SOLO Montessori?

Peter Cresswell's picture
Submitted by Peter Cresswell on Sun, 2006-09-03 03:41

[NB: I've begun this thread to remove this particular topic from the more concrete dicussion on Dr Montessori and Montessori schools begun on this thread, and in response to a suggestion on that thread by Sharath Bachanad.]

Hi Sharath,

I understand and agree with your point(Drunk completely, and have (what I hope) is an even better suggestion than just starting a separate thread to ask and answer those questions. Here it is:

It's all too clear that far too many Objectivists are either shamefully unaware of or unfamiliar with Dr Montessori's Method, or with Objectivist writing on it -- and even those who are familiar with it too often seem entirely unfamiliar with the nature of her method and of the entire, ingeniously integrated system of Montessori education, and of Dr Montessori's writing on the development of the child.

While many are enthusiastic enough about Montessori schooling in general, they're insufficiently knowledgable to even begin to judge the Monte-something schools they often discover in their search for education for their children, let alone able to defend the Montessori system in discussion or debate, or to understand for themselves the genuine genius of Dr Montessori herself.

Perhaps, as just one small way of beginning to change that, we were to establish a SOLO Montessori Coordinator in the same way we have (or have begun to have) Coordinators for Architecture, Economics and the like. (Here for instance is the 'SOLO Architecture' page I began at the old SOLO site - I freely confess I have no idea where to find it on this new site!) The SOLO Montessori Coordinator could promote Montessori education to this audience, with the aim of permanently establishing within Objectivism a knowledge of and an admiration for Dr Montessori and her great achievement.

I hope you don't find this too presumptuous, but having been enormously impressed with your posts, I would strongly suggest you would be the ideal Montessori Coordinator, Sharath.

How 'bout it?

I know that Julian and Ross between them will make it very easy technically to set up SOLO Montessori. And I'm almost certain that Linz and SOLO CEO John Gagnon would be overjoyed to have you on board. All it would need to begin is for you to say "Yes!"

So how about it?

Perhaps one of the opening posts of 'SOLO Montessori' could be a discussion of the substance of my question, just as you suggest here but with the added aim of launching 'SOLO Montessori.'

Another project that might be undertaken a little further down the track is perhaps to establish a long-overdue informal 'Objectivist Caucus' within AMI -- I feel sure that there must be enough Objectivists within AMI to make such a thing feasible, and it would be a great way to raise the profile of Objectivism to other Montessorians -- something that I think is urgently necessary -- and also to allow Objectivist Montessorians to meet up and talk and share insights and thoughts that one couldn't share with other Montessorians as yet un-enthused by Ayn rand's genius.

At the last AMI Congress in Sydney for example, there must have been other Objectivists present than just Carol Potts, and if an informal Objectivist 'caucus' had been set up they could have met up, chatted, plotted and planned, and (who knows) begun to arrange for Objectivist speakers and the like to begin talking to AMI gatherings, something I for one would be overjoyed to see happen.

So, um how about it. Smiling

PS: I loved your point about the two chain-smoking Aristotelian women. You said:

"As for the politeness issue:

"While Aristotle was a gentle giant whose life was dedicated to understanding, the two great Aristotelians of the 20th Century were chain smoking women with raging tempers! Their tempers don't tell as much about their basic premises as it does about the savagery of the Century."

Brilliant! Smiling

Cheers, Peter Cresswell

* * * * *

'NOT PC.'
**Setting Brushfires In People's Minds**

ORGANON ARCHITECTURE
**Integrating Architecture With Your Site**


( categories: )

Just in case

Sharath's picture

Hi Peter, I am loggin off now. Just in case it didn't arrive, I will write again tomorrow.

Thanks,

Sharath

Will do.

Peter Cresswell's picture

Nothing there yet.

Hi Peter

Sharath's picture

Please check your inbox. Better to discuss setting up the forum privately than cloggin up this thread.

The equivalent to the front

Ross Elliot's picture

The equivalent to the front page is the blurb you wrote beneath the architecture forum sub-heading. No, it's not quite the same Smiling

What we could do instead is have a link in that space that points to a page where you can post anything you like, pics, etc.

I'll get back to you.

Intro pages

Peter Cresswell's picture

So is there, for example, no 'SOLO Architecture' front page here, as there was on the old SOLO? Is that why I've never been able to find it?

Is there any reason we don't have one? Any reason we can't just bring over our previous 'head pages' for each topic to become new introductory pages here, and to set up the structure of the site so new visitors to a special interest forum do see it as the 'introduction page' to that forum, and can always and easily get back to it?

Cheers, Peter Cresswell

* * * *

'NOT PC.'
**Setting Brushfires In People's Minds**

ORGANON ARCHITECTURE
**Integrating Architecture With Your Site**

Forums, etc.

Ross Elliot's picture

"So are there no front pages, for example, to introduce a topic, or point interested readers on a topic to a suggested reading list? Or to related or useful links? Ah, I thought there were somewhere (can there be?) as there was at the old SOLO?"

