SAyWfc? V - 1’-
' 72-HSUl I
KUNKEL, Marion David, 1940- INQUIRY IN :t h e SECONDARY ENGLISH CLASS.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 Education, theory and practice
University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan i
©Copyright by
Marion David Kunkel
1971
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED INQUIRY IN THE SECONDARY ENGLISH CLASS
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By Marlon David Kunkel, B.A., M.A.
The Ohio State University 1971
Approved by
AcTvi'ser Department of Education PLEASE NOTE:
Some Pages have Indistinct p rin t. Filmed as received.
UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS PREFACE
The thinking for this dissertation seems to have ■ 4 begun during my experience in teaching high school English in response to the question continually raised by my stu dents, "Why do we study English?" Over a period of about six years while teaching, the conventional rationalizations of English programs of whatever sort began to make no sense to me at all. In fact, under the stimulus of my
students' questioning, I was beginning to suspect that many of the actual results of English,instruction were the exact opposite of the intended ones. It wasn't until much later when I had seriously considered some possible damaging effects of compulsory education, and the role of
linguistic and cultural prejudice in American society that the full perversity of what I had attempted to rationalize
came upon me.
The conventional arguments I used to answer my students' questions about studying. English revolved around three notions: communication, thinking, and humanity. In
English classes, for Instance, we develop communication skills by providing opportunity for students to use
communication media (especially language) and to receive
ii
r: feedback on the effectiveness of their attempts* Bub my own dawning awareness of communication problems In human affairs led me to believe that no amount of such skills could in any way lead to better understanding. There seemed to be something much more basic to mutual under standing than the kinds of skills students were expected to master In the English classroom.
My argument regarding the role of English studies In the development of thinking seemed equally superficial to me with the passage of time. Most students, It seemed to me, were able to get by in school without really thinking.
School for most seemed to be a place for learning to pass courses rather than learning to think. My own teaching objectives, derived from the so-called societal expecta tions of the "educated" person, left little time for think ing in my own classes. Furthermore, It seemed that much of the motivation for learning English in my students as well as in myself was a function of our tacit acceptance of the value expectations of the vast, impersonal and anonymous ideal other to whom we felt we needed to conform. These considerations and others led me to raise some serious questions about the reward system of schooling which seemed to reward unthinking at the expense of thinking.
The sheer inhumanity and injustice of societal and school expectations with regard to learning "Englibh" (one of the so-called "humanities"5 did not fully dawn on me
ill. until much later. It seemed to me so obvious that reflec tion on life experiences was a valuable component of becoming educated, that I had no reason to doubt the validity of the direct teaching of literature and film.
Teaching for exposure to these art works, even if it fre quently led to passive memorization on the part of mo3t students, was worth whatever the cost in terms of trouble to the students or myself.
My own frustration, however, in not being able to
"communicate" the literary experiences which were so vital to me led me to think carefully through some notions of aesthetics— none of which seemed to clarify the problem of communicating such experiences. During this period, an observation of William Wordsworth continually haunted me.
He said that on each of three visits to Tintern Abbey several years apart, his perception of the scene was dif ferent. The scene had a different meaning for him each time because there were changes Inside himself which fol lowed upon new experiences and the reflective thinking tha they induced. My own experience of changing perceptions and of changing responses to literature and music led me to believe that the most promising approach to the teaching of literature would somehow involve.the acceleration of the process of experiencing and reflecting. These experiences and reflections would become the basis for understanding and response* Yet it seemed especially hopeless at this
time that these things could happen within the confines of
the English classroom. My own narrow presumption that the
"educated" person's thinking structures ought to serve as models for the direct development of children's thought prevented me from considering a student-centered approach
to learning at all sympathetically. The idea of exploring
literature in order to learn about life precluded the idea
of exploring life in order to learn about literature,
I had not been able to realize the audacity of this
assumption until I had done a considerable amount of read*
Ing in such authors as Holt, Fromm, Montagu, Goodman,
Friedenberg, Dennison, Glasser, Mead, Rogers, Moffett, and
Postman and Weingartner. So strong was my resistance to
the possibility that "intelligence" could reside anywhere
but in the brains of the "educated" and that "intelligence"
could be gotten from anywhere except an accredited insti
tution, that I probably would not have benefited much from
these readings if it had not been for som concurrent 3 ocial
experiences. In conflict with the attitudes and ideas of
students and young people whose educational and cultural
experiences had led them to a far less optimistic and
benign view of the current technological culture and its
educational machinery, I began to acquire a perspective on
my thinking and behavior which would have been far more comfortable to avoid. My belief that an adequate theory
• * • *, * ■ must account for all the available data— -even In the social
sciences— and my growing awareness of the inadequacy of the experience base upon which my social and educational think ing was founded caused me a great deal of confusion and
turmoil.
This dissertation grew out of an attempt to put to gether the shattered fragments resulting from these con
flicts. The task of Integrating such diverse thoughts and experiences Into a coherent whole has been exceedingly
frustrating and exhausting. It would have been Impossible, however, without having many of the pieces already pre assembled by the writings of Rogers, Glasser, Mead, Postman
and Weingartner, and Moffett.
I would like to thank Professor Bargar whose lec tures on the articulation of problems has enabled me to get some semblance of order out of the chaos of my own thinking. This conceptualization has also come to be an
integral part of the learning model made explicit in
chapter four. Professor Blanke's diligent reading and
commenting upon the earlier drafts of the manuscript enabled me to see the sometimes Implicit organization of the material. His skepticism forced me to consider more
fully many important aspects of my thinking which would perhaps have been more comfortably suppressed. I would like to thank Professor Bateman for the range of concerns and breadth of vision which his continued questioning evoked in me. His patience with me and his belief in people has better enabled me to adopt similar attitudes toward myself and others.
I would also like to thank the graduate and under graduate students at The Ohio State University, as well as the Junior high students at Linwood, Roosevelt, and Mohawk
Schools in Columbus, Ohio, whose observations and questions did much to make me more aware of the nature and depth of the cultural experience gap between them and myself.
Finally, I would like to express gratitude to my wife Kathleen, William Craig, and Kathie Kavanaugh for their assistance in preparing the manuscript. More important, however, is the moral support that they have given me.
vii VITA
October 20, 1940 Born— Cincinnati, Ohio
1961 . ; . . . . B.A., Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio
1961-1967 . . . English Teacher, Elder High School, Cincinnati, Ohio
1966 ...... M.A., Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio
1966-1967 . . . Part-time Instructor, Villa Madonne College, Covington, Kentucky
1967-1968 . . . NSF Trainee in Linguistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1968-1969 . . . Research Associate, USOE Cooperative Research Project No. 2133* Contract OE-6-10-107, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1969-1970 . . . Supervisor of Student Teachers in Project for the Development of an In-Service Teacher Training Program for English in Inner-City Schools, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1970-1971 . . . Assistant Professor, SUNY, College at Brockport, Brockport, New York
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: English Education
Studies in Psycholinguistics. Professors Drachman and Stampe
Studies in Inner-City Education. Professors Bateman and Galloway.
. viii Studies in Educational Change. Professor Blanke
Studies In Educational Research. Professor Bargar TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE ...... ii
VITA ...... viil
LIST OF FIGURES ...... xii
Chapter
I. SOME GOALS FOR EDUCATION IN THE 1970'S .... 1
Introduction Problem Solving and the Schools Complex Problem Solving and Its Special Requirements
II. SOME INADEQUACIES OF CURRENT PRACTICES IN LANGUAGE ARTS EDUCATION ...... Ml
Introduction Conventional Language Arts Curriculum and Independence, Thougjht, Feeling, Responsibility, and Flexibility Conventional Language Arts Curriculum, "Failure," and "Communication" The Growth of Complex Concepts and Composition, Speech, and Literature
III. METHODS OF TEACHING AND COMPLEX PROBLEM SOLVING ...... • . 63
Introduction Historical Perspective The Authoritarianism of Directive Methods and the Development of Independence, Thought, Feeling, Responsibility, and Flexibility: Its Effects on Complex Problem Solving
x Chapter. ■ Page .
IV* COMPLEX CONCEPTUAL LEARNING AND THE FACILITATIVE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT ...... 88
Summary and Introduction / A Model of Complex Conceptual Growth Classroom Atmosphere for the Optimal Growth . of Complex Concepts Some Further Environmental Conditions for Open Inquiry of Complex Concepts
V. SOME KINDS OF GROUP DISCUSSION FOR THE EXPLORATION OF COMPLEX CONCEPTS ...... 125
Introduction Group Discussions for the Discovery of Relevance Exploratory Group Discussions Distinguished from Sensitivity Training Social Behavior Problem-Solving Discussions Initiating and Sustaining Group Discussion Group Discussion for the Interpretation of Literature and Films
VI. GROUP ACTIVITIES FOR THE EXPLORATION OF COMPLEX CONCEPTS ...... 156
Introduction The Planning and Evolution of Group Projects Feeding the Natural Process: Constraints on the Teacher*s Introduction of Tech nical Innovations, New Ideas, and New Perspectives
VII. INDIVIDUAL DIRECTIONS ...... 175
VIII. TEACHER EDUCATION ...... 187
Introduction Personal Development and Experiences Academic Development
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... '...... ®.i.. . . 199
xi ,'■■■■■ LIST OP FIGURES
Figure Page
1. A Model of Conceptual Growth In a Complex- Problem-Solvlng Classroom ...... 96
2. A Model of Tolerance of Complexity and Freedom of Expression In a Complex- Problem-Solving Classroom ...... • . • • . 100
ii
xll CHAPTER I
SOME GOALS FOR EDUCATION IN THE 1970*S
Introduction
In recent years many perceptive critics of education have been calling our attention to the problems arising from the trend to beef up the curricula after our tech nological superiority had been threatened by the launching of Sputnik. Such men a3 Holt, Goodman, Friedenberg, and
Glasser have pointed out the dehumanizing effects of cur rent educational practices. They have also stressed the fact that greater pressure for "academic excellence" leaves children no* choice but to employ means of getting right answers on tests, means that bypass thinking. These criticisms must be taken seriously by educators now. It is no longer possible for us to continue in our socio- pathological view of education in which rigid and arbi trary norms are used to judge and label people. The
"failures," given treatment by specialists in futile attempts to salvage them from the social scrap heap by making them more like the others, seldom achieve "salva tion" once they are labeled as failures. It is becoming increasingly clear that there are so many failures because the typical schools are designed for failure.1 Since
*H. T. Santee, in the FOREWARD to Schools Without Failure by William Qlasser, M.D. (New York: Harper & ftow, 19W)7"p. xi.
failure is largely an attltudlnal problem and children
adopt the attitudes that others have toward them, it seems
likely that changing the attitudes of educators would do
much to reduce failure. However, there, are other atti
tudes, perhaps more pervasive and destructive of individual
self-concept, that are implicit in the structure and oper
ation of the typical educational Institutions. These
attitudes, although they may never be made explicit and
sometimes are even denied, are like the institutional
racism spoken of by black writers. Achieving successful
school experiences for all children and eradicating the
subtle yet powerful determiners of failure— institutional
attitudes— will call for basic changes in curriculum and
instruction as well as in the organization of schools.
