Montessori pedagogy is said to be the largest and most widely spread non-traditional, alternative form of education. Some estimations show that there are at least 15,763 schools of this type located in 154 countries all around the world (Debs et al., 2022). Since 1909, when the first Montessori teacher training course took place (Cossentino, 2009), this community has been cultivating a unique form of “adult preparation” that is often referred to as transformation including inner spirituality as well intellectual, practical and physical dispositions (Jendza, 2023). At the same time, the empirical research reports oriented at displaying this approach to teacher education are sparse  (Gerker, 2023; Macià-Gual & Domingo-Peñafiel, 2021). Thus, the main objective of this qualitative and ethnographic scholarship was to investigate the process of Montessori teacher training programme focusing on the experience of the aforementioned transformation in an international and multicultural group. In other words, the preliminary research question was formulated as follows: How do Montessori teacher trainees experience and thematise their adult preparation programme? In order to carry out this study, the author followed the strategy of participatory ethnography and took part in an international course affiliated to Association Montessori Internationale (AMI), lasting nine months, carried out between 2020 - 2022 and spread over three-summer period. The collected and later analysed research material allowed for the construction of a few main interpretive threads linking theories such as: (1) Thing-centred Pedagogy (Vlieghe & Zamojski, 2019), (2) the concept of school as free time (Masschelein & Simons, 2013), (3) the idea of teacher education as a space of working with difference (Szkudlarek, 2005), and (4) the analyses of study practices derived from the works of Tyson Lewis (Lewis, 2013). 

The study implemented the strategy of participatory, qualitative field ethnography (Emerson et al., 2011; Hockey & Forsey, 2020; Mannay & Morgan, 2015). The project was conducted within an international group of 55 Montessori teacher trainees coming from 19 countries between 2020 and 2022. The data gathering techniques include: field vignettes, jottings, in-depth interviews, auto-ethnographic notes, course correspondence & documents, photo and video documentation (Constantine, 2013; Pelto, 2016). This particular course has been chosen purposefully as the research “area” due to its community reputation since AMI affiliated international courses are praised for its “fidelity” to the original idea of this form of teacher training. The author took part in the course, lived in the same dormitory with most of the participants and finally completed it after circa 750 hours of lectures, supervised practices, numerous informal conversations and having conducted 18 individual, narrative interviews with both the trainees and trainers from 14 countries. The data gathered were later analysed in accordance with the guidelines formulated by (inter alia) Kvale, Denzin, Neuman (Denzin, 1997; Kvale, 1996; Neumann, 1997) and with the use of MAXQDA software as suggested by Jacques (Jacques, 2021) .

The results of the study refer to the three main aspects. The first one is directly linked to the research question posed before entering the field and regarding the dimensions of transformation or adult preparation. Having analysed the material it can be stated that it is through/due to this unique form of teacher training that the participants experience either radical transformation or shift in their biographies. Both modes of change relate to intellectual, personal and practical dispositions of Montessori guides. The second aspect is connected with the “elite community” identity building. It has turned out that the bonds that participants create, shared experiences of enormous amount of workload and effort put in album refinement as well as preparations for the final exams contribute to the creation of strong and shared identity of becoming “real Montessori guides”. The third aspect of research results relates to specific forms and technologies implemented in the course. The assemblage of (1)purposefully arranged cultural and ethnic diversity, (2) verbatim note-making, (3) participating in traditional lecture sessions, (4) suspension from the outside world, (5) free time and night-study practices, (6) manipulating, experimenting and working with material learning aids, (7) shifting roles throughout the process, (8) task based classroom observations and (9) carefully designed teacher internships make this experience unique and potentially inspiring for other teacher education initiatives. The conclusions derived from the study may serve as possible suggestions for the designers of university/college teacher training curricula.

Blomberg, J., & Karasti, H. (2012). Ethnography: Positioning ethnography within participatory design. In Routledge international handbook of participatory design (pp. 86–116). Routledge. Constantine, L. S. (2013). Strategies for data gathering and reporting voices from the field: A review of applied ethnography: Guidelines for field research. Strategies, 9, 23–2013. Cossentino, J. (2009). Culture, craft, & coherence: The unexpected vitality of Montessori teacher training. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 520–527. Debs, M. C., de Brouwer, J., Murray, A. K., Lawrence, L., Tyne, M., & von der Wehl, C. (2022). Global Diffusion of Montessori Schools: A Report from the 2022 Global Montessori Census. Journal of Montessori Research, 8(2), 1–15. Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Sage. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. University of Chicago press. Gerker, H. E. (2023). Making Sense of Montessori Teacher Identity, Montessori Pedagogy, and Educational Policies in Public Schools. Journal of Montessori Research, 9(1). Hockey, J., & Forsey, M. (2020). Ethnography is not participant observation: Reflections on the interview as participatory qualitative research. In The interview (pp. 69–87). Routledge. Jacques, D. N. (2021). Using MAXQDA in ethnographic research: An example with coding, analyzing, and writing. In The practice of qualitative data analysis: Research examples using MAXQDA (pp. 17–33). MAXQDA Press. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitive research interviewing. Sage. Lewis, T. E. (2013). On study: Giorgio Agamben and educational potentiality. Routledge. Macià-Gual, A., & Domingo-Peñafiel, L. (2021). Demands in Early Childhood Education: Montessori Pedagogy, Prepared Environment, and Teacher Training. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 7(1), 144–162. Masschelein, J., & Simons, M. (2013). In defence of the school. A public issue. TStorme. Neumann, W. (1997). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches 3 H@. Ed. Allen & Bacon, United States of America. Pelto, P. J. (2016). Applied ethnography: Guidelines for field research. Routledge. Szkudlarek, T. (2005). On nations and children: Rousseau, Poland and European identity. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 24, 19–38. Vlieghe, J., & Zamojski, P. (2019). Towards an ontology of teaching. Springer. Whitescarver, K., & Cossentino, J. (2007). Lessons from the periphery: The role of dispositions in Montessori teacher training. Journal of Educational Controversy, 2(2), 11.