Um, both sites have a similar structure. We have a front page where all articles appear regardless of origin. The forum contains special interest groups, which when clicked, bring up a list of all topics in that forum. The forum coordinator has privileges that allow them to create special content. Seems the same. What is different?

I agree that the groups need to be made more visible. Perhaps a list of groups on the sidebar that users can click on?

While you're probably right that most people check the recent posts list (I don't, interestingly), simply scanning the front page is the same as all posts appear there.

Lindsay as prime editor selects the posts that get blue stickied. We can set the length of the front page in terms of posts displayed, but it's pretty unwieldy as it is.

We are considering a way to categorise posts on the front page. By categorise I don't mean as per special interest groups, but by other criteria.

Now, you can see that this thread is part of SOLO Education because it's indicated on the bottom right hand corner of the original post (blue rectangle above).

Also, I think I'll make a thread asking users how they currently use the site Smiling

Ross: Conversations and posts by topic.

Peter Cresswell's picture

So are there no front pages, for example, to introduce a topic, or point interested readers on a topic to a suggested reading list? Or to related or useful links? Ah, I thought there were somewhere (can there be?) as there was at the old SOLO?

In any case, I do think it would be a good thing if those various fora were made more obvious. I'm not sure that many readers even know they exist, or how to finds them -- Dan for example was bewildered I think to find out he's been in charge of SOLO Romance for some time without even knowing about it, or what to do next!

At present, I suspect, most people don't work by topic; they find and initiate discussions primarily by means of the 'Recent Posts' button, giving conversations a rather different focus than they might have if they could also be accessed through (perhaps) a visible 'Conversations by Topic' button.

And there's nowhere that I can see on this page, for further example, that tells me that it's happening in the 'SOLO Education' forum, so no indication then to a new reader to post in this particular forum new and related conversations they might initiate themselves -- which makes them almost impossible to find later, and impossible to see as part of an ongoing conversation on a related topic.

(And have I mentioned my ongoing gripe that previous articles and conversations here at the new SOLO are inordinately difficult to find as compared to the old SOLO?)

Cheers, Peter Cresswell

* * * *

'NOT PC.'
**Setting Brushfires In People's Minds**

ORGANON ARCHITECTURE
**Integrating Architecture With Your Site**

The special interest groups

Ross Elliot's picture

The special interest groups are just forums.

Simply click on the "Forums" link on the top nav bar.

But, if any of you haven't been aware that there's more to SOLO than the front page, please let us know *now*. It is certainly possible to make it more obvious.

Truth be told, it's never occurred to me that users *didn't* know we had specialty groups. Keep in mind that posts made to the forum groups appear on the front page just as they would if you made them from your own blog.

SOLO Montessori

Lindsay Perigo's picture

We can do this, no prob, assuming someone suitable (like the person who's been suggested?) puts up his/her hand to lead the group.

At the moment the groups aren't ringfenced the way they were on the old SOLOHQ, so anything posted under a group category goes up on the board like any other post, for all to see. Joe Maurone, for instance, often posts under SOLO Music, in his capacity as SOLO Music Coordinator. But everyone gets to see the post. Ditto Craig's posts as Fitness leader.

Ross - a question about SOLO special interest pages

Peter Cresswell's picture

Ross,

Could you tell me how to find the various SOLO special interest pages?

They don't seem to be awfully accessible or prominent from the front page, which is perhaps one reason very little interest is shown in them.

Cheers, Peter Cresswell

* * * *

'NOT PC.'
**Setting Brushfires In People's Minds**

ORGANON ARCHITECTURE
**Integrating Architecture With Your Site**

Adam

Peter Cresswell's picture

Adam,

I'd be grateful if you could stop following me around like an attention-seeking bad smell, so that the adults here can get on with something that I hope will be constructive.

Now, as you were saying Ross...

Cheers, Peter Cresswell

* * * *

'NOT PC.'
**Setting Brushfires In People's Minds**

ORGANON ARCHITECTURE
**Integrating Architecture With Your Site**

SOLO Education?

AdamReed's picture

How about "SOLO Education?" "SOLO Montessori" is begging the question. Lisa Van Damme speaks of "incorporating the best aspects of Montessori education into VanDamme Academy's curriculum." Clearly, not the rest of it. One can hardly expect an open discussion of which aspects of Montessori education are worth incorporating into an Objectivism-friendly curriculum like Van Damme's, and which are not, on a forum that is pre-emptively named "SOLO Montessori." "SOLO Education" will be more in keeping with the Objectivist principle of primacy of existence - and of keeping the discussion grounded in inductive experience, rather than any single (pre-Randian, however brilliant) corpus of theory.

I'm all for this. Great

Ross Elliot's picture

I'm all for this. Great idea, and sorely needed.

Whereas in modern public education, the theory is divorced from reality and any meaningful results, with Montessori pedagogy, the theory *is* the reality. And, the results are manifest. SOLO is a natural home for such a system.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.