Certainly the healthy psychological and social
development of each child is an essential concern of educa
tion. Together with the goal of replacing the memory game
with thinking and 11 meaningful activity," these objectives
hold the highest position on the list of educational
priorities of humane educators. However, there is another
point of view of the purpose of education which lies out
side of and Includes the individual and his 'Immediate ^ v -^ ::-iJ^ .7 C :b-'3i-; social milieu. It is from this non-specific world-wide, viewpoint that this paper gains its orientation. Rather than being directed toward the nationalistic goals of
"prestige," technological superiority, and "security," and the achievement of individual identities within such a restricted scope, this paper will be concerned with the exploration Of educational possibilities consistent with the
(apparently until now largely unheeded) recommendations of the commission of the United Nations in 1954.
Current generations of youth realize the critical need for immediate world action on problems that affect the whole world.
As members of one species in an underdeveloped world community , they recognize that invidious distinc tions based on race and caste are anachronisms. They insist on the vital necessity of some forms of world order.
•^Margaret Mead, Culture and Commitment: A -Study- of the Generation Gap (Garden City, I'iew York: Natural history Press/Double day & Company;, Inc., 1970), p. 75.
This need is well expressed by Shannon Dickson, a fifteen- year-old Texan boy:
There is a mass confusion in the minds of my generation in trying to find a solution for our selves and the world around us. We see the world as a huge rumble as it swiftly goes by with wars, poverty, prejudice, and the lack of understanding among people and nations. Then we stop and think: There must be a better way and we have to find it. We see the huge rat race of arguing people trying to beat their fellow man out. All of this builds up \
causing unrest between nations and In the home. My . generation Is being used almost like a machine. Ve are to learn set standards, strive for better edu cation so we can follow In our elder's footsteps. But why? If we are to be a generation of repeti tion, the situation will be worse. But how shall we change? We need a great deal of love for1 every one, we need a universal understanding among people, we need to think of ourselves and to express our feelings, but that is not all. I have yet to dis cover what else we need, nor have I practiced these things as fully as I should. Because when I try I'm sneered at by my elders and those who do not hear, or look at it with a closed mind. Computers take the place of minds; electronics are taking over, only confusing things more. I admit we should follow some basic rules but first you should look at who is making the rules. Sometimes I walk down a deserted beach listening to the waves and birds and I hear them forever call ing and forever crying and sometimes we feel that way but everyone goes on with his own little routines, afraid to stop and listen for fear of cracking their nutshell. The answer is out there somewhere. We need to search for it.3
% e a d , Culture and Commitment. pp. 76-77*
Yet, while our children are well aware that they are living
. . . in a world overwhelmed by social, economic, and political problems, education seems bent either on denying to students 5he existence of these problems or implying that they are solved— a total break with the intense realities of our turbulent times. V
^William Glasser. M.D.. Schools Without Failure (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), p. 123.' " ” ’
Schools continue to provide distracting goals and activi ties and "to motivate" them by arousing trivial social- status anxieties. Children are dismayed by the sudden and to them In comprehensible difference between the first five years of their lives, when they used their brains : for fun and for solving their own problems, neces sarily relevant to their lives, and their life later in school when, with Increasing frequency from grade one through the end of graduate school, much of what Is required is either totally or partially Irrele vant to the world around them as they see it. Thus both excess memorization and increasing irrelevance cause them to withdraw into failure or to strike out in delinquent acts. "Smart" children soon learn that what is important in school is one thing and what is Important in life is another, and they live this schizophrenic existence satisfactorily* Many, however, do not.5
^Qlasser, Schools Without Failure, p. 30.
It gives one a sense of hope in a proposed solution to a problem when it becomes clear that that solution will also tend to solve some other problem. Even greater is that hope when many problems seem to converge on a single solution. It is the contention of this paper that freedom and personally meaningful education in our schools, where
children are given every opportunity to learn about them selves as much as they have been bribed or forced to learn about things in the past, will be instrumental in lubricat ing the rigid social machinery*— institutions and cultures— so that the changes which will certainly have to be made to establish or preserve freedom, Justice, and equality for
all people throughput the world can take place.
In the world which is already upon us, :the aim of education must be to develop individuals who are open to change. Only such: persons can construc tively meet the perplexities of a world in which 6
problems spawn much faster than their answers« The goal of education must be to develop a society in which people can live more comfortably with change than with rigidity. In the coming world the capac ity to face the new appropriately is more important than the ability to know and repeat the old.5
^Carl R. Rogers, Freedom to Learn (Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1969), p. 304.
We can no longer afford to prejudice our young with answers to present problems drawn from our past experiencesTo do
^Rogers, Freedom to Learn, p. 303. so will only confirm youth’s estimation of our activities: we are, in their eyes, attempting to destroy their natural idealism and replace it with tried and true institutional behavior. These behavioral precedents, although they con
tradict the stated moral principles of the society in many
* v Instances, are nonetheless lauded or tacitly approved. To
some of us the attempt to coopt the minds of clear-thinking
adolescents by making them listen to "reason"0 (i.e., our
o As the spell of scientific or quasi-scientific thought has spread In our culture from the physical to the so-called behavioral sciences, and finally to scholarship in the arts and letters, the marked tendency has been to consign whatever is not fully and articulately available in the waking consciousness for empirical or mathematical manipulation, to a purely negative catch-all category (In effect, the cultural garbage can) called the "unconscious" . . .or the "irrational" . . . or the "mystical" . . .or the "purely subjective." To behave on the basis of such blurred states of consciousness is at best to be some species of amusing eccentric, at worst to be plain mad. Conversely, behavior that is normal, valuable, productive, mentally healthy, socially respectable, intellectually 7 defensible, sane, decent, and practical Is supposed to have nothing to do with subjectivity* When we tell one another to "be reasonable," to "talk sense," to "get down to brass tacks," to "keep one's feet on the ground," to "Btick to the facts," to "be realistic," we mean that one should avoid talking about one's "inner" feelings and look at the world rather in the way an engineer looks at a construction project or a physicist views the behavior of atomic particles. We feel that worthwhile things come of such a state of mind— knowledge, solutions to problems, successful projects, money, power— whereas only some manner of unpro ductive self-indulgence comes of wallowing in "mere feel ings." Theodore Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co.7 19^9)» PP» 52-53*
own prejudices and semi-syllogistic rationalizations of our
own pusillanimity, not doing what we know must be done and
doing what we know we must not because of institutional
sanctions)^ becomes a frantic compulsion. To the extent
^Even scientists, when they form committees, are apt to have as their goal not the total abolition of war, but the prevention of the particular kinds of warfare for which they themselves feel an uncomfortable special responsibil ity— such as the use of pesticides in Vietnam. Mead, Culture and Commitment, p. 7^.
that our own children do not accept without question the pat
terns of behavior that are so essential to our personal
identities, to that extent we are forced to doubt our pre-
packed rationalizations of our behavior and attitudes.—
10The unquestioned assumptions of science are among the most pervasive and tyrannical.
This ugly doubt forces us to face squarely the institutional
hypocrisy with which we have compromised our own ideals in some moment of weakness and have not gained courage since to
reject. ■ ' _ ' ; v ^ ■ V^-'■/>
In addition to the preparation of future generations
open to change and committed to change, free student-
centered education may help to raise the low resistance of some frustrated youth to accepting a solution of their identity problems In freedom such as submitting themselves to the authority of some equally tyrannical and ineffective
Ideology or leader. Not the least of these is the dogma of science and "objective consciousness.1,11
11 In the days when an idea could be sileneced by showing that it was contrary to religion, theology was the greatest single source of fallacies. Today, when any human thought can be discredited by branding It as unscientific, the power previously exercised by theology has passed over to science; hence science has become in its turn the great est single source of error. Rogers. Freedom to Learn, p. 274. !
According to some writers on the subject, greater
freedom, which allows the individual to develop an aware ness of his own uniqueness, can cause intense anxiety and insecurity as a result of the individual's awareness of him self as distinct from all around him. In the words of
Erich Fromm:
. . .man, the more he gains freedom in the sense of emerging from the original oneness with man and nature and the more he becomes an "individual,1' has no choice but to unite himself with the world in the spontaneity of love and productive work.or else to seek a kind of security by such ties with the World as destroy his freedom and the Integrity of ';rs ■K his Individual self. 12
^Erloh Fromm. Escape from Freedom (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., l^l), p. 37-30. (Avon paperback ■ edition.)
In schools where spontaneity of love and productive work
are not valued (as Is true In most current American
schools), children are not given the opportunity to develop
the strong personal Identities and faith In their own com
petence necessary to achieve this essential feeling of one
ness with their environment. Instead of building children's
self-confidence and sense of responsibility, the schools
make all the significant decisions for them and tell them
what they ought to do. In order to acquire the strong
internal orientation needed to interact spontaneously and
effectively with his world, each child must be allowed to
develop responsibility for his activities: he must be
allowed to make his own mistakes and to cope with the
results, as well as to enjoy the fruits of his better
choices. By making children dependent upon ourselves, we
strip them of the independent motivation which could keep
them from grasping indiscriminately at any form of author
ity to save them from doubt and lack of direction and the
consequent insecurity and isolation. Paul Goodman says
this about "the young":
In their own-action organizations, the young are almost fanatically opposed to top-down direction, In several remarkable oases, e.g*, Tom Hayden, Bob Moses, Mario Savio gifted and charismatic leaders have stepped down because their influence had be- come too strong. • In imitating Qandhian non violence 9 they (the students) do not like to sub mit to rigid discipline, but each one wants to make his own moral decision about getting his head broken. . . All this, in my opinion, probably makes them immune to takeover by centralists like the Marxists, When Trotskyites, for instance, infiltrate an organization and try to control it, the rest go home and activity ceases. When left . to their own improvisation, however, the students seem surprisingly able to mount quite massive efforts, using elaborate techniques of communica tion and expert sociology. By such means they will never get power. But, indeed, they do not want power, they want meaning.13
13ooodman, "The New Aristocrats," in Natural Enemies, ed. by Alexander Klein (New York: Lippincott Company, “ 1969), p. 254.
Obviously Goodman is speaking of a particular segment of
"the young" in this passage. He is speaking of the young . who are members of action organizations, and generalization to all youth Is not Intended. It is perhaps not this small minority— about 5% of the total college-age group of
6,000,000— who have strong personal identities that need concern us. The young people (and some older ones) described by Kenneth Kenlston as the "non-political alienated" make up 5-10JS of the population of progressive colleges in the U.S. today. Kenlston says that these youths distinguished in several important respects from the activitlsts, may become increasingly more common as our society becomes ever more technological, more specialized, and more highly organized.
