nor overly 'educational' or 'fun' things. As adults we need 'to be there for her', or more accurately, 'with her', sharing her small experiences rather than trying to inflict our own on her. In the same way that going for a walk with a child should not mean dragging her along at the brisk pace of our adult legs to get to a certain place by a certain time, but rather covering a unspecified distance in an unspecified length of time at the child's pace and in response to her interests, on the social front the same is true. Because socially she is in embryonic form until she is about 6 and because her emergent skills and abilities here are still far from those expected by the adult, more than anything she needs to proceed at her own pace. And more than anything, as adults, we need to be sure that we are not putting obstacles in her way.
The first six years of life are often an obstacle course with major hurdles placed in the way by well-intentioned adults. Among these we can list pressure to achieve ('He knows his alphabet and can count'), pressure to act in a socially acceptable way ('Share your toys!'), to be quick ('Come on, hurry up!'), to be dragged away from what actively interests him... to have things done for him that he is well able to do for himself... It is likely that such pressures create stress in the small child. The stress hormone cortisol kills brain cells. The adults in the environment need to observe the child, so as to be able to meet his needs, to give support where necessary, but mostly to stand back to let him get to grips with his environment by himself, on his own terms, in safety and security. Montessori practice values very highly the skill of 'active observation, the ability to be there, involved with the children as a sympathetic facilitator, as part of the environment, but not interrupting or diverting the flow of activity. Flow, a psychological state identified by Csikszentmihalyi, is characterised by Goleman as representing 'perhaps the ultimate in harnessing the emotions in the service of performance and learning... it is intrinsically rewarding... a state in which people become utterly absorbed in what they are doing... their awareness merged with their actions' (1996:90-91).
This concept is specially familiar to Montessorians who are continually on the look-out for this phenomenon, because it is a sign that all the aspects of the child's personality and psyche are fusing, that he has discovered the capacity for concentration on purposive and intentioned activity, and we can see when this happens that it refreshes his soul.
Montessori repeatedly spoke of the education of movement, and the connection between movement and brain development is now well-established. Everything in the environment should encourage different kinds of independent movement. All the activities to be freely chosen by the children should be selected for the environment because of the motor activity they encourage. And always there should be the opportunity to repeat... as often as the child desires.
And yet, how often do we interrupt a small child, considering his activity inferior in importance to our own? Each time an adult says, 'We can't wait here all day. You'll have to stop now. You can do it another time' the child's brain development is being obstructed, diminished. As educators we should be specially sensitive to this and strive consciously to follow Montessori's example of never interrupting a child who is experiencing 'flow'.
Helen Prochazka was born in Glasgow, Scotland. She has a PhD in Russian, a PGCE in post-compulsory education and training, and both foundation and advanced Montessori Diplomas. She is also an NVQ assessor for Early Years Care and Education awards.
Combining a research background in mediaeval Russian with a variety of teaching experiences in the UK and the Middle East, Helen first became involved in the early years when teaching in the English-medium kindergarten of an Arabic school. Introduced by a colleague to the educational ideas of Montessori she embarked on training, and was eventually appointed Director of Studies for the St Nicholas Montessori Training Centre. Now, as a partner of the Montessori Partnership she is involved setting up and quality-assuring Montessori teacher training programmes, she co-owns two Montessori nurseries, one of which she manages directly, and she is currently the Chairman of the national umbrella body for Montessori, Montessori Education UK. She writes on Montessori and the early years.
Contact:
1 Brooklyn Close, Otterbourne,
Winchester SO21 2EF
Tel/fax: 01962 715675
E-mail: HYPH(at)aol.com
References
Butterworth, B. 1999, The Mathematical Brain, Macmillan.
Goleman, D. 1996, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, Bloomsbury.
Greenfield, S. 1998, 'How Might the Brain Generate Consciousness?' in Rose, S. (ed), From Brains to Consciousness? Essays on the New Science of the Mind, Allen Lane Penguin pp. 210-227.
Hatch, T. & Gardener, H. 1996, 'If Binet Had Looked beyond the Classroom', The NAMTA Journal, Vol. 21, No 2, pp. 5-28.
Montessori, M. 1988, The Absorbent Mind, Clio Press, Oxford.
Montessori, M. 1989, The Formation of Man, Clio Press, Oxford.
Montessori, M. 1972, The Secret of Childhood, Ballantine, New York.
Sillick, A. 1996, 'Movement, Music and Learning: the Musical and Bodily/Kinesthetic Intelligences', The NAMTA Journal, Vol. 21, No 2, pp. 81-96.
Singer, W. 1998, 'Consciousness from a Neurobiological Perspective', in Rose, S. (ed), From Brains to Consciousness? Essays on the New Science of the Mind, Allen Lane Penguin pp. 228-245
Wharburton, E. 1999, 'Multiple Intelligences: Past, Present, Future', The NAMTA Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 209-223.