The long-term effect of alternative education on self-regulated learning: A comparison between Montessori, Dalton, and traditional education

Abstract

With the rise of secondary alternative schools in the Netherlands, such as Montessori and Dalton, research into its effectiveness has become crucial. Alternative schools' greater focus on autonomy and independence may better equip students with the self-regulated learning (SRL) skills essential for higher education. The aim of this study is to investigate the transition of secondary (alternative) education to higher education. More specifically, former Dalton (N = 184), Montessori (N = 150), and regular (N = 8614) secondary education students are compared on the perceived fit between secondary education and higher education, for example in regard to learning to work together and work alone, and SRL skills in a bootstrapped hierarchical regression. Results show that former Dalton students rate the fit of their secondary education to their higher education significantly better than students who attended regular education. No other significant differences were found when comparing Mon-tessori and regular education students regarding fit, or when comparing both Montessori and Dalton to regular education regarding the SRL skills of students. Alternative explanations regarding the differences between alternative and regular educations are discussed.

Full text

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
Available online 4 July 2024
0191-491X/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
The long-term effect of alternative education on self-regulated learning: A
comparison between Montessori, Dalton, and traditional education
Vivian E. Morssink-Santing
a
,
*
, Symen van der Zee
a
, Lida T. Klaver
a
, Jaap de Brouwer
a
, Patrick
H.M. Sins
b
a
Saxion University of Applied Sciences, the Netherlands
b
Thomas More University of Applied Sciences, the Netherlands
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Self-regulated learning
Montessori
Dalton
Higher education
Education transition
ABSTRACT
With the rise of secondary alternative schools in the Netherlands, such as Montessori and Dalton, research into its
effectiveness has become crucial. Alternative schools’ greater focus on autonomy and independence may better
equip students with the self-regulated learning (SRL) skills essential for higher education. The aim of this study is
to investigate the transition of secondary (alternative) education to higher education. More specically, former
Dalton (N =184), Montessori (N =150), and regular (N =8614) secondary education students are compared on
the perceived t between secondary education and higher education, for example in regard to learning to work
together and work alone, and SRL skills in a bootstrapped hierarchical regression. Results show that former
Dalton students rate the t of their secondary education to their higher education signicantly better than
students who attended regular education. No other signicant differences were found when comparing Mon-
tessori and regular education students regarding t, or when comparing both Montessori and Dalton to regular
education regarding the SRL skills of students. Alternative explanations regarding the differences between
alternative and regular educations are discussed.
1. Introduction
Several initiatives from educational reformers emerged at the
beginning of the 20th century in the western world, aiming to change
the educational system (Kliebard, 2004). Traditional schooling was
criticized for being excessively rigid, authoritarian, and narrowly
focused on students’ cognitive development. From this perspective,
alternative education, with its equivalents like education nouvelle
(France), Reformp¨
adagogik (Germany) and progressive education (USA),
emerged from the late nineteenth century and served as a critique of the
existing educational system, as exemplied by public schools with its
traditional schooling methods (Hoencamp et al., 2022; Jenkins, 2000).
Educational reformers and pedagogues, such as Montessori, Parkhurst or
Freinet, advocated for alternatives to this traditional education, intro-
ducing the concept of the ’new school’ (Imelman & Meijer, 1986).
Although they had varied ideas on this new school concept, these
educational reformers and pedagogies shared a common ideal: educa-
tion must respect and address the individuality of each child. In addi-
tion, these schools tried to nd a better balance between the child and
the curriculum.
Overall, the proposed renewal of education based on the works of
these reformers, can be comprehended through ve guiding principles:
1) individualization, which involves that pupils were allowed to work at
their own pace and teachers adjusted instruction and assignments to
their capabilities and needs activation; 2) activating, empathizing chil-
dren’s autonomy, self-exploration and self-regulated learning; 3) so-
cializing; 4) interaction, this principle included providing opportunities
for children to help and instruct each other and stimulating group work
among children and 5) contextualizing, this involved linking subject
matter to pupils’ interests and out-of-school experiences (Imelman &
Meijer, 1986; Norris, 2004; R¨
ohrs & Lenhart, 1995; Van der Ploeg, 2013;
van Hulst et al., 1970).
Starting in the early twentieth century, these alternative forms of
education were adopted in many countries in the Western world. For
instance, Dalton education and Montessori schools were found in the
USA, England, Australia, Germany and the Netherlands. From early 20th
century, Dutch society was open to changes in education (Hoencamp
et al., 2022). However, until 1917, the Dutch government exclusively
* Correspondence to: School of Education, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Handelskade 75, 7417 DH Deventer, the Netherlands.
E-mail address: v.e.santing@saxion.nl (V.E. Morssink-Santing).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Studies in Educational Evaluation
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/stueduc
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101380
Received 20 July 2023; Received in revised form 14 May 2024; Accepted 20 June 2024

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
2
funded conventional public schools. Schools based on alternative
educational philosophies, like Montessori or Dalton, as well as religious
schools, had to be privately funded. Different denominational and social
groups including Roman Catholics, Protestants, Liberals, and Socialist
campaigned for government funding of all types of schools, which led to
the so-called School Struggle. This struggle started in 1889 and was
nally settled in 1917, with Article 23 in the Dutch constitution, often
referred to as the Freedom of Education Act (Rietveld-van Wingerden
et al., 2003; Slaman, 2018). The Freedom of Education Act stipulates
government funding for all types of schools, with the government
determining core educational objectives and overseeing educational
quality, while granting schools autonomy to choose their educational
methods and adapt the curriculum as they see t. Due to this law, the
Dutch educational landscape features moderate government regulations
alongside considerable school autonomy. Consequently, the Freedom of
Education Act paved the way for the introduction of progressive edu-
cation in the Dutch educational landscape.
Although the alternative school movement did not immediately
result in all-encompassing changes in education, interest in alternative
education in the Netherlands remained and even strongly intensied in
the 1960s and 1970s (Bakker, Noordman, & Rietveld-van Wingerden,
2010; van Hulst et al., 1970). By the 1980s, alternative education was
steadily gaining in popularity in the Netherlands, and the number of
alternative schools kept increasing during the 1990s and after the
change of the millennium (Bakker et al., 2010). Currently, there are
approximately 800 alternative schools for compulsory education in the
Netherlands, constituting about 10 % of all compulsory education, and
these numbers continue to rise (Sins & van der Zee, 2015; Sins, van der
Zee, & Schuitema, 2021). While most of these schools are primary
schools, the number of secondary Dalton and Montessori schools has
grown rapidly in recent years. Currently, there are nineteen government
funded public secondary Montessori schools in the Netherlands, all
afliated with the Dutch Montessori Association and 29
government-funded public secondary Dalton schools in the Netherlands,
all afliated with the Dutch Dalton Association.