Their sense of themselves seems precarious and disunifled; they often doubt their own continuing capacity to cope; they have little positive sense of relatedness to other people; the boundaries of their egos are diffuse and porous.Strong in op position, these students are weak in affirmation; unable to articulate what they stand for, they have little sense of self to stand on. • . .1*1
^Kenneth Kenlston, "The Alienated," in Natural Enemies. ed. by Alexander Klein (New York: Lippincott Cora- pany, 1969), p. 262,
These young people and the ''quiescent multitude, the vast majority of young people (which) shares the experience, if not the logical response," are the ones who need the inner directiveness not to be forced to conform or non-conform.
The majority, perceiving existing Institutional patterns and trying to fit in, "like the militants and dropouts, has been conditioned by forces^ that deny the logic
the orthodox culture they confront is fatally and contagiously diseased. The prime symptom of that disease is the shadow of thermonuclear annihilation beneath which we cower. The counter culture takes its stand against the background of this absolute evil, an evil which is not defined by the sheer fact of the bomb, but by the total ethos of the bomb, in which our politics, our public morality, our economic life, pur intellectual endeavor are now embedded with a wealth of ingenious rationalization. We are a civilization sunk in an unshakable commitment to genocide, gambling madly with the universal.exter mination of our species. And how viciously we ravish our sense of humanity to pretend, eyen for a day, that such horror can be accepted as "normal," as "necessary"I Whenever we feel inclined to qual ify, to modify, to offer a cautious "yes . . . but" to the protests of the young, let us return to this fact as the decisive measure of the technocracy's 12
essential criminality: the extent to which it in sists, in the name of progress, in the name of ' reason, that the unthinkable become thinkable and the intolerable bedome tolerable. If the counter culture is, as I will contend here, that healthy instinct which refuses both at the personal and political level to practice such a cold-blooded rape of our human sensibilities, then it should be clear why the conflict between young and adult in our time reaches so peculiarly and painfully deep* In an historical emergency of absolutely unprecedented proportions, we are that. strange, culturebound animal whose biological drive for survival expresses itself generationally. It is the young, arriving with eyes that can see the obvious, who must remake the lethal culture of their elders, and who must remake it in desperate haste* Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture, p. 47. of the existing institutional environment. As a result, the majority is troubled. It is a susceptible majority, open to the suasions of the motivated minority."1**
Sherman B, Chlckering, "How We Got That Way," in Natural Enemies, ed. by Alexander Klein (New York: Llppincott Company, 19&9), PP* 204-205*
Fromm says that "there is no greater mistake and no graver danger than not to see that in our own society we are faced with the same phenomenon that is fertile soil for the rise of Fascism anywhere; the insignificance and power
lessness of the individual.wl7 He goes on to say that by
1 Tt Fromm. Escape from Freedom, p. 265. freeing the individual from all external restraints democ racy has not achieved true individualism. The "right to express our own thoughts . * * means something only if we v'.
are able to have thoughts of our own; freedom from external authority Is a lasting gain only If the Inner psychological
conditions are such that we are able to establish our own
Individuality."18
1®Fromm1 Escape from Freedom, p. 266.
The institutions— especially schools— are doing
little to develop these inner psychological conditions necessary for the survival of free men. They are instead making children hopelessly dependent upon authority and social pressure of opinion and valuing outside themselves
— ■*■9 and attempting to strip them of their humanity and
^ , . . they did not foresee the possibility, indeed the inevitability, that the scientific world view might well be corrupted by the same kind of bad magic that had turned Christianity into the bulwark of exploitive priv ilege. Yet science and technology* with their relentless insistence on specialization and expertise, were themselves to come full circle and be transformed into aV closed a priesthood as any in history. Where the shaman looked to communal ritual to validate his vision of reality, scien tific experts have had to look more and more to professional approval by self-selected authorities to validate their ever more esoteric knowledge. The general public has! had to content itself with accepting the decision of experts that what the scientists say is true, that what the tech nicians design is beneficial. All that remained to be done to turn such an authoritative professionalism into a new regime of bad magicians was for ruling political and economic elites to begin buying up the experts and using them for their own purposes. It is in this fashion that the technocracy has been consolidated. We arrive, at last, at a social order where everything from outer space to psychic health, from public opinion to sexual behavior l is staked out as the province of expertise. The community dares not eat a peach or spank a baby without looking to a t ': 14 certified specialist for approval— lest it seem to tres pass against reason. Even the experts who hold out gamely against this system, challenging the certification authority of state , corporation, university, or party, can do no more than ask the community to accept their authority on trust* For the reality which scientific Knowledge examines cannot be translated into either art or ritual which the community can participate in experiencing. The research of experts can be popularized or vulgarized as a body of information— and Inevitably distorted in the process. It cannot be democratized as a form of vital experience. Such is the price we pay for replacing the immediacy of the personal vision with the aloofness of objective knowledge. The old magic that could illuminate the sacramental presence in a tree, a pond, a rock, a totem is derided as a form of superstition unworthy of civilized men. Nothing we come upon in the world can any longer speak to us in its own right. Things, events, even the person of our fellow human beings have been deprived of the voice with which they once declared their mystery to men. They can be known now only by the mediation of experts, who, in turn, must rely upon the mediation of formulas and theories, statistical measures and strange methodologies. But for us there is no other reality, unless we are willing to let ourselves be set down as incorrigibly Irrational, the allies of sinister and reactionary forces. Roszak. The Making of a Counter Culture, pp. 262-264. wisdom which can flow naturally only from self-knowledge
■ 20 and maximally integrated personalities.
20I believe that this picture of the individual, with values mostly Introjected, held as fixed concepts, rarely examined or tested, is the picture of most of us. By taking over the conceptions of others as our own, we . lose contact with the potential wisdom of our own func tioning and lose confidence in ourselves. Since these value constructs are often sharply at variance with what is going on in our own experiencing, we have in a very basic way divorced ourselves from ourselves, and this accounts for much of modern strain and insecurity. This fundamental discrepancy between the individual's concepts and what he is actually experiencing, between the intel lectual structure of his values and the valuing process going on unrecognized within him— this is a part of the fundamental estrangement of modem man from himself. This is a major problem for the therapist. Rogers. Freedom to Learn, p . 2^17
Free student-centered education will not only lead toward the solution of the problem of personal "failure" and lack of real thinking in school work, and the political problems inherent in the destruction of the individual identities of children in our society, but such education will also reintegrate the thoughts and feelings of children so that the schizoid effects of modern culture can be con trolled. Erich Fromm has said it well:
It seems that one of the essential features of that society which we are approaching is a state of chronic low-grade schizophrenia* . . . I mean by that an essential characteristic of schizophrenia, the split between thought and feeling, truth and pas sion, mind and heart, is becoming complete in our time. . . . It has become fashionable to write about the possible death of millions of Americans (never mind other people who are killed) in the same tone used to discuss the transportation of coal. . . . A certain number of killed is acceptable, and a larger number (is not) acceptable, the only criterion being whether our economy can be made as good as new within twenty or thirty years. This way of writing and of thinking, in which one speaks about human affairs without any corresponding emotion, without any cor responding . . • visceral thinking, is indeed madness. . . . There are many low-grade forms of psychoses which permit a person to function very well socially, in some societies even better, in spite of having lost that sanity in which mind and heart remain in har mony . It is in this sense that "sick'1 and "insane" are not Just psychiatric concepts, but social concepts as well. If enough people share a common craziness, the craziness becomes normalcy, just as long as it doesn1t go beyond that threshold which would make crazy people incapable of working. In such a society, the person who is not crazy is thought to have lost his mind. Nietzsche said It beautifully: "Anyone who ' doesn't lose his mind over certain events has no mind to lose.V2^
SlErich Fromm, "In the Name of Life," in Natural Enemies. ed. by Alexander Klein, pp. 240-241.
We can no longer pretend to be passive and helpless witnesses to problems caused by vague mysterious forces beyond our control, nor can we invoke the grand scapegoat-^ outside agitation— as the basic cause of social unrest throughout the world. The solution of the increasingly acute problems of our shrinking world is within the reach of independent, feeling, thinking, and responsible citizens of the world. The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the present non-educatlve activities pursued
In most English classrooms, and the goal of this alterna tive is the cultivation of all that is human: Independence, 22 feeling, thought, responsibility, and flexibility. The
22Man has within him an organismic basis for valuing. To the extent that he can be freely in touch with this valuing process in himself, he will behave in ways which are self-enhancing. We even know some of the conditions which enable him to be in touch with his own experiencing process. . In therapy, such openness to experience leads to emerging value directions which appear to be common across individuals and perhaps even across cultures. Stated in older [sic] terms, individuals who are thus in touch with their experiencing come to value such directions as sin cerity, Independence, self-direction, self-knowledge, social responsivity, social responsibility, and loving interpersonal relationships. I have concluded that a new kind of emergent uni versality of value directions becomes possible when indi viduals move in the direction of becoming open to their.: experiencing. Such a value base appears to make for the enhancement of self and others, and to promote a positive evolutionary process. Rogers. Freddom to Learn, p. 2 5 6 . atmosphere considered most conducive to the attainment of this goal is an open, personally accepting, yet intellec tually challenging one in which children are involved in the pursuit of activities which are real to them. Only by having the responsibility to solve the problems presented by their own activities will children be motivated to learn about themselves and others and possibly to find hints as to how to solve the most pervasive problems in human existence.
Problem Solving and the Schools
Unfortunately, there is widespread lack of under standing of the importance of these problems among educators and in the community. As a result, few people involved with education are totally convinced that educa tion should be concerned with preparing students to identify, explore, and solve problems, rather than with passing on to our children the conclusions that we have reached after accumulating and examining information lead ing to the solutions of problems we have deemed important.
This and the final section of the present chapter are an attempt to point out the limitations of much of current thinking on the topic of schools and problem-solving, : Ausubel has attacked the belief that the development of problem-solving ability is the primary goal of educa tion* He quotes Bruner who says:
Whatever program is Introduced in the schools, let it be pursued continuously enough to give the student a sense of the power of mind that comes from a deepening of understanding. It is this, rather than any form of coverage over time, that matters most.23
2^David Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals. PecemberT I9t>l7 P. 3b.
