Kids stop caring way too young as a self-preservation mechanism. This means many of them also stop trying... It's a spiral that can only be broken by restructuring.
This is a big if. Until the 1990s, class sizes routinely exceeded 30 and school sizes 500 in former Czechoslovakia, but I wouldn't call us "pathologically self-centered society".
As for self-centeredness, shrinking family size might be the true reason. Only children tend to be a lot more pampered than kids who were born into a family of six. In China, they are called "Little Emperors".
to quote @inglor_cz - this is big if… you are arguing against generalization in your first paragraph and then you are proceeding to generalize… I am only child and my daughter is too and neither of us (especially me) have been pampered
The Little Emperors phenomenon is still a thing. If a kid has two parents and four grandparents who have no other descendands, it is USUALLY on the receiving end of a lot more attention and resources than if there are six of them.
how would small class sizes help make children less self centered?
more attention from the teacher? why would that help?
i have to admit i have no clue what factors help kids be less self centered.
1. It's easier to form friendships in a smaller group. In larger groups it is much easier for it to became a wall of people rather than individual persons. Large groups can be extremely overwhelming for children (they are still overwhelming for many adults).
2. It is much easier for the teacher to see the group dynamics, and jump in to make sure nobody is excluded. If the teacher doesn't do this, many of the benefits of smaller class size will be lost. Teachers need to very vigilant to teach that it's not okay to exclude kids and not play with them, its not ok to bully, etc. If there is nobody in the room to foster healthy relationships, they will never reach even close to their full potential.
I have seen and talked about this in quite a bit of detail with educators who are continually successful, and it is not hard to figure out - it requires devotion rather than advanced pedagogical theory and strategy.
the montessori method can handle larger class sizes specifically because of the way it is designed. in other words, large class sized are an even better argument for why the montessori method should be used.
When we transitioned our charter Waldorf to a public Waldorf, the kids experiencing it for their first year absolutely thrived. I would love to see both systems expand significantly in the public space, and have educators with enough savvy to help kids find their best place.
I think that even a more traditional school system can be totally healthy, and should stay part of the school mix. I have seen it work out relatively well in other countries. It just doesn't work when run like a for-profit prison.
I'm not saying that kids cannot have a good experience at a Waldorf school, or that all their educational ideas are bad. Just that once you children have been there for a couple of years, you learn some very disturbing truths about the organization. It's not an education institution as much as it is a religious organization - your children WILL be taught hymns about god and angels in class. The teachers will not admit to this. They will be taught from the original lessons of Steiner, who had some rather unconventional pseudo-scientific ideas (even for his day). This is coming from a dad who had his kids at Waldorf for three years, and I'm so glad I finally got them out - even with the difficult academic transition.
There is plenty of information published about their organization online, and growing awareness worldwide.
From my experience, the teachers and admin will actively disclaim any adherence to the Waldorf / Anthroposophy connections, but I can assure you that if this is truly a Waldorf school (not "Waldorf-inspired"), they are 100% absolutely members of the Anthroposophy organization. I saw teachers actually do things like quickly hide away Steiner's books from their desk when parents would drop in. But do dig a bit deeper into your school if you can - you'll find there is a "college of teachers" and other such secretive meetings, religious Christian-inspired songs being taught to the children (speaking of God and angels from heaven), and more such nonsense at your school.
If you are a Anthroposophist, then by all means, send your kids there. But Waldorf has an international track record[1] of hiding covering their tracks and pretending to be secular when they are anything but. They just don't belong to a religion that you've heard much about [2].
[1] https://waldorfcritics.org/concerns/ [2] https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-cult-of-waldorf-sc...
Why not? Costs are lower, etc.
The upfront costs of teacher training and Montessori materials were amortized
over their expected lifespan of 25 y. Total costs for Montessori and
traditional programs were divided by the average number of children in each
type of classroom at the PK3, PK4, and kindergarten years, then summed to
yield the cost difference of Montessori and traditional programming over
three years of public preschool.
the current cost of montessori teacher training and materials is a matter of scale.
the training only takes one year. the cost comes from it being done on top of the traditional teacher education that most teachers likely went through.
if montessori training would be included into traditional teacher education, the cost would be absorbed (you could skip a few other redundant classes). likewise, the material produced at scale would be cheaper.
If that's our standard, then nothing is worth doing. Lower costs seem like a good possibility.
The significant factor is how a change like this is implemented in context. Within a public school system there may or may not be convincible political appetite to increase short term costs for longer term gains.
It seems that the district(s) studied are making those changes and studying the outcomes in order to make prudent choices long term, which is not flipping a switch but is doing more than nothing.