Celia Ortiz de Montoya She was a teacher and ahead of her time: she proposed something that in her time bordered on audacity. I wanted to do obstetrics at school.”An atmosphere as happy and thought-free as possible“, she wanted to be surrounded by a climate in which freedom ceased to be an exception and became a habit. It was this approach that changed the Argentine educational system, which was very strict.
He was a teacher when the classroom was governed by discipline, rank, and the teacher’s unimpeachable authority, but that was not based on respect, but on He is afraid that authority Supreme imposed almost. Teaching was a closed mandate. Learning, an exercise in silent obedience… The word “creativity” was almost unheard of; But if it appears, it is an outburst worthy of punishment.
In this context, Celia chose another direction and became the first Doctor of pedagogy from Argentina and pioneer of the renewal of teaching in the 1930s. He opposed the imposed positivist doctrine, and imagined classrooms where thought could move without fear, where creativity need not ask for permission… This gesture, so simple and so radical, ended up defining its place in the educational history of the country.
In Argentina at the beginning of the twentieth century, the school was built on a very rigid structure. Naturalism has built a temple of certainties: fixed programs, ritual tests, Teachers who provided facts and students destined to receive them without question. In this scenario, Celia’s appearance was more than just an inconvenience: it meant a silent break with what had been established and she became, in the eyes of her colleagues, a difficult person to convince that her path was not the right one. She knew it was him.
She started her academic career early, since she was a girl already revealed a different ambition within her. Born in Paraná in 1895, she trained as a teacher at the Paraná Normal School, where she graduated in 1915; Only a few years later, she obtained the title of Professor of Education and Philosophy at the National University of La Plata, in 1918, and in 1921 she obtained the title Doctorate in Educational Sciences. But this achievement did not place her in the institutional position that the entire system expected of her; Rather, it encouraged her to look at the world around her with different eyes.
Since that trip was not enough, the desire arose to continue learning and training. So he traveled to Europe, where he reinforced the idea he took as a simple axiom: school should not be a place to contain curiosity, but a space for it. Publishing. There he encountered perspectives that transcended the Argentine disciplinary tradition, taking up ideas that ranged from the sensibilities of philosopher and teacher. Jean-Jacques Rousseauwhich valued the child’s freedom and natural development, to currents that challenged the rigidity of positivism and celebrated creativity and life-energy in the classroom. This made her convinced that she would never give up: Education had to become a living areanot in a cloning machine.
This clash between the new and what he hoped to do was the pulse of his entire life and work. While the local regime insisted on the necessity of its presence The classrooms are arranged like barracksCelia suggested different atmospheres, climates and ways of being. While dominant education prided itself on its objectivity, She defended joy as a means and freedom as a basis. Not because he believed in the naive romanticism of the art of education, but because he saw in these gestures the possibility of forming people capable of thinking for themselves, and not merely obedient ones.
Nor did his idea of creativity seek to decorate school curricula. It was not a nice addition, but a statement of principles. the creativity (What naturalism viewed with suspicion) was hers Deep human powera tool capable of opening paths where repetitive logic only provides narrow paths. That is why I insist that the school must cease to be an instrument of copying and become… A space where each student can practice versions of themselves.
The culmination of this transformative drive was an experience Active comprehensive educationIt was implemented in 1931 at the Paraná Normal School. At first glance, it may seem like a pedagogical experiment, but in fact it was a structural challenge: integrating body, thought, sensitivity and expression in times when any deviation from the formal program was seen as an act of indiscipline.
The experiment lasted only one year. The political intervention that marked the beginning of the notorious decade ended the decade without pedagogical arguments, but with the clear suspicion that this project was proposing a different way of being in the world. For a country that still relied on obedience as a means, it was too much… but the interruption did not dampen their momentum. Celia continued to write, teach, and think. He published more than forty booksFrom historical evidence to deep philosophical reflections on the meaning of education. In all of them he speaks of a pedagogy that encourages looking at people before consenting, and an ethic of freedom that does not need big data to become tangible.
Even when she was dismissed from her job near the end of the term of Juan Domingo Peron’s government, her voice did not disappear.. His work has never depended on the position he holds; His strength did not come from institutional authority, but from his deep conviction, which he carried with precision and accuracy. This perseverance is perhaps one of the most distinctive features of his character: the ability to resist without fuss, without abandoning complexity, without submitting to the dictates of the moment.
Celia Ortiz de Montoya’s work is challenged by a question that is as simple as it is radical: Why do we learn? The normalization system, implemented in normal schools, was designed to create orderly, useful, and predictable citizens. But she offered another idea: to encourage each person to discover their own potential; It is an idea that has been uncomfortable for decades or has simply been forgotten.
The school I imagined was neither without teachers, nor a utopia without a structure. It was rather a school where Authority was not confused with imposition, and knowledge did not become a wall. Authority, in his view, should be a guide, not an undeniable figure; Knowledge, a calling, not a limit. That is why I insist on educational horizontality, as a means of recognizing this No one learns in isolation or from fear.
This vision, which today is very close to contemporary critical teaching methods, was at the time an act Intellectual disobedience. While the current system – positivism – tried to measure everything, classify everything, and control everything, Celia opened the door to the unpredictableWhy can’t it be unified? In this profoundly philosophical gesture, he offered an account of his understanding of the human condition.
Your book History of education He clearly reviewed the traditions that characterized Western teaching, but without accepting that the past determines the present. Later, in Educational philosophical problems in the twentieth centuryThis deepened the critical outlook and linked ideas to concrete practices, without making the theory inaccessible.
Those who worked with her remember her unique way of communicating: always attentive, always open and always precise. He did not impose an idea, but rather suggested it. This style, soft and firm at the same time, made many of his contributions go underground, influencing more than official history acknowledges.
He received many international awards throughout his life even though he was not a prophet in his country: in 1965, the Latin American Education Association awarded him the Medal of Orchid honoring Latin American women; In 1969 it was named Professor Emeritus From the National University of the Sahel, and in 1977 it was recognized by the International Conference of Nations The famous parliamentarian. He died on December 8, 1985 at the age of 90.