Ausubel points out that these "somewhat extreme value
Judgments regarding the principal functions of the school inspire . . . correspondingly one-sided proposals with oil respect to curriculum and pedagogy. He then quotes
Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 36. -
Suchman to the effect that
, . . the schools must have a new pedagogy with a new set of goals which subordinates retention to thinking . .. Instead of devoting their efforts to storing information and recalling It on demand, they would be developing the cognitive functions needed to seek out and organize Information in a way that would be most productive of new concepts.2*>
25Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 37, quoted from Richard J. Suchman, "In- . qulry Training: Building Skills for Autonomous Discovery" (Urbana, Illinois: College of Education, University of Illinois, June, 1961), pp. 6-7. oV Ausubel admits that the problem-solving ability Is a legitimate and significant educational objective In Its own right, and hence It Is highly defensible to "utilize a certain portion of classroom time in developing appreci ation of and facility In the use of scientific methods of inquiry and of other empirical, inductive, and deductive problem-solving procedures."2** However, he goes on to
^Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 37. qualify this admission and to assert the need for restoring the "natural balance between the 'transmission of culture* and the problem-solving objectives of education" (p. 37).
This is a far cry from advocating that the enhance ment of problem-solving ability is the major func tion of the school. To acquire facility in problem solving and scientific method, it is not necessary for learners to rediscover every principle in the syllabus. Since problem-solving ability is itself transferable, at least within a given subject matter field, facility gained in independently formulating and applying one generalization is transferable to other problem areas in the same discipline. Furthermore, overemphasis on developing problem-, solving ability would ultimately defeat its own ends. It would leave students with insufficient time in which to learn the content of a discipline; and, hence, despite their adeptness at problem solving, they would be unable to solve simple problems involving the application of such content.27
27Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 37.
; The assumptions which underly the educational assumptions of Ausubel and the educators he is arguing with In this article are not accepted by many of today's youth.
If it were possible for young people to believe that the
paths determined for them by tradition were indeed means of
achieving solutions to the problems that they face, it
would still be possible to preselect "vital skills and
knowledge" to be Included in the curriculum and to devise
"effective methods" for the teaching of these things. When
one talks about problem solving in education, it is
important to find out whose problems they are. It is a well-known fact that learning is most natural and effec
tive when it results from working on problems that are
perceived as problems by the learner— when the learning brings the learner a step closer to realizing his goals, whether these are skills needed to sustain the child's
sense of competence or facts which help to reduce the con
flict of his Ideas or perceptions. The notion of problem
solving, therefore, would seem to be at the heart of real
learning. This suggests that the process of education
should perhaps somehow cause the student to have problems
rather than to decide in advance what problems he should be concerned with and then force him to solve these— even worse, force him to learn the answers to questions and
the solutions to problems with which he is not concerned.
Chapters 5, 6, and 7 of this paper will be concerned with
some activities out of which real problems can arise in
the classroom. Teachers will help students to articulate their own problems and to devise methods of investigating
them when these are not apparent to individuals or groups«
Furthermore, Ausubel contends that:
While it makes perfectly good sense for the scien tist to work full-time formulating and testing new hypotheses, it is quite indefensible, in my opinion, for the student to be doing the same thing— either for real, or in the sense of rediscovery. Most of the latter*s time should be taken up with appropri ate expository learning, and the remainder to sampling the flavor and techniques of scientific method.28
28 Ausubel,"Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 39.
It is obvious here that the cognitive and attltudinal
growth associated with creative problem-solving activity
counts for little in Ausubel*s thinking. Children are not
to learn to think and to believe in themselves as thinkers;
this is only for the special elite who manage to go beyond
what the schools force them to "learn." Students must be
made to realize that they cannot think competently, or
perhaps schools as they now are would not*be able to
survive. This destructive attitude of schools is communi
cated to children all too well in the timetable of
Instruction and standardized testing procedures used to
assess "educational" effectiveness. A further lesson in
subservience and dependence on institutions for xlegitimizing thought is given by the schools1 usurping of
the child's responsibility to devise a meaningful education :v'V;22:; for himself. He is not "educated" until lie submits to the
arbitrarily selected set of "disciplines" required by the experts. This haughty attitude toward the thinking of
children Ausubel attempts to Justify by reference to the revered stages of mental development:
There is in my opinion a world of difference between the intuitive thinking of elementary- school children and the Intuitive thinking of scholars and scientists* The elementary-school child thinks intuitively or subverbally about many complex, abstract problems, not because he is creative, but because this is the best he can do at his particular stage of Intellectual develop- ment. The intuitive thinking of scientists on the other hand, consists of tentative and roughly for mulated "hunches" which are merely preparatory to to more rigorous thought. Furthermore, although the hunches themselves are only makeshift approxi mations which are not precisely stated, they presuppose both a high level of abstract verbal ability as well as sophisticated knowledge of a particular discipline.29
29Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 39.
Unfortunately,.these claims are unwarranted and may reflect a misreading of the developmental psychologists' theories.
Certainly there are rather discrete stages of intellectual development. However, no one to ray knowledge maintains that during the crossover from one stage to the other the child exchanges one way of thinking for another. Rather, he acquires new.modes of information processing and problem solving in addition to the ones previously acquired.
Ideally, these new modes of thought are integrated with the more primitive cognitive apparatus so that problems of greater remoteness from Immediate concrete situations can be dealt with. For Instance, the acquisition of the conscious use of logical operations for solving more abstract problems gives the child a breadth of vision and scope which he could not otherwise have, even though he has been operating unconsciously in response to concepts of such scope long before. While it may be true that discovery can be made entirely within the symbolic system devised to represent the concepts and their interrelations of a particular discipline, it is also true that such cerebral discovery is necessarily limited by the accuracy of the postulates and concepts commonly accepted within that discipline. A fresh imagistic sense of fundamental concepts and of possible explanatory mechanisms may be utterly inhibited by "a high level of verbal ability as well as sophisticated knowledge of a particular discipline." The accepted verbal concepts may dichotomize the perceived realities in such a way that no other, perhaps more adequate, conceptualization is possible for one steeped in this kind of specialized knowledge. The "hunches" of scientists seem, according to Ausubel's description, to be no different from elementary-school children's intuitive and subverbal thinking, except for the fact that the . scientists are more likely to represent their intuitions with greater facility and in orthodox terms. An attitude (misunderstanding) which Is used to <
Just1fy our not structuring schools for the development of independent thought and flexibility (resourcefulness.
Improvising skill, venturesomeness, originality, etc.)— qualities essential to the problem-solving competence of children of the 1970's— but being satisfied with educational veneer is typified in the elitism of such educational writers as David Ausubel.
Ausubel attacks the "democratized" belief In the universality of the capacity for critical thinking and creativity. Creativity, so it is alleged by many, "is not the exclusive property of the rare genius among us, but a tender bud that resides in some measure within every child, requiring only the gentle, catalytic Influence of sensl- tlve, imaginative teaching to coax it into glorious bloom"
(p. 39).
This idea rests on the following questionable assumptions: that one can be creative without necessarily being original; that all discovery activity, irrespective of originality, is qualita tively of one piece— from Einstein's formulation of the theory of relativity to every infant's spontaneous discovery that objects continue to exist even when they are out of sight; that consid ering the multiplicity of abilities, every person stands a good chance, genetically speaking, of being creative in at least one area; and that even if uncooperative, good teachers can take the place of missing genes.30
3°Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 39• Ausubel maintains that the adoption of the goal of ^ = developing this mythical universal creativity is most unreasonable. ,
How reasonable is the goal of "teaching for creativity," that is, in the sense of singularly original achievement? A decent respect for the realities of the human condition would seem to indi cate that the training possibilities with respect to creativity are severely limited. The school can obviously help in the realization of existing cre ative potentialities by providing opportunities for spontaneity, initiative, and individualized expres sion; by making room in the curriculum for tasks that are sufficiently challenging for pupils with creative gifts; and by rewarding creative achieve ment. But it cannot actualize potentialities for creativity if these potentialities do not exist in the first place. Hence it is totally unrealistic, in my opinion, to suppose that even the most ingenious kinds of teaching techniques that we could devise could stimulate creative accomplishment in children of average endowment• Since creative potentialities are, by definition, sparsely distributed in the population, instances of true creativity can be anticipated no more frequently among the clientele of our schools than among any other population of human beings.31
^ A u s u b e l , "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 40.
The phrase "singularly original achievement" which
Ausubel maintains is connoted by the word creativity
(although creativity is often defined in a more restricted
sense by those who advocate such a teaching goal as
"autonomous and flexible discovery") makes it appear that his real objection to creativity is something not claimed
as its justification by its advocates. The ambiguity of this term seems to arise from our grammar-school notions • 26 of "great" men; These notions of "greatness" we got from our expurgated texts telling only of the 11 great" deeds and discoveries* Such mystery and awe these stories aroused i,n us that we even now have difficulty imagining a "great" man like Lincoln or Einstein using the toilet or enjoying sex/ or even telling a lie* If a person is concerned enough about some problem and if his experiences and other informational sources are in happy combination— • and he has the needed "qualities"— it is possible that he will be creative in the grammar-school sense. The mystery and grandeur of "creative" activity is all in our minds.
Ausubel also sides with the geneticists when he claims that variance in critical thinking or problem-solving ability is due more to inherited endowment than it is to experience.
Aptitude in problem solving involves a much dif ferent pattern of abilities than those required for understanding and retaining abstract ideas. The ability to solve problems calls for qualities (e.g., flexibility, resourcefulness, improvising skill, originality, problem sensitivity, venturesomeness) that are less generously distributed in the popula tion of learners than the ability to comprehend verbally presented materials. Many of these qual ities also cannot be taught effectively. Although appropriate pedagogic procedures can improve problem solving ability, relatively few good problem solvers can be trained in comparison with the number of persons who can acquire a meaningful grasp of various subject matter fields.32
32Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery; Rationale and Mystique," p. 4l. It is probably true that these essential qualities cannot be
”taught effectively.11 In fact, they may not be teachable at
all* It Is perhaps most likely that these "qualities*1 are
given In the makeup of normal, healthy infants* Whether a
particular child survives childhood with the flexibility,
resourcefulness, improvising skill, originality, problem
sensitivity, and venturesomeness would seem to depend
largely on whether he was allowed to pursue his own inter- ■
ests and to what extent he was allowed to be flexible,
resourceful, improvising, original, and venturesome in his
play.
Consider what damage is done to these qualities when
children are continually scolded for getting into forbidden
tool boxes or sewing kits. Some children are even punished
for not eating properly. I once passed some children in the neighborhood "fishing11 in an entrance to the apartment basement. The drain was clogged and several inches of water had accululated in the bottom. Since this entrance was used only on rare occasions by maintenance men, it was
covered with iron grillwork and thus served as part of one
family*s porch. The children were happily dangling their homemade fishing equipment into the water, pretending that they were on a bridge. Suddenly the woman who lived in that apartment came rushing out, screaming that they should get out of there immediately. She dragged her own son, who had started the game, into the house, shouting at him the whole time. I wonder what effect a number of such Incidents would have on the flexibility, resourcefulnessimprovising skill, originality, and venturesomeness of children. . It would seem that a child thus treated would soon learn to avoid any activity that is not explicitly advised or con sented to by authorities. And since playfulness requires spontaneous activity, all these beautiful "qualities" essential for the ability to solve problems would be cramped by inhibition and would ultimately die.