1.1. Secondary Montessori schools
In 1930, the world’s rst Montessori secondary school was founded
in Amsterdam (Joosten-Chotzen, 1937). At the time of its founding, no
formal training existed for Montessori secondary school teachers and
guidelines for establishing a Montessori secondary school were lacking.
Moreover, Montessori did not venture into secondary Montessori edu-
cation as she lacked experience with this group of students (Montessori,
2020; M.M. Montessori, 1961). Urged by the Dutch initiators of this rst
secondary Montessori school, Maria Montessori outlined some princi-
ples (M.M. Montessori, 1961).
Maria Montessori’s writings on secondary education included a
radical boarding school program called ‘Erdkinder’ (Ruijs, 2017).
Montessori outlined some guidelines for secondary schools in which
adolescents learn to participate in societal functions, particularly
through agricultural activities. In this context, young people learn and
practice real adult work, economic independence, community building,
and cultural and artistic production (Eckert, 2023). The development of
the child’s personality, the adaptability to a changing world and the
child’s intellectual development were the major principles (Montessori,
2020). The guiding principles of the new school movement, like con-
textualization, socialization and interaction, are evident in Montessori’s
secondary school program. However, for many years Montessori’s
guidelines were viewed as difcult to implement fully (Eckert, 2023).
Moreover, Montessori was still developing her program for secondary
schools when she passed away (Lillard, 2013). Consequently, the ‘Erd-
kinder’ program has been implemented very sparsely and Montessori
schools globally typically adopted only certain guidelines of the original
idea (Eckert, 2023).
Secondary Montessori schools in the Netherlands began
implementing Montessori’s program in the early years, specically from
1930 up to 1960. This lead to the establishment of six secondary Mon-
tessori schools in the Netherlands, each with different interpretations
and implementations of Montessori’s guidelines (M.M. Montessori,
1961). Today, Dutch secondary Montessori schools implement certain
Montessori guidelines, including the freedom to choose work, a focus on
students’ self-directed activity, and the organization of eld projects, to
foster social development and prepare students for societal roles. The
schools focus moves beyond mere academic achievement and also em-
phasizes the development of non-cognitive skills necessary for aca-
demic, work, and societal engagement, as well as guiding students
towards a responsible social role (Dutch Montessori Association, n.d.;
Rubinstein, 2008; Ruijs, 2017).
1.2. Secondary Dalton schools
The Dalton Plan was introduced in the Netherlands in 1923, with
Secondary Dalton schools beginning to implement and experiment with
Parkhurst’s ideas from the early 1930s (van der Ploeg, 2014). Initially,
the Dalton Plan, emphasizing individualized instruction and active
learning, was well-received in the Dutch system (Hoencamp et al.,
2022). By 1934, there were 50 primary and one secondary Dalton school
in the Netherlands. However, due to implementation problems and its
disappointing effectiveness, this initial growth was stunted, and by
1951, only 18 primary Dalton schools and two or three secondary
schools remained (van der Ploeg, 2014). Unexpectedly, in the 1980s,
there was a resurgence in the Dalton movement in the Netherlands,
leading to the establishment of over 400 Dalton schools today. It is now
the largest movement of alternative schools in the Netherlands.
In the secondary Dalton school program, the school functions as a
sociological laboratory, mirroring real-life community conditions. The
secondary Dalton schools are founded on the core Dalton principles
freedom, cooperation, independence, effectiveness, and reection (Dutch
Dalton Association, n.d). Although secondary Dalton schools implement
these principles, Parkhurst (1992) considered these principles as exible
and non-prescriptive. Consequently, each secondary Dalton school tai-
lors their program to the needs and possibilities of their context and
students (Imelman and Meijer, 1986). Today’s secondary Dalton schools
differ from traditional secondary schools in a number of ways. Most
notable is that learning at secondary Dalton schools is tailored to indi-
vidual student abilities and needs, fostering both independence and
interdependence. This approach, aligning with the Dalton principles of
cooperation and independence, not only improves students’ social skills
but also cultivates a heightened sense of responsibility towards others
and their own learning (Berends et al., 2021). Furthermore, while stu-
dents are instructed at a specic level, they have the freedom to learn at
their own pace (van der Ploeg, 2014). Students can also choose whether
and how to collaborate with classmates, as well as and determine how
their learning will be assessed. This approach aligns with the Dalton
principles of freedom, effectiveness and reection. Additionally, students
in a secondary Dalton school have the freedom to choose whether to
participate in a Dalton-hour, a compulsory lesson where they indepen-
dently select the subject they will study and the teacher they will engage
with. This approach reects the Dalton principles of freedom and inde-
pendence. The Dalton secondary school program reects the guiding
principles of the new school movement, including a focus on individu-
alization, socialization, activating, and interaction.
Nowadays, Montessori and Dalton secondary schools continue to
provide an alternative to the more traditional secondary schools in the
Netherlands. These programs focus on the individuality of each child
and strive to achieve a better balance between the needs of the child and
the requirements of the curriculum by focusing on the child’s autonomy,
individualizing education and instruction, and broadening the scope
from narrowly focused on students’ cognitive development to a more
holistic approach of development. Despite the increasing prominence of
secondary Montessori and Dalton schools in the Netherlands, it is
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
3
noteworthy that little research has been conducted on their effective-
ness, with no studies addressing the transition from secondary education
to higher education. Moreover, it is crucial to understand if, and to what
extent, Montessori or Dalton principles, like individualization or acti-
vation, are effective.
This study aims to investigate the t of Montessori and Dalton sec-
ondary education to higher education and to compare the self-regulated
learning skills of students from these alternative schools with students
from regular education.
1.3. Transitional t from secondary to higher education
In the Netherlands, the secondary education a student follows is
determined by their ability level. At the end of primary school, which
lasts from the age of 4–12, children’s secondary education is decided
based on national tests and the teacher’s expertise. The Dutch secondary
education system comprises three main types: VMBO (Pre-Vocational
Education), HAVO (Higher General Secondary Education), and VWO
(Pre-University Education). VMBO is a four-year program that offers a
practical education. After completing VMBO, students can enter voca-
tional education or continue their studies at a higher level of secondary
education. HAVO is a ve-year program that provides more general and
broad education compared to VMBO. VWO is a six-year program that is
academically challenging. In this study, the focus is on the transitional
pathways from the HAVO and VWO programs in secondary education to
higher education. HAVO graduates can apply to Applied Universities
(HBO), while VWO graduates also have the option to apply to Academic
Universities (WO). HBO programs typically last four years, offering a
combination of academic skills and practical training to prepare stu-
dents for the job market. WO programs generally consist of a three-year
bachelor’s degree, focusing on higher academic learning. This is fol-
lowed by a master’s program, which can last one or two years. See Luijkx
and de Heus (2008) for a more detailed explanation of the Dutch school
system and all possible pathways.
