To be sure, I see some pedagogical differences! Like the oral component of math for instance. Montessori was a big believer in the work of the hand and the hand to mind connection, so that wouldn’t have been how she introduced math. And the concept of sensitive periods as Montessori saw them don’t exist in Charlotte Mason, so our young children have didactic materials that teach pretty advanced concepts in their environment for them to choose if they wish. Academics are usually something Mason waits to introduce from my reading. Of course, I would definitely agree with that based on how academics are traditionally approached with children. It would not be appropriate to introduce lessons to little children in that way.
What I do see though is the concept of “spreading a feast” and an atmosphere is done in Montessori’s own way with our dedication to the environment and the beautiful, rich materials and books. That appeals to me, and I find a kinship between these two great women there. And as a Catholic, I am privy to Montessori’s own religiosity through her friend Gobbi’s Catechisis of The Good Shepherd. I appreciate Mason’s proudly Christian bend, and I love her focus on the arts. That’s why I find myself turning to her for inspiration in those places. I find the two philosophies so brilliant, and I am forever indebted to them both professionally and as a mother.

I really appreciate the interaction from Montessori practitioners. I freely admit that my base of knowledge about Maria Montessori and her methods is not that strong, so it very well could be that it has developed in ways that make it more philosophically compatible with Mason’s pedagogical principles than she herself gave them credit for. I would love to see more research done in this area of intersection between the two. It strikes me that something significant was occurring historically when Mason and Montessori worked through their philosophies. And now their approaches are being worked out in a fairly different cultural moment. So they might have some compatibilities that likely stem from a common post-Victorian European context.

I am also Montessori trained for primary and elementary. I have happily read all of Ms. Mason’s books, and utilize many of her ideas in presenting the arts. I find that the CM side of the educational world has a lot of strong feelings for Montessori, and it’s generally not positive; however, usually these articles are charitable. In that sense, I see an incomplete understanding of the other planes outside of the absorbent mind in these discussions. Often those dissenters pit 1st plane education against CM elementary education which is an innacurate comparison. There are too many differences between the planes to ignore. For instance, while we still believe that normalization can occur in the second plane through exercise of practical life, there is a lot of discussion about virtue with the 2nd plane child thanks to their newly acquired reasoning abilities. Before we mostly modeled virtue while the child’s chief form of learning was through absorbing their immediate environment.
I also rarely seen Cosmic Education brought up, and when it is, it’s posed as irreligious though Montessori’s own tellings of the Great Stories are anything but. I expect many non-Catholic Christians will always disagree with evolution even if it is seem through the lens of intelligent design. However, to completely write off the religiosity of the author of The Mass Explained to Children is unfair.
I think more Montessori voices should be included in this conversation because I think there’s more to adapt and adopt between the two that people realize.

I admit I know far more about Mason than I do Montessori, so when I came to the task of researching for this article I came to it with the assumption that Montessori was simply the Italian version of Mason. Now I think there are substantial differences, although there are nuanced reasons for these differences that need further thought. To that end, I welcome your perspective as you explore the intersection of classical education and Montessori. I think we’ve found classicism and Mason to be highly compatible even though Mason was an agent of reform and classicism is a movement of renewal. So you might find something similar for Montessori. Let me know how that comes along when you have a chance.