More on Motivation and Montessori

Update on my earlier post which mentioned Montessori:

Kim at Starry Sky Ranch wrote a post on Use of Fantasy and Imagination in Montessori Kids. It gets below the "convention" I was talking about to the principles behind the idea. This is very useful. She also sent this link: Normalization and Deviations which is the clearest description I have read yet about normalization (I was googling this term for quite a while last year and couldn't get a handle on exactly what the term meant).

If I am understanding correctly the gist of the articles I read, fantasy is considered a deviation (also known as a "defense") caused by circumstances which marginalize the child.... make his work and mental development rather irrelevant to the life going on around him. So some of the things we consider "normal" like whining and disobedience and fantasy play and watching TV, are actually aberrations. This is not to be blamed on the child or punished; things like this would further marginalize and alienate the child (or so I understand it). Rather, it is looked on rather like I might look upon something like Aidan's original fear of food.... something that we need to address, but in a whole environment which helps him kick into gear his own natural healthy desire for independent nourishment.

This reminds me a bit of some of what Jean Liedloff writes about in the Continuum Concept. Except that she believes that engagement in a working home life is the solution, rather than a prepared environment for children.

I guess this got a bit far from freedom and responsibility in some ways. In other ways, perhaps it goes further into the heart of the whole thing.

Kim says:

Duboyvoy makes a clear distinction between fantasy and imagination as well, a distinction which is critical to the argument and is often blurred among adults today. Imagination is properly defined as Willa did when she says that "..investing of objects with imaginary significance is a rudimentary use of symbolism which is a wonderful human capacity". Dubovoy and other Montessorians would likely concur, though they would tend to believe that this capacity is best developed by ample reality based experiences in the first plane (ages 0-6). This is in line with Sayer's and other classical educators who consider the early years to be a time of concrete learning followed by the abilty to grasp more abstract thought.

The way I understand Montessori thought, the "ample reality based experiences" Kim describes include a strong element of volition -- of choice and self-direction. From the article Kim sent to me, Montessori said:

The first characteristic of the process of normalization is love of work. Love of work includes the ability to choose work freely and to find serenity and joy in work.

I have noticed how important volition is in fostering motivation, many times. I have sometimes wondered if what Montessori calls normalization is anything like what Mihaly Csikszentmihaly has called "Flow".

"How to live life as a work of art, rather than as a chaotic response to external events..."

Why then is it that most people find it "too difficult" to organize themselves towards more satisfying activities, but rather pursue apathetic ones like watching TV?

There is a clear need to overcome the initial resistance to do other than apathetic activities (those that don't need initiating by the person).

Still no conclusions -- but one more note -- Aquinas says that "the human mind takes ideas from the signs that our senses perceive. It then uses these to produce knowledge in itself. For signs are not the immediate cause of knowledge, but the mind moving from principles to conclusions". I think that this is one statement of the classical ideas of early development that Kim mentioned. An early focus on "signs" would build up a lot of ability to build on these concrete experiences later on in life, and also a sense of mastery and confidence and order.

Hmm, lots to think about.