For many students the transition from secondary to higher education
is a challenging process. In this transition students are confronted with
complex and independent learning (Vosniadou, 2020). In addition,
students are expected to learn more autonomously and to have a higher
level of responsibility for their own learning (Vettori et al., 2020). For
rst year students, these expectations in higher education can often be
overwhelming and potentially lead to various difculties, such as the
ways to handle higher standard feedback, coping with the lack of
teacher availability, and handling additional responsibilities (Brink-
worth et al., 2009).
Secondary schools aim to prepare students for their transition to
higher education. An example of this is teaching students how to do
research. This not only increases students’ content knowledge, but also
prepares them with the cognitive and meta-cognitive skills needed for
higher education (Verberg et al., 2019). In HAVO and VWO, this is
particularly characterized by the school research project (proelwerk-
stuk) in the nal year. This project involves students working in pairs or
small groups over an extended period, learning to conduct and docu-
ment research on specic topics. According to Vosniadou (2020),
improving students’ abilities to self-regulate their own learning is
important to facilitate students’ adaptation to the demands of higher
education. Furthermore, the perceptions students have about learning
inuence their results in higher education, with those holding positive
attitudes achieving better grades (Vettori et al., 2020).
In Montessori and in Dalton secondary schools, a strong emphasis is
placed on fostering student independence and the ability to learn
autonomously. Given the necessity for autonomy in higher education, it
can be expected that these schools are able to provide their students with
better opportunities to navigate the transition to higher education
compared to regular schools. In other words, students from Montessori
and Dalton schools may perceive a better t between secondary edu-
cation and higher education than students who attended regular schools.
In addition, it can be assumed that self-regulated learning skills are more
deliberately practiced in alternative schools than in regular schools.
1.4. Self-regulated learning
Self-regulated learning (SRL) has emerged as a prominent research
area in educational research, leading to the development of various
models in the last few decades to describe SRL and facilitate effective
interventions (for a review, see Panadero, 2017). Generally, SRL com-
prises a learner’s planning, monitoring, and evaluation of the learning
process, involving learners self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions
that serve to pursue their own goals (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2011).
While there are multiple conceptualizations of SRL, most researchers
agree that it involves an interplay between cognitive, metacognitive,
motivational, and behavioural processes that are oriented toward goal
attainment (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Boekaerts & Maes, & Karoly,
2005; Panadero, 2017; Pintrich, 2004; Zimmerman, 1986; 2013). In his
seminal paper, Pintrich (2000) dened SRL as “an active, constructive
process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to
monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and
behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual
features in the environment” (p. 453).
Positive associations have been established between SRL skills and
students’ academic achievement and learning motivation (de
Bruijn-Smolders et al., 2016; Dent & Koenka, 2016; Dignath & Büttner,
2008; Donker et al., 2014; Hattie et al., 1996; Jansen et al., 2019). High
performing students tend to employ more SRL strategies than students
with lower academic achievement in secondary education (Dent &
Koenka, 2016). Other meta-analyses found this link between SRL and
academic achievement in higher education as well (Jansen et al., 2019;
Richardson et al., 2012).
The promotion of SRL skills of students can occur through direct and
indirect means (Callan et al., 2020; Dignath & Veenman, 2021). Indirect
promotion involves preparing an environment that is conducive to
teaching SRL and providing meaningful schoolwork. Direct promotion is
done through interaction with students. Multiple meta-analyses show
that training SRL strategies leads to improved academic performance (de
Boer et al., 2018; Donker et al., 2014; Ergen & Kanadali, 2017), SRL
strategy use, and motivation (Dignath & Büttner, 2008).
Numerous studies have investigated interventions aimed at directly
and indirectly promoting SRL in students (e.g. Dignath & Büttner, 2008;
Dignath & Veenman, 2021; Donker et al., 2014) In the meta study of
Dignath and Büttner (2008), interventions that took place over a longer
period of time were found to be more effective, as students required time
to adopt the learned strategies into their own learning. Additionally,
interventions led by researchers were more effective than those led by
teachers. Dignath and Büttner suggested that inadequate or insufcient
teacher training may contribute to this nding. According to Vosniadou
(2020), teachers should focus on helping students acquire the skills and
strategies needed to learn when teaching SRL skills, rather than focusing
on the content of the lessons. However, teachers often spend little time
on strategy teaching, and instead focus more on the content (Hamman
et al., 2000). Thus, it seems teaching SRL skills is a difcult task for the
general teacher and facilitating self-regulation in regular education may
not occur frequently enough.
It is plausible to assume that alternative schools devote more atten-
tion to the indirect and direct promotion of SRL strategies. In these
schools, students are expected to take more responsibility of their
learning and are provided with more autonomy and support with respect
to their choices, learning goals and ways of learning. Therefore, one of
the aims of this study is to investigate whether students who had
attended Dalton or Montessori schools show better SRL skills than stu-
dents from regular education in the rst year of higher education.
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
4
1.5. The present study
Alternative forms of education such as Montessori and Dalton
emphasize the importance of independence and autonomy of students
(Dutch Dalton Association, n.d.; Montessori, 1961). Given the size and
popularity of alternative education, it is rather remarkable that the ef-
fects of these schools have hardly been subject of empirical research.
Especially for secondary alternative education, there is a lack of research
into the transition to higher education and the self-regulated learning
skills students develop in these types of education. Addressing this gap in
the literature is important, as the transition to higher education is
already challenging (Vosniadou, 2020), and identifying aspects that
make this transition smoother can facilitate improvements for many
future higher education students.
To address this gap in the literature, this research focuses on two
main points.The rst research question of this study was: what are the
differences in the perceived t of secondary education to higher edu-
cation of former Dalton, Montessori, and regular education students in
the rst year of higher education? The second research question was:
what are the differences in SRL skills of rst year-higher education
students with either Dalton, Montessori, or regular secondary education
backgrounds? The hypothesis was that students from alternative sec-
ondary education experience a better t to higher education and that
SRL skills would be better among students from alternative education
(Montessori and Dalton) when compared to students from regular edu-
cation. This assumption is made on the basis of the enhanced focus on
autonomy and independence in Dalton and Montessori education, which
is assumed to be distinguishable from regular education. Dalton and
Montessori education are based on the same didactic principles of
individualizing, activating, contextualizing, and socializing (van der
Ploeg, 2013). Therefore, the comparison between Dalton and Montessori
is not made in this study. The application of these principles does differ,
but there is no literature on the specic differences between Dalton and
Montessori secondary education, so this comparison is beyond the scope
of this paper.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Participants of this study were rst-year students from various aca-
demic and applied universities across the Netherlands. These partici-
pants completed the survey ‘Startmonitor’, which is long running project
from the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science and the
research institute ResearchNed (Startmonitor, n.d). This questionnaire is
only distributed among rst-year students. For the current research, a
selection was made of students having completed HAVO (36.8 %) or
VWO (63.2 %) secondary education in the Netherlands. A selection of
only HAVO and VWO students is made because of the previously
described academic pathways into higher education. HAVO and VWO
secondary education allow access to universities and applied univer-
sities. To evaluate the effect of secondary education on the t and SRL
skills, students should be coming directly from secondary education,
thus other routes to get into higher education are excluded from this
analysis.
