Computational thinking in Montessori primary school


  • Stefano Scippo Sapienza University of Rome
  • Fabio Ardolino IC San Nilo in Grottaferrata (RM)



Computational Thinking, innovation, Montessori, robotics, creativity


Here, we contribute to the debate on the relationship between Montessori’s pedagogy and new technologies. In this longitudinal study we used a mixed methodological approach, relying on structured evidence, field observations and notes. We show how in children, following the use of technological material aimed at developing computational thinking, in the five years of primary school in a Montessori class in Grottaferrata (RM), creativity and a sense of community have increased. The sense of community has consistently remained at a good level. The pervasiveness due to the error at a low level. Our evidence indicate how technological materials must respect the typical characteristics of Montessori development material to be integrated in school job: freedom of choice, error control, aesthetic attractiveness, autonomy of use, manual interactivity, possibility of collaborating with peers, repetition of the exercise, quantity limits are essential characteristics.


Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Worth Publishers.

Banfield, J., & Wilkerson, B. (2014). Increasing Student Intrinsic Motivation And Self-Efficacy Through Gamification Pedagogy. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 7, 291.

Barbaranelli, C. (2003). Analisi dei dati. Tecniche multivariate per la ricerca psicologica e sociale. Milan: LED Edizioni Universitarie.

Becchi, E. (1997). Sperimentare nella scuola. Storia, problemi, prospettive. Florence: La Nuova Italia.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. In N. L. Gage (Ed.). Handbook of Research of Teaching (pp. 171-246). Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.

Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Cook, T.D., Campbell, D. T., & Peracchio, L. (1990). Quasi-experimentation. In M. D. Dunnette, L. M. Hough (Eds.). Handbook of Industrial Organizational Psychology (pp. 491-576). Palo Alto (CA): Consulting Psychologist.

De Vellis, R. F. (1991). Scale Development. Theory and applications. Newbury Park: Sage.

Elkin, M., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2014). Implementing a robotics curriculum in an early childhood Montessori classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 13, 153-169.

Jones, S. J. (2017). Technology in the Montessori Classroom: Teachers’ Beliefs and Technology Use. Journal of Montessori Research, 3, 16.

Lillard, A.S. (2013). Playful Learning and Montessori Education. The NAMTA Journal, 38, 2, 137-174.

MacDonald, G. (2016). Technology in the Montessori Classroom: Benefits, Azards and Preparation for Life. The NAMTA Journal, 41, 2, 99-107.

Montessori, M. (1999). La scoperta del bambino. Milano: Garzanti. (Original work published 1950)

Montessori, M. (2015). Introduction on the Use of Mechanical Aids. AMI Journal, 5-7.

Romero, M., Richard, V., & Kamga, R. (2016). Usages de la robotique pédagogique en éducation primaire selon son intégration disciplinaire et le développement des compétences du 21e siècle. Communication au colloque «Intelligences numériques. Digital Intelligence», Université Laval, 4-6 avril.

Seligman, M.E.P. (1996). The Optimistic Child: Proven Program to Safeguard Children from Depression & Build Lifelong Resilience. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Torrance, E.P., Sprini, G., & Tomasello, S. (1989). Test di pensiero creativo: Torrance test of creative thinking. Florence: Organizzazioni Speciali.

Valle, M. (2017). La pedagogia Montessori e le nuove tecnologie. Turin: Il Leone Verde.

Vygotskij, L. S. (1966). Pensiero e linguaggio. Florence: Giunti-Barbera. (Original work published 1934)




How to Cite

Scippo, S., & Ardolino, F. (2021). Computational thinking in Montessori primary school. Ricerche Di Pedagogia E Didattica. Journal of Theories and Research in Education, 16(2), 59–76.