In the Montessori community, quality and value is highly subjective, since there are various philosophies in the field, each with its own standards of measuring for authenticity and validity. Historically, “accreditation” has been employed in education, by using a set of commonly agreed standards, and then measuring compliance with these standards by an independent, recognized body or board of some sort.
Before Dr. Montessori’s death, a type of “accreditation” was controlled by Dr. Montessori herself who supervised all teacher education through the Association Montessori Internationale (AMI). However, after her death in 1952, the Montessori community diverged with the authority and control of AMI, and conflicts arose as to proper standards for Montessori teacher education. In the 1970’s, in America, the American Montessori Society (AMS) and the AMI came into conflict with their competing standards, each seeking recognition from the federal government for their own brand of Montessori teaching. At the same time, other independent training institutes and organizations sought an inclusive type of Montessori accreditation for the ENTIRE Montessori community.  Since the federal government was only bound to recognize a single Montessori accrediting agency, they chose the “culture” model of AMS form of accreditation, which was established in 1992, since they had the largest number of affiliated programs. The name of this AMS accrediting agency was “Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Education” (MACTE).
Sadly, this MACTE agency was not inclusive, but used its recognition to monopolize the field on behalf of the interests of AMS. Such exclusionary recognition has harmed progress in the field, so that in 1997, one commentator observed that “most educators dismiss the Montessori movement” and that “…Montessori…is exceedingly difficult to grow when consumed by invidious, sectarian, and trivial pursuits like the past mandates of MACTE.” (Public School Montessorian, Summer, 1997, Joseph Beckmann, director for Development for OEkos, a foundation for Education)
Since this MACTE accreditation was not compatible with “true natural” Montessori teaching, the International Montessori Society (IMS) led an effort to form an alternative inclusive “umbrella” accrediting agency for the entire Montessori community. Known as “International Montessori Accreditation Council” (IMAC), this agency is designed with standards and criteria broad enough to include all available formats and expression of teacher education in the field. Since the US federal government refused to grant recognition to this IMAC agency, IMS has pursued an effort to correct the discriminatory MACTE recognition by endorsing abolition of all federal government “recognition” of private accrediting agencies, since this is really not needed, and is also detrimental to free competition and choice in the field of higher education.
Since AMS and AMI choose to follow their own separate accrediting and approach to government approval, the IMAC agency remains largely inactive. However, it nonetheless provides an effective, inclusive structure for Montessori accreditation which would be good for all parties in the Montessori community. Decisions in IMAC are made by consensus, based on a definition of Montessori teaching as being committed to support normal development in children as described by Dr. Montessori’s in her various published texts on the subject after 1907. The board essential standards all relate to common principles in the field based on the writings of Dr. Montessori herself. Now, the dialogue as how best to assure quality and value in the Montessori community continues to be an ongoing issues of standards and procedures related to accreditation of teacher education in the field.Â