In total, 8948 participants were included in the sample, of which
88.9 % were Dutch, 10.7 % of students had different nationalities, and
for the others this was unknown. This sample contains 2869 male and
6079 female students, ranging from 16 to 36 years old (N =8948, M
age
=
18.12, SD =.862). More students are in academic universities (58 %)
than in applied universities (42 %). Within the sample, 71.8 % of stu-
dents had parents that also attended higher education. In secondary
school, 16.3 % of the students had to retain.
Students in the sample reported the type of education they followed
in secondary school. Of the participants, 8614 students followed regular
education (M
age
=18.11, SD =.864), 184 students attended Dalton
education (M
age
=18.09, SD =.763), and 150 students attended Mon-
tessori education (M
age
=18.37, SD =.832) in secondary school. The
survey was distributed to different rst-year students in three cohorts:
2015/2016, 2016/2017, and 2017/2018, with comparable sample sizes
across those years. Table 1 shows the distribution of these cohorts.
2.2. Startmonitor survey
The data that was used in this study was derived from the rst two
questionnaires from September and December in the years 2015–2017
of the Startmonitor. The questions asked in the nal part of the ques-
tionnaire were irrelevant to the research objectives. The Startmonitor
survey is designed to gather information on study choice, study success
and study drop-out (Startmonitor, n.d).
In the September questionnaire, students received questions
regarding their secondary education. Additionally, This questionnaire
included some questions in which students rated their perceived study
habits in comparison to their peers (1 =a lot worse than average to 5 =a
lot better than average). In this category, they rated their effort in their
previous education, their study results in their previous education, and
the time spent on their previous education. Various demographic vari-
ables are included in this survey, including gender, ethnicity, and
whether at least one parent is higher educated. Additionally, an item
about redoing a year is included.
The subsequent questionnaire in December contained questions of
the t of the students’ secondary education to their current study in
higher education, alongside items on their study habits and (self-regu-
lated) learning strategies. The t questions were introduced with the
prompt: ‘how well does your study align with your previous education?
Below, indicate the degree of alignment with your previous education
for each aspect’, utilizing a 5-point scale ranging from 1 =Aligned very
poorly to 5 =Aligned very well. The aspects evaluated were study skills,
critical view at own work/adjusting progress, working together, and
working alone. The items regarding study habits and learning strategies
could be answered on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 =Totally not
applicable to 5 =Totally applicable. These items included both present
and past tense formulations. Students who had quit their studies
received the items in the past tense, whereas students continuing their
studies received the items in the present tense. These items can be seen
in Table 2.
We used 10 of the items of the Startmonitor that pertained to current
study behaviors and the t of the secondary education to the current
study on four separate areas, namely working alone, working together,
critical view at own work/adjusting progress, and study skills. All items
are shown in Table 2. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted on
these 10 likert-scale items to check if those items could be reduced to the
t of secondary education and SRL skills. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
measure of sampling adequacy suggested that the sample was factor-
able (KMO =.853). Barlett’s test of sphericity was signicant (p <.001),
which also suggests the factorability of the sample. The factor analysis
showed that two factors had an eigenvalue larger than 1.00. All items
had loadings higher than .50 on one of the factors (see Table 2).
Six items loaded onto the rst factor. These items are all related to
study behaviors or attitudes that are related to self-regulated learning
skills; such as planning, time management, and motivation. Therefore,
this factor was labelled ‘self-regulated learning skills’. The items in this
Table 1
Distribution of students across cohorts.
2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018
N 3054 3037 2859
Male / Female 956 / 2098 962 / 2075 951 / 1908
Regular education 2940 2913 2763
Dalton education 64 64 56
Montessori education 50 60 40
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
5
factor reached Cronbach’s alpha of .706. Four items loaded onto the
second factor. These items are all related to the t of secondary educa-
tion to the current study on four different topics: the t regarding
working alone, working together, looking critically at your own work,
and study skills. This factor was labelled ‘t of secondary education’.
The items in this factor reached Cronbach’s alpha of .843. These results
show that the items in these factors can be combined to create two main
variables: self-regulated learning skills and t of secondary education.
Mean scores for the items within these variables were calculated, with
the items concerning self-regulated learning skills recoded so that a
higher score indicated stronger self-regulated learning skills.
2.3. Procedure
The data utilized in this study originates from a survey known as
Startmonitor. It consists of three distinct questionnaires administered
throughout the academic year. The initial questionnaire is distributed at
the onset of the academic year in September, followed by subsequent
distributions in December and June. Data collection was conducted by
ResearchNed. The sample is picked from the applications to higher ed-
ucation in the rst week of September. This information is provided by
DUO, the Dutch governmental institution responsible for the execution
and administration of student nance, loans, and educational support
programs. Invitations to this questionnaire are sent out in writing. Par-
ticipants provide their email address when they want to participate in
the later questionnaire, and invitations to those are sent out via email
(Warps, 2013). Data was provided to the researchers in an anonymized
format. All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with
the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (NOW, 2018).
2.4. Data analysis
Data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS 27. Hierarchical
regression analyses were performed comparing Dalton and Montessori
students to students who attended regular secondary schools. Dummy
variables were created for education type, with Dalton and Montessori
as dummies and regular education as the reference group. The regres-
sion was performed on two dependent variables; the t of secondary
education and self-regulated learning skills, which are both derived from
the factor analysis. Hierarchical regression analysis was chosen because
this allows for step-wise addition of dependent variables, which makes it
possible to inspect the effects of alternative education while controlling
for additional background variables and school-related variables.
Before conducting the analysis, assumptions of linearity,
independence of errors, homoscedasticity, multicollinearity, and
normality of the residuals were checked. The assumption of normality of
residuals was not met. A solution given for non-normality is to bootstrap
the regression (Williams et al., 2013). Therefore, this method was
applied to the analysis. The differences in sample size between Mon-
tessori, Dalton, and regular education are important to note. Whereas
analysis of variance requires sample sizes to be approximately the same,
multiple linear regression allows for larger differences in sample size
(Slinker & Glantz, 1988). Thus, hierarchical regression can be performed
with these differences in sample size between the groups.