If these qualities are not crushed out of the child by the time he reaches school, it is likely that they will be, not long after he arrives. In school the child learns very quickly— it is in fact one of the first and most per vasive lessons— that directions must be followed exactly as given. There is no room for Inventiveness in the class room. (I recently saw a second grader's art paper which, although it was a remarkable piece of work for his age, received a "D." The boy explained that the teacher had said to draw a picture of a rocketship going out into orbit. He drew his oging out and coining in.) Frequently, teachers and even published work sheets and textbooks ask ambiguous questions. Because the answers are not what the teacher (or the published exercise) wanted for an answer, he marks them wrong and explains why he is right.
Original or unusual (but nevertheless correct) answers to ambiguous questions are therefore punished. For example , a boy was once asked on a physics exam.how to ascertain the height of a building given a barometer. His reply: go to the top of the building, tie the barometer to a long string, let the barometer down slowly until it hits the ground, then draw up the string and measure how much string was let out.
Or more simply, take the barometer downstairs and, with It, knock on the maintenance engineer's door and ask him how tall the building Is. Naturally, no credit was given for either of these answers. Flexibility, resourcefulness,
Improvising skill, originality, and venturesomeness must be sacrificed for the sake of good order, and, of course,
"learning" (not in the sense of "thinking" but in the sence of "recalling").
Given Ausubel's concept of "creativity" and its distribution in the general population, it is not surprising that he concludes:
From the standpoint of enlightened educational policy in a democracy, therefore, it seems to me that the school should concentrate its major efforts on teaching both what is most important in terms of cultural progress and what is most teachable to the majority of its clientele.33
33Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 41. 30
Perhaps for the 1970's this should read:
Prom the standpoint of enlightened educational policy in a democracy, it seems that the school should concentrate its major efforts on teaching both what is most important in terms of human survival (personal and social) and human progress and whatever is deemed related to the achievement of these ends.
Many students are finding it more and more difficult to
believe that the two statements above are at all compatible.
If our schools are not oriented toward the goals in the
1970 revision of Ausubel's statement many more students may
become hopelessly alienated and hostile toward the "culture11
whose "survival" and "progress" are so dear to us. For
their sake, whatever is done in the schools of the ?70's,
let us not destroy those "qualities" essential to problem
solving and critical thinking, for once they are destroyed
and conformity to external guidance is put in their stead, we leave our young at the mercy of any kind of demagbguery
that may seem to be an easy answer to the concerns they
feel most deeply. Children must now be encouraged to
develop their problem-solving capacities and critical
thinking— and this Involves a willingness to be questioned
ourselves as well as to question those we consider to be
our opponents. - Complex Problem Solving and Its Special Requirements
Frequently, In general educational writings, a clear distinction Is not made between the various kinds of concepts dealt with in school subjects. Consequently, generalizations about the learning process derived from this amorphous heap of concepts are often of little use.
In generalizing from the acquisition and employment of simple concepts to the case of complex problems, we perhaps seriously distort our notion of the process of complex concept attainment and complex problem solving. A clari fication of the perhaps genetically different types of concepts (and perhaps involving such concepts) is essen tial to the understanding of the principal shortcoming of conventional education for children of the 1970*s.
By simple, I mean those concepts or relations which admit only a narrow range of points of view. Such concepts when they are grasped by the learner lead to accurate! predictions by the learner of the outcome of certain defined situations. When propositional arguments involving these concepts are made according to acceptable modes of reasoning, one is not likely to be approached by another person claiming to have other possible answers to the problem using the given set of concepts. There are usually no affective reactions to such concepts: they are : ■ static and are neither loved nor avoided. The concepts do v:;‘; •- not usually grow— at least . If they do, they do so only
within certain predictable limits--and this growth does not
involve a possible perceived contradiction or necessary
rejection of the previously acquired concept. These con
cepts are frequently mutually exclusive or entirely inclu
sive of or included in other concepts of the discipline.
Opposing concepts do not vie with one another for our
attention when they are involved for problem solving. They
are either appropriate to the situation or they are not,
and our sense of this Is almost immediate and intuitive.
Finally, since there are no emotive aspects to these con
cepts, we do not find that their use or presence in mind
corresponds in any way to our various feeling states.
Mathematics Is a good example of a discipline which
deals exclusively in the realm of simple concepts and
relations. (Certainly, simple in the sense that I am
using the term has nothing to do with the difficulty of a
subject.) When one has once acquired the concepts of
three and four and seven, the propositional relationships
among these concepts (3 + 4 ** 7, 7 - 3 * 4, 7 - 4 a 3) are
forever fixed. The boundaries between the concepts in no.-.* way overlap. Although the concept of seven includes a set
of three and a set of four together, seven is not four nor
is it three. Even if I like threes or sevens becasue of
some religious significance, or if I avoid them because of
bad luck I have had with them in gambling, my understanding of these propositions and the action I may take as a result
of them will be in no way affefeted.
In contrast to the simple concepts and propositions
of disciplines like mathematics are those areas of study
which involve larger numbers of variables and which touch
more closely and directly the decisions made in real life
affairs. One can learn a number of principles in economics
stating the usual relationships between governmental policy
and business, labor, foreign policy, changes in world
currency valuation, domestic developments, and the expected
movement of the stock market. But since there are less
tangible causes of, say, stock market movement (the psychology of the market), the effects of these causes can
either occur or not, depending often on who says what and
on how much faith the general public has in the people making predictions. Even if one is able to predict
successfully the direction of change according to the principles, it is still impossible to determine ahead of
time the extent of the change.
It seems that political decisions rest to a large
extent on abstract concepts and propositions of even
greater complexity. Take, for Instance, the question of whether or not to extend welfare benefits. It would seem
that opinions on such a topic can be arrived at by means of simple or complex processes of thought and feeling. In more complex considerations of this problem, there would ■■■■ V; ; ..3k seem to be considerable ambivalence of feelings aroused by the conflicts between various concepts such as justice, humanltarlanlsm, egalitarianisms, and self-concept— especially the concepts which serve as the bases of self- esteem. A complex view of the welfare question may Involve a notion that everyone deserves a fair share of the material goods which abound in this country* Many people are disturbed by the thought of people starving and not having adequate shelter and clothing. Yet some of them feel that this is what poor people deserve because they have not looked to the future and worked hard as they them selves have. In fact, to some extent one's own feelings of self-worth may be based on the contrast between his own acquisitions and those of others. The myth of the holiness of work and the definition of worth in our culture in terms of acquisition of goods has a powerful Influence on our self-concepts. Those of us who are relatively successful are pleased to hear stories of the self-made mem pulling himself up by his bootstraps, for these stories confirm our feelings of worth. On the other hand, they tend to give us justification for ignoring the plight of poor people. When our own feelings of self-worth are so involved with our attitudes toward people less fortunate than ourselves, it is often difficult for us to think seriously about the degree to which our ^success" is due to mere chance.
Admitting that the family we were born into, the color of V:- ._. .’ 35 our skin, the friends we had, and the opportunities that came along were largely responsible for our "success” would ... detract from ourselves. Our defenses may become insur mountable and preclude an Open consideration of the situation from other points of view.
When we hear stories of minority people who have been recently hired but who have not demonstrated the proper attitudes of obeisance and gratitude, we are dis posed only to find confirmation of our expectations in terms of the founding assumptions behind our own concept of self-worth. We say, "What do they think, the world owes them a living? If they don't work hard and learn decent manners, they'll never get anythwere. I had to do it, and so do they." We are satisfied with our assumption that such people are lazy, and we use their "impudence" as an attempt to Justify our convictions about their laziness.
We must believe this, or we threaten our own self-image.
We therefore do not attempt t.o feel what they are experi encing as they perceive the "blessing" of work. How different the myths of the holiness of work and land of opportunity must appear to the failures as defined in our culture• The "failure" in our society must feel the fullness of his "worthlessness!1 if he accepts such beliefs, Just as the "success" feels.the fullness of his
"worth" by accepting and confirming them. He knows well, as we are unable to, that he would be equally as motivated If he could believe that he was really the master of his
own destiny. But he also knows that he is not.r His
3^in addition to the school characteristics which were shown to be related to pupil achievement, Coleman found a gugdl characteristic which appears to have a stronger relationship to achievement than all the school factors combined. The extent to which a pupil feels he has control over his~own cHestlny~Is strongly related To achievement. flhls feeling oi* potency Is less prevalent among Negro students, but where it is present "their achievement is higher than that of white pupils~ltffio lack that conviction1' (emphasis addedJ. Qiasser. schools Without failure, p. 123. progress along the road to "success" is subject to the whims of the people who control him, and he knows that
competence to qualify him for many positions is defined in arbitrary ways which frequently make the competition from
"advantaged" people insuperably difficult. The "wonderful
opportunity" to work and make a "respectable" living seems to him little less than servitude, since he is well aware that the living that even the greatest amount of effort will bring will fall far short of what he needs to support his family with a moderate degree of comfort, security, and "dignity." His experience under the circumstances
(i.e., he has no control over his own destiny) leads him to the same position that Sartre came to while in prison. The only thing that he could do to retain his own sense of dignity was to say no. This worker is similarly forced to adopt the dignifying attitude expressed in his "X will not serve." W v ■' ■- :'v^ ’^v -v:’' ;'.r- : 37 Even within the commonly acquired concept of justice there Is considerable ambiguity, and concepts of humani-
tarianism and egalitarianism overlap to some extent with
the concept of justice. The kind of feelings about law and
order and getting what one deserves for wrongdoing has been
for some time of the dominant themes in American popular
dramatic entertainment. If a villain was a villain, he was rotten and inhuman throughout. There was little interest
in going far behind the overt antisocial behavior to look
at the world from the criminal's point of view. Now, however, even on television an occasional program will present a villain in an almost sympathetic way at the same time that poetic justice is administered in the end. Such treatment seems to satisfy simultaneously our conflicting
feelings toward the administration of justice. One fre quently hears people mouth the principles of Justice- innocent until proven guilty— and practically in the same breath tell you that those Black Panthers in Chicago should be shot. Somehow our own feelings of threat and prejudice
conflict with and at times dominate our abstract notions of what should be.
One wonders to what extent conventional educational practices predispose us to find and be satisfied with simplistic ways of considering complex issues like these.35
^Learning to help one another solve the common problems of living, learning that when we have educational 38 dlfficulty we are not alone in the world, are ideas few people associate with school* For many, kindergarten is the last place where learning social responsibility plays any part in the regular program. Students are learning less social responsibility , not more,: at a time when social responsibility seems at a low ebb. When students are not asked to think about the problems of their own world and about how they relate to the whole world, when they are rewarded for remembering what others deem necessary and important, they begin to believe either that right answers will solve all problems, or that problems are generally insoluble through the use of formal education. In a world ; overwhelmed by social, economic, and political problems, education seems bent either on denying to students the existence of these problems or implying that the^ are"" solved^aTtotal break with the Intense realities of our turpuient times. Giasser. schools Without Failure, p. 31.