The hierarchical regression analyses each consisted of three models.
In the rst model, the Dalton and Montessori dummies were included,
comparing Montessori and Dalton students to regular education stu-
dents. In the second model, demographic student background variables
were included; gender, ethnicity, and the education level of parents. In the
third model, variables regarding secondary education were included;
whether students had to redo a year (retention), effort in previous education,
study results in previous education, and time spent on studying in previous
education. Cohen’s f
2
was calculated when adding each model, which is
calculated by using the R
2
of two models in the hierarchical analysis and
calculating an effect size based on this change. An effect size of f
2
=0.02
indicates a small effect, f
2
=0.15 represents a medium effect, and f
2
=
0.35 indicates a large effect size (Cohen, 1988).
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive statistics
The primary objects of the current study are the t of secondary ed-
ucation to higher education and self-regulated learning skills. Table 3
shows the mean scores and standard deviations for these variables across
Dalton, Montessori, and regular education students. The perceived t of
secondary education was highest for students coming from Dalton ed-
ucation (M=3.76) and lowest for students coming from regular edu-
cation (M=3.52). SRL skills were lowest for students coming from
Montessori education (M=2.98) and highest for students coming from
regular education (M=3.12).
3.2. Bootstrapped hierarchical regression analysis
3.2.1. Fit of secondary education
The rst research question pertained to the t of secondary educa-
tion to higher education among Dalton, Montessori, and regular edu-
cation students. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 4. The
hierarchical regression on the t of secondary education revealed that in
the rst stage, the relationship between the Montessori and Dalton
dummies and t of secondary education was quite weak (R =.05), and
little variance was accounted for by the education type dummies (R
2
=
0.03 %), although the change in R
2
was signicant (F(2, 8890) =13.04,
p <.001). Montessori did not have a signicant effect on the t of
secondary education, but Dalton was signicantly positively associated,
meaning that students who received Dalton education in secondary
school rated the t of their secondary education to their current study
signicantly higher than regular education students. Adding the de-
mographic variables to the model seemed to account for no additional
variation, but the difference in R
2
was signicant, F(4, 8887) =6.83, p
<.001. The effect size of adding these variables to the model was f
2
=
0.00. Dalton and the higher education of parents were signicant posi-
tive predictors of t of secondary education, the other variables showed
no signicant effect. Adding the third stage to the model accounted for
an addition 0.17 % of variation, which was a signicant change, F(9,
8883) =21.59, p <.001. The effect size of adding these variables to the
model, when compared to the second model, was f
2
=0.02, indicating a
small effect (Cohen, 1988). In this stage, Dalton, effort in previous ed-
ucation, and study results in previous education were signicant posi-
tive predictors of the t of secondary education. Being female and
Table 2
Item loadings of the exploratory factor analysis.
Factor Self-regulated
learning skills
Fit of secondary
education
I have/had the tendency to postpone
obligations
.78
My self-discipline is/was good (reverse
coded)
.74
I should (have) spend more time on my
studies
.74
I can/could only study well sporadically .67
I nd it difcult to plan my studies
independently
.66
I nd/found it difcult to make an
effort for uninteresting courses
.51
Working alone .73
Working together .59
Critical view at own work/adjusting
progress
.58
Study skills (planning, self-study,
following classes)
.58
Note: Applied rotation method is oblimin. Number of factors were determined
based on eigenvalues. Loadings below .200 are not shown in the table.
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
6
retention were negative predictors. Other variables, namely Montessori,
ethnicity, education level of parents, and time spent on study in previous
education showed no signicant effect.
3.2.2. Self-regulated learning skills
The second research question pertained to the differences in self-
regulated learning skills of Dalton, Montessori, and regular education
students. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 5. The effects of
the predictors on self-regulated learning skills were analyzed using the
same three stages. In the rst stage, Dalton and Montessori had a small
relationship with self-regulated learning skills (R =.03), and little variance
was accounted for (R
2
=0.01 %), although this was a signicant change
(F(2, 8681) =3.90, p <.05). Following Dalton secondary education had
no signicant effect on self-regulated learning skills, whereas Mon-
tessori students scored signicantly lower than regular education stu-
dents. Adding the second stage to the model accounted for an additional
0.9 % of variation, which was a signicant change, F(5, 8678) =17.79,
p <.001. The effect size for adding these variables to the model was f
2
=
0.01, which is lower than the threshold for a small effect size of 0.02
(Cohen, 1988). Montessori education, education level of parents, and
having a non-Dutch ethnicity were negatively associated with
self-regulated learning skills. Females scored signicantly higher than
males. Dalton showed no signicant effect. The third stage of the model
accounted for an additional 17.4 % of variation, which was also a sig-
nicant change, F(9, 8674) =218.70, p <.001. The effect size for adding
these variables, compared to the second model is f
2
=.21, indicating a
medium effect size (Cohen, 1988). In this nal model, Dalton, Mon-
tessori, and gender showed no signicant effect on self-regulated
learning skills. Having a non-Dutch ethnicity, education level of par-
ents, and retention showed a negative association. Finally, effort-, time
spent-, and study results in previous education were all positively
correlated to self-regulated learning skills.
4. Discussion
In this study, we compared transitional t and use of SRL-skills of
rst year students in higher education who attended either Dalton,
Montessori, or regular schools in secondary education. The results
revealed that students who had attended secondary Dalton schools rated
the t from their secondary education to their current study in higher
education signicantly better than the students from regular secondary
education. However, no difference between Montessori students and
Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the t of secondary education and of self-regulated learning skills for each education type.
Regular education Montessori education Dalton education
N M S.D. N M S.D. N M S.D.
Fit of secondary education 8616 3.52 .67 150 3.62 .68 184 3.76 .60
Self-regulated learning skills 8739 3.12 .81 147 2.98 .86 180 3.01 .84
Table 4
Comparing t of secondary education between Montessori and Dalton secondary education students and regular secondary education students.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
B SE B β B SE B β B SE B β
Montessori .095 .056 .018 .090 .056 .017 .105 .054 .020
Dalton .242 .046 .051 * * .242 .046 .051 * * .245 .046 .052 * *
Gender (0 =male, 1 =female) -.008 .015 -.005 -.044 .016 -.030 *
Ethnicity (0 =Dutch, 1 =Non-Dutch) -.027 .023 -.013 -.017 .023 -.008
Higher education of parents 0.39 .016 .026 * .032 .016 .021
Retention -.042 .020 -.023 *
Effort in previous education .086 .011 .134 * *
Study results in previous education .038 .009 .043 * *
Time spent on previous education -.017 .011 -.027
R
2
.003 .004 .021
Adjusted R
2
.003 .003 .020
F for change in R
2
13.04 * * 6.83 * * 21.59 * *
R .054 .062 .146
Note: * p <.05, * * p <.01
Table 5
Comparing self-regulated learning skills of students from Montessori and Dalton secondary education with students from regular secondary education.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
B SE B β B SE B β B SE B β
Montessori -.150 .072 -.024 * -.144 .073 -.023 * -.081 .064 -.013
Dalton -.108 .064 -.019 -.105 .064 -.018 -.098 .056 -.017
Gender (0 =male, 1 =female) .144 .018 .083 * * -.024 .017 -.014
Ethnicity (0 =Dutch, 1 =Non-Dutch) -.109 .028 -.042 * * -.077 .026 -.029 *
Higher education of parents -.046 .019 -.026 * -.067 .017 -.037 * *
Retention -.094 .022 -.043 * *
Effort in previous education .233 .013 .300 * *
Study results in previous education .136 .011 .128 * *
Time spent on previous education .078 .012 .103 * *
R
2
.001 .010 .185
Adjusted R
2
.001 .010 .184
F for change in R
2
3.90 * 17.79 * * 218.70 * *
R .030 .101 .430
Note: * p <.05, * * p <.01
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
7
regular education students regarding the t of secondary education was
found. Moreover, in the nal model of the hierarchical regression
analysis, no signicant differences were found for SRL skills between the
different forms of education. Remarkably, the alternative forms of ed-
ucation explained less of the variation than additional demographic and
school-related variables, such as effort and study results in previous
education, added to the model.
4.1. Explanations for ndings
The ndings of this study are mostly contrary to our hypotheses,
since we expected that students from alternative schools would score
signicantly higher on transitional t and SRL skills. The only signicant
effect was found for Dalton students’ perceived transitional t. Several
factors may explain these unexpected results. Firstly, if the assumption is
that students from Montessori and Dalton secondary education receive
more training on their SRL skills, it is possible that they are also rating
themselves more critically on such skills. Thus, they may score them-
selves lower even if they employ more SRL skills, as they can identify
what skills are still lacking. Second, an explanation can be found in the
differences between regular and alternative education. Since 1998, self-
regulation and independent learning were put on the agenda of sec-
ondary schools when the so-called ‘Studiehuis’ (Studyhome) was
introduced by the Dutch government. This involved a new approach to
learning at upper secondary level that emphasized independent study.
While the implementation was discontinued after a few years, as it was
in that form unsuited for adequately supporting students, the interest
and focus on developing independent learning remained and some of the
methods introduced in that time period may have been improved and
still be in use in classes today. Methods employed in regular schools,
such as free study hours, are also methods that are used in Montessori
and Dalton schools to facilitate study skills. So possibly regular sec-
ondary schools have adopted educational practices from alternative
schools and the differences between regular and alternative are not so
pronounced as before.
The study by Schuitema et al. (2012) corroborates the suggestion of
reduced differences between regular and alternative education, since
they found that students in innovative environments in secondary edu-
cation reported no more SRL than students in traditional environments.
The innovative schools that were part of this study had less whole-class
instruction and students worked independently and, at times, collabo-
ratively in groups. These authors suggest that in future research, instead
of comparing between different ways of schooling as an instantiation of
the intended learning environment, we need to consider how students
perceive the learning environment in secondary school (realized
learning environment) and how these perceptions relate to long-term
impacts.
The lack of strict guidelines for Montessori and Dalton secondary
education from their founders further complicates comparisons. Mon-
tessori was hesitant to attach herself to Montessori secondary schools as
she lacked experience with the age group (Montessori, 2020; Mon-
tessori, 1961). Helen Parkhurst, the founder of the Dalton Plan, also left
a lot of room for schools to organize their implementation of Dalton
themselves (Berends et al., 2021). This complicates the ability to
compare Dalton or Montessori secondary education with regular edu-
cation since even within alternative education types, schools can differ a
lot from each other.
4.2. Strengths and limitations
There are four primary limitations to this study. First, no information
is known about the specic ways SRL skills are facilitated in regular and
alternative schools. An assumption was made that schools practicing
Montessori education and Dalton education invest more time in the SRL
skills of their students, but it is not known to what extent this happens in
practice. The second limitation relates to the nature of the measurement:
which is self-reported data. This may introduce bias and inaccuracies for
participants lling in the questionnaire. Additionally, the retrospective
nature of the questionnaire may lead to recall bias where participants
recall a situation in a different way than what actually happened. A third
limitation of our study is that it is unclear to what extent the results of
this study are generalizable outside the Dutch context, as the study only
includes students coming from Dutch secondary education studying in
Dutch (applied) universities.
A nal limitation of our study is that based on the available sample,
our explorative investigation did not afford an examination of the
potentially divergent efcacy levels among various contexts. This per-
tains specically to the assessment of school and classroom dynamics,
which could serve as explanatory factors for observed variations in
transitional t and use of SRL skills. Also, we could not include data on
possible explanatory background factors in our analyses, such as stu-
dents’ primary education, prior academic achievement, and parents’
socio-economic status. For instance, it might be assumed that results
may be different for students who attended both alternative primary and
secondary schools, compared to students who attended only alternative
secondary schools. Additionally, students’ prior academic achievement
in secondary education could have differentially affected the results
benetting students who attended Dalton secondary education. How-
ever, previous school effectiveness studies in primary education in
general showed no signicant differences between students attending
Dalton schools and students form traditional schools (Sins & van der
Zee, 2015; Sins et al., 2021). Also, we could not control for differences
with respect to parents’ socio-economic status. Studies in primary edu-
cation have shown that parents opting for Montessori or Dalton schools
are of higher socio-economic status compared to parents of student
attending traditional schools (Dohrmann et al., 2007; Rathunde &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2005; Sins & van der Zee, 2015; Sins et al., 2021). Not
much is known about differences pertaining to parents’ socio-economic
status in secondary education, except for Ruijs (2017) who found no
signicant difference in the amount of parental support between Mon-
tessori and non-Montessori students. Unfortunately, our dataset did not
provide such information, and this was beyond the scope of the current
research. Future research should provide more insight into the potential
differential impact of these factors on students’ experiences transitional
t and their SRL skills.
While the study has these limitations, some strengths should also be
noted. The primary strength relates to the large sample size. While the
samples for Montessori and Dalton are smaller than that of regular ed-
ucation, this can be explained by the smaller number of alternative
secondary Montessori and Dalton schools in the Netherlands. Addi-
tionally, hierarchical regression analysis is a robust method allowing for
the investigation of the effects of multiple independent variables (Cohen
& Cohen, 1983). The questionnaire also consists of items measuring
multiple demographic and school-related variables, which allows for a
thorough exploration of other factors explaining the differences found.