With the implicit doctrine of efficiency and correct answer hunting, it is likely that the (perhaps quite natural) discomfort and Intolerance of ambiguity is raised in many of us to the level of neurotic compulsion. Since in schools the thing that is considered the worst of all is not knowing
"the answer," we find that this (at least partially culturally-induced) anxiety can be reduced by becoming opinionated. The teachers who will dare to respond to open questions with, "I don't know. I'm thinking about it.. Here are some of the things that X have been considering,11 are rare. Teachers frequently feel that the admission of some ambiguity in the face of the complexity of a problem will cause their students to "distrust" their competence. They feel that they must show no lack of decision on issues because they have to live up to the expectation that as teachers they "know" all the answers,. It Is apparent that open consideration of complex
concepts and their Interrelations requires tolerance of
ambiguity.Anything which contributes to the general
anxiety level of the student or poses itself as a threat to
his self-worth ought?therefore, to be minimized. It is,
therefore, necessary to play down the destructive
competlveness of current practices, and stimulate each
child1b sense of his own uniqueness and worth.
■ v From what has been said here, it seems that the lack
of openness toward the possible solutions of problems in
highly structured disciplines could induce an expectation
of and eventually a need for simplistic and unchanging means for arriving at solutions to all problems, since
openness in these disciplines (at least within .the class
room practice of them) does not pay off. Although the
challenge of thinking openly about real and complex human . problems Is sometimes not comfortable, we must convince ourselves that we are not doing children a favor by protecting them from the truth or by isolating them from real problems.
Obviously then, if we are going to equip our children
adequately for the world they are experiencing--a world
filled with ambiguities and changing complexities— schools must begin to consider, and not lose sight of the possible
overall negative effects of their practices. The following two chapters are an attempt to show how schools, especially ;■ i: i|0 the conventional English classroom, are dysfunctional to those ends. The remaining chapters will sketch the primary features of a possible educational alternative which will perhaps better promote the development of the qualities and skills most needed for complex problem solving.
.'.V.: \ v : 1- y s Sr CHAPTER IX
SOME INADEQUACIES OP CURRENT PRACTICES IN
LANGUAGE ARTS EDUCATION
Introduction -
In the previous chapter an attempt was made to survey some of the needs of education today* This chapter is intended as a brief exploration of some of the ways in which the subject matter of conventional language artB programs (or better perhaps, the prevailing attitudes toward this subject matter) thwarts the attainment of some of those needs* The following chapter will attempt to illuminate the ways in. which structured curricula in general and the teaching methods usually employed in meet ing the predefined objectives of structured curricula interferes with the attainment of still others of the most pressing of the needs of education for the W T O ’s. '
Traditional language arts programs, especially in secondary schools, place a great deal of emphasis on subject matter.. The areas generally studied include such diverse fields as grammar and usage, reading, literature, film, drama, speech, and writing* It will be shown in this chapter that there is reason to believe that some of the teaching objectives of these subjects are socially divisive and unjust in that they set up arbitrary stumbling blocks in the pathways of our so-called "unmotivated11 students.
They thus aggravate the problem of "failure" in schools and
Inhibit rather than facilitate communication in our society. Others, while they purport to deal with human or "affe ctive domains," frequently end up more memory games in which vital trivia like the structure of the
Shakespearian stage are stressed to prepare for College
Board Examinations. Still others dichotomize, organize and rationalize until there is nothing left for the student to engage himself with but the dried skeleton of what was perhaps once beautiful. Courses 'which ought to be promot ing the development of humanity in students thus negate in practice the spontaneous beauty of being human. Speech courses generally have an equally technical and structural emphasis. Seldom if ever in speech courses is the person able to be himself and explore his thinking in the contrived and culturally inappropriate speaking situations in which he is required to perform (such as formal debate, and monologulng on topics of various kinds). Writing (usually on assigned topics to be done in a certain time) similarly fails to emerge in the students' mind as a valuable exploratory and communicative tool. The empty formality of speech and writing courses also destroys their essential function In today's schools— -providing opportunities for spontaneous love and productive work essential for the development of the character needed as an antidote against the need to escape from freedom.36
3^See Escape from Freedom, especially pp . 282-303.
Conventional Language Arts Curriculum and Independence. Thought7 Reeling. Responsibility and Flexibility
A major objection to conventional structured curricula in language arts from the point of view of this paper is the waste of valuable opportunities (in pursuing trivial and frequently useless skills and knowledge) for learning which could lead to the growth of the essential human qualities mentioned in the previous chapter-- independence, thought, feeling, responsibility and flexibility. The child's independence is frequently destroyed by supplanting his natural valuing with the artificial (to him) values implicit in the curriculum. For instance, a great deal of value is attached to details of grammar and usage (fundamentally insignificant in communi cation, yet somehow considered of great importance as marks of social class and potential employability). While his natural tendency would be totake another person at face value in terms of his personal behavior toward him, the "well-socialized1' child learns that there is something not quite right about the other less fortunate children because they continually use forms of speech that are not like the schoolroom usage which to him represents standards of excellence. Even speakers of non-standard dialects who are highly motivated to achieve social status sometimes adopt doubly strong negative attitudes toward other not so
"successful" non-standard dialect speakers. The indepen dence of the children's natural valuing (of people as well as things) is thus polluted and biased by such Instruction.
Thought and feeling are also perverted by this interference with natural valuing. Consider the implica tions in the artificial value placed on much of what is taught in literature and drama classes. Somehow the only clear lesson attained by many perceptive children is that they (their own thoughts, feelings and even their very existence I) are less important than the dusty tomes on the bookshelf. While children are grappling with real feelings of Joy, excitement, terror, dread, love, and despair- in their own hearts, we are telling them to become excited about the frozen feelings of authors dead for centuries.
And this under the guise of "enlightenment" and "broadened knowledge" and "humanizing people I" How can children become convinced of the value of their own experiencing (much less their need to explore that experiencing) when such high value is placed on the thoughts and feelings of the dead ■ masters, and their own thoughts and feelings are regarded as Insubstantial and Immature. Internalizing these atti tudes toward their own experiencing, they are preparing themselves for the culture of expertise into which they must enter with bowed head— a culture in which even the most enlightened "dares not eat a peach or spank a baby without looking to a certified specialist for approval— lest it seem to trespass against r e a s o n . " ^ Thinking— if it is
37Ro3zak, The Making of a Counter-Culture, p. 263« to be respectable to oneself as well as to others— must correspond with expert judgment. Children sense that the best way to achieve this correspondence, is seeking out and remembering what the experts have said. Similarly, they make their feelings conform (perhaps only externally) to the expectations of those around them— if they have hot already learned to inhibit them entirely.
"Responsibility" is frequently used to refer to the quality of mind which leads one to do what is expected of him. In this sense there is ample opportunity for children to demonstrate their "sense of responsibility" in the
English classroom with traditional instructional goals.
However, the sense in which this term is used here is quite different. While the behavior resulting from responsibil ity in this sense may frequently be identical to that which is expected of people, this behavior differs in that it is motivated not by a desire to do.the expected thing but by a desire to do what is perceived by the person as beneficial
to himself and at least not unavoidably harmful to others.
Responsible behavior, therefore, requires thought--an
awareness of the consequences to himself and others of his
actions. There is little opportunity for experiencing the
consequences of personally motivated choices in classes for which there are expected curricular outcomes, for in these
circumstances the "right" choices (those which lead to behavior which is expected) are defined by the very structure of the situation.
Finally, it is fairly obvious that flexibility is not encouraged in student thinking in many aspects of traditional English curricula. That is not to say that, there are not individual teachers who manage to build into their literature, drama, and writing instruction a limited amount of divergent thinking. Even the most open and most promising teachers, however, given the pressure of
"covering the material" and the need to discipline and organize the direction of thinking in the classroom toward
^pedagogically sound instructional objectives" which are to be "learned," tested and graded, may find themselves stubbornly adhering to a single approach or interpretation when there are clearly more than one possible. Conventional Language Arts Curriculum; "Failure." and vCommunication11
Traditional objectives of language arts programs* In
addition to being sometimes destructive of those qualities
of mind and spirit which from the point of view of this
paper are most desirable are perhaps not of such inherent
value as to be relentless and compulsory components of every
child's education, especially considering the harm some
children and all of society suffer by maintaining these
practices. This section of Chapter 2 will investigate the
problem of "failure" as it relates to language arts
curriculum.
The so-called essential skills of speaking and writing properly are still frequently viewed as basic to
the preparation of the child for real life. Somehow this
myth of social snobbery managed to survive for centuries in
our country unchallenged, largely perhaps because schools
have taught the "right" way of using language and anyone who had managed to learn the pseudo-language was determined
to show others how well he had done this and felt obliged
to show proper indignation at the "abuses" apparent in the
speech of those less well-socialized than himself. The
lies that have thus been perpetuated (in our schools) about
the "need to know proper English" are probably responsible
for much of the failure in our schools. Furthermore, as will be seen in this section, believing these lies has worsened rather than improved the possibility of real
communication among peoples having diverse life experiences.
The argument that one often hears to justify the
"need for all to know proper English" is that we cannot understand other dialects easily and that the lack of a rigidly uniform dialect would result in the disastrous breakdown of communication. Actually, there is little truth to this claim. If breakdown in communication occurs as a result of dialect difference, it is only "communica tion" taken in Its most trivial sense* This argument seems especially ludicrous in a time when there 13 an unprecedented generation gap across which young and old speaking Identical grammatical forms cannot understand the
first thing of what the other is saying.
Assuming however that trivial differences in dialect do interfere to a very limited extent with communication,
let us consider an alternative to the prescription of
"standard" dialect. If there are occasional misunder standings between speakers of different dialects in
America, this is so only because there is only one dialect heard in most schools and in many people's daily verbal, interaction. Even the most divergent of English dialects are for the most part mutually intelligible. Without any previous contact with dialects other than one's own little misunderstanding takes place. To be sure, 'there are occaslonal unfamiliar words and phrases and peculiar 49 pronunciations - which can be clarified by questioning the
speaker. Within a very short time, however, speakers of
different dialects of English can understand one another with remarkable accuracy.
Another argument for the learning of a standard
dialect centers around the notion of dialect superiority.
Actually, there is no-evidence that one language is
superior to any other in the sense that something can be
said in one language that cannot be said in the other.
3^It is true that some languages and dialects do force the speaker to make certain conceptual distinctions which are optional and thus Infrequently (or maybe never) made by individual speakers of another language. For example, nine kinds of snow are referred to by distinct words in Esquimo, while most other languages do not require such discrimination for labeling. It may be that many Individuals in non-Esquimo cultures have discriminated at least some of these kinds of snow (such as wet, clinging snow; fine, powdery snow; large, dry-flaked snow; etc.) However, since the selection of a precise label including these distinctions is not required by the discourse situations of most non-Esquimo cultures, it is perhaps possible for a non-Esquimo never to have made such distinctions. Nevertheless, it still appears that all languages have the capacity to express any conceivable distinction by circumlocution.