4.3. Implications and future research
This study highlights the need for secondary education to work to-
wards preparing students for higher education, where autonomy and
self-directed learning come to the forefront (Vettori et al., 2020). This
study contributes to the literature by shining a light on the transition
from secondary education to higher education, primarily for comparing
different types of education. The question should not just focus on which
type of (alternative) education best prepares students for higher edu-
cation, but intentions should focus on learning from each other and
adopting effective characteristics into other types of education.
This study has some implications and suggestions for practice. Pri-
marily, schools should strive to investigate their effective practices and
communicate this with other schools. Certain aspects of alternative or
regular education that show effectiveness in preparing students for
higher education and improving SRL skills can be shared and
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
8
incorporated into the school structure. Schools should be encouraged to
develop and share their vision on preparing students for higher
education.
Future research should aim to replicate our study while reducing the
limitations by gathering data on the schools that students attended, as
well as previous academic results and parents’ socio-economic status.
For example, a multi-level analysis could be done where t of secondary
education and SRL skills are compared at the individual, classroom, and
school level. In addition, research focusing on differences in the
approach of teaching SRL skills between Montessori, Dalton, and regular
secondary education can explain these ndings as well as uncover which
methods of teaching SRL skills are most effective in secondary educa-
tion. Furthermore, future research should aim to gain more insight into
students’ perceptions of aspects that are relevant to Montessori and
Dalton in secondary schools pertaining to independent learning,
autonomy-support and collaborative learning and their relationship
with effective study behaviors in higher education.
Author’s note
This article is based on data retrieved from the Dutch research
institute ResearchNed. These datasets are restricted and not publicly
available, but further information and code for the analysis can be
requested from the rst author. This research received no specic grant
from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-prot
sectors.
The authors have no conicts of interest to declare. All co-authors
have seen and agree with the contents of the manuscript and there is
no nancial interest to report.
All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they
participated in the study. Data was provided anonymized by
ResearchNed.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Patrick Sins: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft,
Supervision, Methodology, Conceptualization. Vivian Morssink-Sant-
ing: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Methodology,
Investigation, Formal analysis. Jaap de Brouwer: Writing – review &
editing, Writing – original draft. Symen van der Zee: Writing – review
& editing, Writing – original draft, Supervision, Methodology. Lida
Klaver: Writing – review & editing, Software, Methodology, Formal
analysis.
References
Berends, R., Van Slochteren, H.-M., & Otten-Binnerts, V. (2021). Dalton: L E F. Saxion
Progressive Education University Press.
Bakker, N., Noordman, J., & Rietveld-van Wingerden, M. (2010). Vijf eeuwen opvoeden in
Nederland [Five centuries of education in the Netherlands] (2nd edi). Koninklijke Van
Gorcum.
Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: a perspective on
assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2),
199–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x
Boekaerts, M., Maes, S., & Karoly, P. (2005). Self-regulation across domains of applied-
psychology: Is there an emerging consensus? Applied Psychology, 54(2), 149–154.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00201.x
Brinkworth, R., McCann, B., Matthews, C., & Nordstr¨
om, K. (2009). First year
expectations and experiences: student and teacher perspectives. Higher Education, 58,
157–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9188-3
Callan, G. L., Longhurst, D., Ariotti, A., & Bundock, K. (2020). Settings, exchanges, and
events: The SEE framework of selfregulated learning supportive practices. Psychology
in the Schools, 58(5), 773–788. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22468
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/correlation Analysis for the
Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed..,). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc,.
Cohen, J. E. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc,.
de Boer, H., Donker, A. S., Kostons, D., & van der Werf, G. P. C. (2018). Long-term effects
of metacognitive strategy instruction on student academic performance: a meta-
analysis. Educational Research Review, 24, 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
edurev.2018.03.002
de Bruijn-Smolders, M., Timmers, C. F., Gawke, J. C. L., Schoonman, W., & Born, M. P.
(2016). Effective self-regulatory processes in higher education: research ndings and
future directions. A systematic review. Higher Education, 41(1), 139–158. https://
doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.915302
Dent, A. L., & Koenka, A. C. (2016). The relation between self-regulated learning and
academic achievement across childhood and adolescence: A meta-analysis.
Educational Psychology Review, 28(3), 425–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-
015-9320-8
Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among
students. A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school
level. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 231–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-
008-9029-x
Dignath, C., & Veenman, M. V. J. (2021). The role of direct strategy instruction and
indirect activation of self-regulated learning - evidence from classroom observation
studies. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 489–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10648-020-09534-0
Dohrmann, K. R., Nishida, T. K., Gartner, A., Lipsky, D. K., & Grimm, K. J. (2007). High
school outcomes for students in a public Montessori program. Journal of Research in
Childhood Education, 22(2), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02568540709594622
Donker, A. S., de Boer, H., Kostons, D., Dignath van Ewijk, C. C., & van der Werf, M. P. C.
(2014). Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: a
meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 11, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
edurev.2013.11.002
Dutch Dalton Association. (n.d.). Kernwaarden [Core values]. Retrieved from 〈https://d
alton.nl/daltononderwijs/kernwaarden/〉.
Dutch Montessori Association. (n.d.) De Montessori visie [The Montessori vision].
Retrieved from 〈https://montessori.nl/veelgestelde-vragen/montessori-visie/〉.
Eckert, E. (2023). Erdkinder: An Educational Approach for Adolescents Ages 12–15. In
M. McKenna, A. Murray, E. Alquist, & M. Debs (Eds.), Handbook of Montessori
education. Bloomsbury Publications.
Ergen, B., & Kanadali, S. (2017). The effect of self-regulated learning strategies on
academic achievement: a meta-analysis study. Eurasian Journal of Educational
Research, 69, 55–74. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2017.69.4
Hamman, D., Berthelot, J., Saia, J., & Crowley, E. (2000). Teachers’ coaching of learning
and its relation to students’ strategic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92
(2), 342–348. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.342
Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effects of Learning Skills Interventions on
Student Learning: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 99–136.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066002099
Hoencamp, M., Exalto, J., de Muynck, A., & de Ruyter, D. (2022). A Dutch example of
New Education: Philipp Abraham Kohnstamm (1875–1951) and his ideas about the
New School. History of Education, 51(6), 789–806. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0046760X.2022.2038697
Imelman, J.D., & Meijer, W.A.J. (1986). De nieuwe school, gisteren en vandaag [The new
school, yesterday and tomorrow]. Elsevier.
Jansen, R. S., Van Leeuwen, A., Janssen, J., Jak, S., & Kester, L. (2019). Self-regulated
learning partially mediates the effect of self-regulated learning interventions on
achievement in higher education: A meta-analysis (Article) Educational Research
Review, 28, Article 100292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100292.
Joosten-Chotzen, R. (1937). Montessori opvoeding. Haar toepassing in ons land. [Montessori
education. Its application in our country]. Bijleveld.
Jenkins, C. (2000). New education and its emancipatory interests (1920-1950). History of
education, 29(2), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/004676000284427
Kliebard, H. M. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum (3rd ed..,, pp.
1893–1958). Routledge Falmer,.
Lillard, A. S. (2013). Playful learning and Montessori education. Namta Journal, 38(2),
137–174.
Luijkx, R., & de Heus, M. (2008). The educational system of the Netherlands. The
international standard classication of education (ISCED-97). An evaluation of
content and criterion validity for 15 European countries, Mannheim: Mannheimer
Zentrum für Europaische Sozialforschung (MZES), 15, 47–75.
Montessori, M. (2020). Door het kind naar een nieuwe wereld [Through the Child into a New
World]. Montessori-Pierson Publishing Company, (original work published 1941).
Montessori, M.M. (1961). Waarom Montessori Lycea [Why Montessori High School]. In
Allessie, M.A., Cornelissen, O., Haak, J., Misset, L.D., & Postma, W.P. (Eds.)
Montessori Perspectieven [Montessori Perspectives] (pp. 15–21). J.H. De Bussy
Amsterdam.
Norris, N. D. (2004). Promise and Failure of Progressive Education. Rowman & Littleeld,.
NOW. (2018). Netherlands code of conduct for research integrity. Retrieved from
〈https://www.nwo.nl/en/netherlands-code-conduct-research-integrity〉.
Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: six models and four directions
for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(422). https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2017.00422
Parkhurst, H. (1992). Education on the Dalton Plan. Kessinger Publishing,.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In
M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.
451–494). San Diego: Academic.
Pintrich, P. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated
learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385–407. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x
Rathunde, K. R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005). Middle school students’ motivation and
quality of experience: a comparison of Montessori and traditional school
environments. American Journal of Education, 111, 341–371. https://doi.org/
10.1086/428885
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.

Studies in Educational Evaluation 83 (2024) 101380
9
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological Correlates of University
Students’ Academic Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026838
R¨
ohrs, H., & Lenhart, V. (Eds.). (1995). Progressive education across the continents: A
handbook. Peter Lang.
Rietveld-van Wingerden, M., Sturm, J. C., & Miedema, S. (2003). Vrijheid van onderwijs
en sociale cohesie in historisch perspectief [Freedom of education and social
cohesion in historical perspective]. Pedagogiek, 23(2), 97–108. 〈https://dspace.libra
ry.uu.nl/handle/1874/187625〉.
Rubinstein, M. (2008). Karakteristieken van scholen voor voortgezet Montessori
onderwijs [Characteristics of schools for secondary Montessori education].
Apeldoorn: Garant.
Ruijs, N. (2017). The effects of Montessori education: Evidence from admission lotteries.
Economics of Education Review, 61, 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
econedurev.2017.09.001
Schuitema, J. A., Peetsma, T., & Van der Veen, I. (2012). Self-regulated learning and
students’ perceptions of innovative and traditional learning environments: a
longitudinal study in secondary education. Educational Studies, 38(4), 397–413.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2011.643105
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of Self-regulation of Learning
and Performance. Taylor & Francis.
Sins, P. H. M., & van der Zee, S. (2015). De toegevoegde waarde van traditioneel
vernieuwingsonderwijs: een studie naar de verschillen in cogntieve en niet-
cognitieve opbrengsten tussen daltonscholen en traditionele scholen voor primair
onderwijs. [The added value of alternative education: a study of the differences in
cognitive and non-cognitive yields between dalton schools and traditional schools in
primary education.]. Pedagogische Studien, 92, 254–273.
Sins, P. H. M., van der Zee, S., & Schuitema, J. A. (2021). The effectiveness of alternative
education: a comparison between primary Dalton schools and traditional schools on
outcomes of schooling. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 33(2), 169–197.
Slaman, P. (2018). In de regel vrij. 100 jaar politiek rond onderwijs, cultuur en wetenschap
[Generally free. 100 years of politics around education, culture and science]. Ministerie
van OCW,.
Slinker, B. K., & Glantz, S. A. (1988). Multiple linear regression is a useful alternative to
traditional analyses of variance. American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative
and Comparative Physiology, 255(3), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.1152/
ajpregu.1988.255.3.r353
Startmonitor. (n.d.). Startmonitor. Retrieved from 〈https://www.startmonitor.nl/〉van
derPloeg, P. (2013). Dalton plan: Origins and theory of Dalton education. Saxion Dalton
University Press.
Van der Ploeg, P. (2013). The Dalton Plan: recycling in the guise of innovation,
Paedagogica Historica. International Journal of the History of Education, 49(3),
314–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2012.725840
van der Ploeg, P. (2014). The salient history of Dalton education in the Netherlands.
History of Education, 43(3), 368–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760x
van Hulst, J.W., van der Velde, I., & Verhaak, T.M. (1970). Vernieuwingsstreven binnen het
Nederlandse onderwijs in de periode van 1900–1940 [Educational reform in The
Netherlands in the period 1900–1940]. Wolters-Noordhoff.
Vettori, G., Vezzani, C., Pinto, G., & Bigozzi, L. (2020). The predictive role of prior
achievements and conceptions of learning in university success: evidence from a
retrospective longitudinal study in the Italian context. Higher Education Research &
Development, 40(7), 1564–1577. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1817875
Verberg, C., Post, L.S., Van der Rijst, R., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Naar zelfstandig
onderzoek van leerlingen in het voortgezet onderwijs [Towards individual research
of students in secondary education]. Retrieved from 〈https://www.nro.nl/sites
/nro/les/migrate/eindrapport-405–15-552–1.pdf〉.
Vosniadou, S. (2020). Bridging Secondary and Higher Education. The Importance of Self
regulated Learning. European Review, 28(S1), S94–S103. https://doi.org/10.1017/
s1062798720000939
Warps, J. (2013). LOB en studiesucces. [LOB and study success]. Retrieved from 〈https
://www.researchned.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/LOB-en-studiesucces-Ein
drapport.pdf〉.
Williams, M. N., Grajales, C. A. G., & Kurkiewicz, D. (2013). Assumptions of multiple
regression: Correcting two misconceptions. Practical Assessment, Research, and
Evaluation, 18(11). https://doi.org/10.7275/55hn-wk47
Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key
subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 307–313. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0361-476x(86)90027-5
Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: A social cognitive
career path. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00461520.2013.794676
V.E. Morssink-Santing et al.