When one considers the lack of.substance behind the arguments for teaching "standard" dialects, such hideous practices as screening people from advanced study or from certain occupations on the basis of their knowledge of
"standard" language seem to be motivated by nothing more than blind, middle-class ethnocentrism. Needless to say, one of the principal sources of-
"failure” in schools has been our blind preoccupation with
language standardization and our ignorance of the social
aspects of language most significant for the growth of
cognition and linguistic skill. There is no intrinsic motivation for learning standard speech. Standard speech
is acquired only because it is necessary to fulfill
educational requirements or to Impress the right people.
By the same token, there is widespread anti-motivation not
to acquire (or at least not to reveal one's knowledge of)
standard speech among minorities, among certain economic
• » classes, and even among young peers. The immediate
Importance of maintaining one's primary social identity and membership in one's group thus frequently conflicts irreconcilably with the arbitrary demands of the society as represented by schools. The result is "failure." And .
since these demands are arbitrary, the felt injustice and implicit Insult they entail aggravate already great hostilities among many segments of society. The cost in terms of loss of human potential and increased social divisiveness seems unjustifiable In any mode of reasoning.
Reading has become a damaging myth of education comparable to the "need to know proper English." Reading has had a crucial role to play in education in the past.
The written word has been for centuries the only source of
Information other than direct verbal exposition by live , speakers. Today* with audio and audiovisual tapes, radio,
and television in every home, it is possible to be informed
and involved with the information one gets in a more direct
way than is even possible with the printed word. There
fore, reading skill no longer seems such an urgent matter,
and while it will perhaps remain a valuable tool for the
development of thinking and for gathering information, it
cannot be claimed as essential to learning and growth. ^
^Neil postman, "The Politics of Reading. Harvard Educational Review. May. 1970, pp. 24*1-252.
The misuses made of this revered skill of reading in
segregating people are more obvious because they are more
explicit. Most Intelligence and aptitude testing for
adults and older children is done by means of written tests. As a result, they do not test the knowledge, skills,
and aptitudes that they are supposed to measure so much as the peculiar problems of individuals in decoding and interpreting the written word. The unfortunate child who has been given a severe hang-up about reading in school— a problem which occurs quite frequently because we make zealous efforts in our own ignorance to save children from ignorance— does not have a chance to perform successfully on such a test. Nevertheless, reading tests and written tests of other skills have served a "valuable" (and face- saving) function: they, have allowed us mechanically to keep » ' ■ '* 'V '-'* ■ ", •: . ;V f,v'- 7 • ’ 7.7 ’’7'- ’’7 'V,< r' vj 7 ' L; !:, - !• ■ ■ ’ ' 1 v7 ■L’ ■ -i ■
the undesirables of pur society In their place.1*®
Postman, "The Politics of Reading," p. 250.
It Just so happens that those who do poorly at read
ing are the very ones who speak dialects most divergent
from the "standard" dialect. And due to their social
isolation from the "mainstream" of American culture, it is
no wonder that these dialects differ more and more
markedly.1*1 There are several possible reasons for the
^Jane W. Torrey, "Illiteracy in the Ghetto," Harvard Educational Review. May, 1970, pp. 257-258.
added difficulties of learning to read that speakers of
divergent dialects have. First, in these dialects certain
sequences of sounds merge regularly into simpler sounds
with the result that a larger number of words are pro
nounced Identically in these dialects than in the "stand- hp ’ ard" dialect. Next are the vocabulary differences
**2William Labov, "Some Sources of Reading Problems for Negro Speakers of Non-Standard English," Teaching Black Children to Re ad. ed. by Jean C. Baratz and Roger W. snuy (Washington, b.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1969), pp. 26-97.
between the divergent dialects.. These differences are
slight, yet the difficulties they pose for inexperienced
readers are monumental. Typically the speech decoder
operates on*the incoming message somewhat in advance of the 1
UL»
speaker. Based on his perception of the emerging syntactic and semantic structure of the message, the header or reader expects certain constructions or words to follow. When these anticipated speech elements do not occur as expected, the decoder must either go back to see if he missed or misinterpreted some crucial signal earlier in the utter ance, or try to determine the meaning (semantic or syntactic) of the surprise element if he is sure of his interpretation of the preceding part of the utterance. Add to these difficulties the problem of getting the intonation and stress patterns right (if one is reading), and you have a fair idea of the added complexity of the task of learning to read in a dialect different from the one that the child ]io uses in dally interaction.-3 Unconsciously (perhaps), the
theoretical claim contradicts the opinions of such writers as Jane Torrey who maintains that a "Passive understanding of standard dialect should suffice for standard.forms in speech" (Torrey, "Illiteracy in the Ghetto," p. 256). I am currently designing an experimental situation to test this claim. If this should turn out to be the case, it in no way affects the validity of the major thesis of Torrey*s article, that "it is crosscultural vari ations in the social functions and significance of language, rather than minor structural differences, that create barriers to teaching and learning." Furthermore, I am in complete agreement with the author's call "for cultural and linguistic pluralism.not only in grade school, but throughout this country's educational and occupational systems." Torrey, "Illiteracy in the Ghetto," p. 253. teacher communicates to the child, during his,'attempts to grapple with these conflicting and- disturbing sets of cues, his disappointment and annoyance at the child*s / V ": : 5 * . l - inability to "understand a simple sentence in plain;
English.11 The child internalizes this attitude toward
himself and consequently carries with him for life a damaged -
self-image and a more or less intense phobia for reading.
Most attempts to improve reading programs have failed
because of basic misunderstandings of the nature of language,
misunderstandings of the process of speech production and
perception, and especially, misunderstandings of the social
and motivational factors in learning to read. No human
being wants to be on the outside of anything that he thinks
might be good for him. Certainly no person growing up in
our culture surrounded by reading material and hearing
people talk about things that they have read will be able iili to resist the lure of learning to read. Seeing their
^Postman, "The Politics of Reading," p. 252.
classmates buying books and magazines and comic books,
children will naturally have the desire to find out what's
in them if they have not been discouraged from learning to
read by being forced to learn. Forcing children to learn
such a skill as reading before they perceive its relevance
to their own competence needs can only produce negative
attitudes toward that skill, the teacher, and themselves if
they perceive themselves as failing to learn to read. Such
artificial and external sources of motivation as fear
cannot make any child want to read, and if anything, learning to read under such conditions will cause him to think of all reading as a chore to be done to satisfy some
one else, not himself. Yet being aware of this, why do we persist in doing this to children? It is a well-known fact
that children who become avid readers generally come from homes where the parents read. These children presumably have identified reading as an important skill for them to acquire because their adult models of adequacy include reading. Reading is for them eminently relevant. They thus enter school with ready-made personal motivation to learn to read. The rest of the children are prematurely doomed to repeated failure in school. One sometimes wonders if we continue in these primitive and inhuman practices in order to insure the smooth operation for the standardized testing mechanism for discriminating against unwanted segments of our society by excluding them on the basis of tests which more than anything else test the child's reading ability.
The Growth of Complex Concepts, Composition. Speech, and Literature
Languaglng— that is» using language to communicate thought in social intercourse— plays a crucial role in forming intelligence. This function of languaglng, a central concern from the point of view expressed in this paper, is explored in some detail in Chapter 4y and the remaining chapters will attempt to spell out some activities by which valuable use can be made of languaging situations that arise from real activities devised and directed by students themselves. Let it suffice to say here that activities for the English classroom ought to be oriented first of all toward illuminating aspects of the communica tion process which block successful communication in most fundamental and non-trivial ways.
Although Piaget used the term "egocentrlcity" to distinguish the asocial use of language by very young children, the concept can well be extended to apply to the basic cause for failure to communicate across cultural boundaries. Like the young child's first attempts to explain some process to another, we adults, who have not internalized the attitudlnal and experiential perspectives of people different from our middle-class selves, have great difficulty in sending and in receiving messages across these boundaries. We assume, like the young child, that our listeners share the same "knowledge" that is
"obvious" to us from our perspective. Furthermore, we sometimes assume that the reason for our failure to * ' ■ communicate is due to some defect in the listener's intel ligence or to his sheer obstinacy. The effect of an
English curriculum which has the communication process at its center should be to enable the child to move outward from his initially quite narrow egocentric world view ; : r \\■'5 7 through increasingly broader stages of "egocentrism"
(points of view shared by increasingly larger numbers of diverse people) toward a hypothetical optimally broad human perspective which Includes and Integrates all of his previously attained viewpoints.
The effect of languaging on egocentric thought can be clearly seen in Piaget*s description of a common human experience:
We shall quickly realize the full Importance of egocentrism if we consider a certain familiar experience of daily life. We are looking, say, for the solution of some problem, when suddenly every thing seems quite clear; we have understood, and we experience that sui generis, feeling of intel lectual satisfaction. But as soon as we try to explain what it Is we have understood, difficulties come thick and fast* These difficulties do not arise merely because of the effort of attention needed to hold in a single grasp the links in the chain of argument; they are attributable also to our Judging faculty itself. Conclusions which we deemed posi tive no longer seem so; between certain propositions whole series of intermediate links are now seen to be lacking in order to fill the gaps of which we were previously not even conscious; arguments which seemed convincing because they were connected with some scheme of visual imagery or based on some sort of analogy, lose all their potency from the moment we feel the need to appeal to these schemes, and find that they are incommunicable; doubt is cast on propositions connected with judgments of value, as soon as we realize the personal nature of such Judgments. If such, then, is the difference between personal understanding and spoken explanation, how much more marked will be the characteristics of personal understanding when the individual has for a long time been bottling up his own thoughts, when he has not even formed thehabit of thinking in terms of other people, and communicating his thoughts to them. We need only recall the inextricable chaos of adolescent thought to realize the truth of this distinction., v
^^Jean Piaget. The Language and Thought of the Child (Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., l^b^lV p. 65.
The language arts curriculum, therefore, since its business is presumably involved with verbalizing, would seem to be the most obvious part of children's total educa tional experience where the growth of complex concepts would be stimulated. However, there are several reasons why language arts as it is is Inadequate. First it does not seem possible to consider the traditional Isolated areas of study of language arts adequate for the exploration of complex concepts. In fact, the classroom regarded as a central locus for testing ideas relating to human existence cannot be restricted to a discrete subject matter area.
Such subjects as political science, history, sociology, psychology, anthropology and many others dealing with human beings and their behavior provide essential informa tion for the full elaboration of thoughts and feelings resulting from direct human experiences* The classroom for dealing most fully with complex,concepts must, therefore, have the freedom to range over whatever specific subject matter areas would help the Individuals think more clearly and fully about their experiences. From the perspective of this paper, many of the things generally included in the terms composition, speech, and literature are of critical
Importance in the exploration and elaboration of experience.
In this section the primary focus is on the shortcomings of writing, speech, and literature as they are generally taught in schools.
Another reason that writing, speech, and literature as they have been taught are inadequate is that our teaching objectives have frequently been dominated by trivia at the expense of the really Important educational results of these activities. For centuries, it seems,
English teachers have been morticians laying to rest the remains of the once lively intelligence of children. Once the vigor and enthusiasm of children's experiencing and thinking were strangled by the need to meet the "require ments" of school and "society," they obviously needed to be adorned with flawless perfection so that the aspect of death would be less offensive. As long as we kept ourselves oblivious of the fact that beneath our handiwork lay the putrifying flesh of their intelligence or at best a feeble pulse, we could continue to be moderately satisfied with our important work. And our work was important indeed. We had to keep the ugly truth of our failure to make intelligence flourish not only from ourselves but from anxiety-ridden teachers of other fields. What else could motivate teachers of social science, for instance, to attack the
English teachers indignantly for not doing their Job, 60
maintaining that many of their students* papers are ;
unintelligible, that much more work needs to be done on
comma splices, spelling, verb agreement, etc.? It is as
though when the make-up wears thin, these teachers like
ourselves become anxious and appalled and even horrified
by the ghastliness that lies beneath.
This formalistic attitude toward "English" has led
to a perversion of the English curriculum, especially of writing and speech. Composition, for Instance, is admit
tedly one of the lea3t successful areas in the English
program. Many teachers complain that composition cannot be taught. After years of "correcting" student themes,
they have nothing to show for all their efforts but a handful of students who have perhaps benefitted from their
labors. However, the only students who manage to become better writers are those who already wrote well. A study
done recently in a senior high school supports the common-
sense notion that a child will become a writer--and he will
soon learn to write well— when he has something that he
really wants to say to others, A group of tenth graders were identified as non-writers; their written work in previous English classes was consistently poor— mechanically
as well as structurally. This same group of students were
later investigated to see whether there were any signifi
cant changes in their written work, and if so, whether
there were any identifiable changes in their personalities. 61
It became clear Immediately that those non-writers who
became politically active during their high school days
were the ones wh o became writers— and good ones— by the end
of the twelfth grade. They apparently had arrived at a set
of convictions wi ilch they wanted to persuade others to
share. And now Lt was important to them to be able to
arrange the supportive arguments and data in effective ways.
Practically all the efforts of their previous teachers were
in vain, for writing, like any other school activity that
is not perceived by students to be relevant to their
personal needs, Is only another thing that one has to do to
satisfy the teac tier's demands.
This empty formalism has destroyed the value hot
only of writing and speech as opportunities for exploring
and elaborating bhought, but also of literature. Litera-
ture (and other art forms, especially film) can bean
occasion for the exploration of one's thoughts, feelings,
and experiences, Frequently, however, the talk stimulated
in the classroom by literature and film is carefully pruned and directed toward the objectives of teachers, and the exploration of the children's own perspectives (time-
consuming as it Ls) is left for individuals to do on their
own. Outside the social process, however, the motivation
for such exploration soon dies. Furthermore, the most
significant part of the .learning process, the interanliza- tion of the quesbions others would need to ask for the i ' '- ■; 'Sdv."■ ft " V ;:;:: ■": ■ 'V''/ ;V: 62 articulation, clarification, and testing of the perceptions of Individuals, Is bypassed In favor of "getting across" the teachers* insights more efficiently. It is especially a pity that this happens, for the "insights" teachers are frequently most eager to share are trivial*-technlcal, structural, procedural— comments, and hopelessly distract students from the experience itself. The great value of literature (and other arts) in helping readers to articu late their own experience is thus often lost. : ^''■"' . CHAPTER III
METHODS OP TEACHING AND COMPLEX PROBLEM SOLVING
Introduction
Ausubel, In his article, "Learning by Discovery:
Rationale and Mystique," finds eleven myths characteristic of the so-called mystique of learning by discovery. The following analysis of the two conventional positions represented in his discussion of some of these myths will serve as a point of departure for the introduction of a third position consistent with the student-centered, complex-problem-solving perspective described in this paper. This analysis will demonstrate further how those two conventional methods and the assumptions upon which they are based (and which they communicate to some stu dents) work against the goals for education outlined in chapter one: the cultivation of independence, thought, feeling, responsibility and flexibility, and the develop ment of complex-problem-solving capacities. These goals it will be seen, are made more difficult or impossible to achieve because these methods subtly, introduce values, attitudes, arid concepts which interfere with the complex- problem- solving abilities of children as well as the
■■ 63 classroom atmosphere In which these abilities could grow and be nourished. This problem and the possible uses of
iig The negative effects of these more directive methods used judiciously, however, may be overcome if they are set in the context of a larger non-directive human situation* these more directive methods in the English classroom are taken up in Chapter 6* First, let us review some of the philosophical debate lying behind choices of educational methodologies.
Historical Perspective
The so-called inquiry (or discovery) learning has had a long history. The educational theories of Rousseau and Froebel advocated structuring the curriculum so that it reflected the child's Interests, his needs, and his state of Intellectual and emotional development at each stage.
The ideal environment for learning at each stage, they said was to be permissive so as not to interfere with the natural processes of maturation. The child is in the best position to choose those things which correspond best with his needs. Providing guidance or direction in learning and direct teaching of generalizations or insights were naturally considered anathema. This chiId-centered approach, as qualified in the following pages* emphasizing asit does autonomy and se 1 f-discovery, actually comes quite close to answering the needs of education today. The progressive education movement and the contro versies concerning discovery versus reception learning will serve as a foil to clarify by contrast what "Inquiry in the
English class" is not intended to mean. First, it may be helpful to get a general perspective on the topic by considering what the progressive movement has contributed to these controversies, let us look at what David Ausubel has said about the philosophy of discovery learning.
The Progressive Education movement obviously furnished several major strands in the design of the discovery method. One aspect of this movement was a growing dissatisfaction with the empty formalism of much educational content in the latter part of the nineteenth century; with stultifying drill and catechism-like methods of teaching; with the curriculum's lack of relatedness to the everyday experience of the child, his physical world, and social environment; and with pupils' rote verbaliza tion and memorization of ideas for which they had no adequate referents in experience. Overstatement of the realities underlying this dissatisfaction con stituted the basis of the later mystique that all verbal learning is little more.than glib verbalism and parrot-like recitation. This led, in turn, to the exaggerated emphasis that progressivist3 placed on relating the curriculum to the physical and social environment of the child; on direct, immedi ate, and concrete experience as a prerequisite for meaningful understanding; on active learning and inquiry; and on incidental learning and learning in natural, uncontrived situations. From this type of emphasis grew activity programs and project methods, and the credo of "learning for and by problem solving" as the principal objective and method, respectively, of the educational enterprise. Two final by-products of this point of view were deifi cation of the act of discovery associated with the inductive and Incidental learning methods of teaching, and extrapolation to the secondary-school and uni versity student of the' elementary-school child's dependence on recently prior concrete, empirical experience in the comprehension and manipulation of Ideas . . .both of these developments became extremely important components of the mystique of learning by discovery. **7
• ^^Ausubel. "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," pp. 18-19,
Emphasis on the child's direct experience.and
spontaneous interests, and Insistence on autonomously
achieved insight free of all directive manipulation of the
learning environment set the stage for the subsequent
"deification of problem solving, laboratory work, and
naive emulation of the scientific method."**® Some other
**®Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 20.
contributing factors to the development of the discovery
method fad were the revolt against the "prevailing educa
tional psychology (of the late fifties) . . .which is
largely an eclectic hodge-podge of logically incompatible
theoretical propositions superimposed upon a sterile
empiricism," and the militant sentimentality underlying the
currently popular educational objective of making every
child a critical and creative thinker.**•*
■ ■ |)Q ?Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 22. , .
Before embarking on his attempts to lay low the mystique of discovery learning, Ausubel concedes certain . . . palpable advantages of the discovery method. * In the early, unsophistlcated stages of learning any abstract subject matter, particularly prior to adolescence, the discovery method Is invaluable. It is also lndispensable for teaching scientific method and problem solving skills. Furthermore, various cognitive and motivational factors undoubtedly enhance the learning, retention, and transferability of meaningful material learned by discovery.5°
^°Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 22.
There is an attitudinal advantage as well. In addi tion to the skills of hypothesis making and testing, such methods foster
. . . desirable attitudes toward learning and Inquiry, toward guessing and hunches, toward the possibility of solving problems on one's own (this last as others to be given a broader interpreta tion in the context of inquiry in the English class, i.e., the necessity of solving many complex human problems together) . . . ; (and) attitudes about the ultimate orderliness of nature and a conviction that order can be discovered.51
^Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 24.
Ausubel clearly reveals the "transmission of culture" point of view52 from which his criticisms of
52See Chapter 1, pp. 18-30 for a discussion of some of the possible cultural, social, and educational conse quences of this philosophy. discovery learning flow when he says:
The crucial points at issue, however, are not whether learning by discovery enhances learning, retention, and transferability, but (a) whether it does so sufficiently, for learners who are cap- able of learning princlples meaningfully without it, to warrant the vastly Increased expenditure of time It requires; and (b) whether, In view of this time consideration, the discovery method Is a feasible technique for transmitting the substan tive content of an intellectual or scientific discipline to cognitively mature students who have already mastered its rudiments and basic vocabulary.53
53Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 25.
The Authoritarianism of Directive Methods and the Development of Independence. Thought. """* Feeling, Responsibility, and Flexibility
This section of the present chapter Is designed to show how both the verbal expository method and the so-called discovery method are inherently authoritarian.
The next section will explore further how these directive methods can destroy the Independence, thought, feeling, responsibility, and flexibility of our students, and thus
cripple their complex-problem-solving capacities. First, let us take a look at the question of whether verbal expository teaching Is inherently authoritarian, as maintained by the advocates of discovery learning; and then let us see to what extent programmed learning shares this same charge.
One of the myths of discovery learning that Ausubel attacks is the belief that expository teaching methods are
Inherently authoritarian. Bruner, for Instance, maintains that "telling children and then testing them on what they have been told inevitably has the effect of producing bench-bound learners whose motivation for learning is likely to be extrinsic to the task at hand— pleasing the teacher, getting Into college, artificially maintaining self-esteem."-*1* Ausubel claims that the "distressing
5 4 . v Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 42, . picture" is overdrawn and that there is nothing inherently authoritarian about expository teaching. The method, he says, is condemned for its abuses; however, I think that there is something inherently authoritarian "in presenting or explaining ideas to others" even though they are "not obliged, either explicitly or implicitly to accept them on faith." Given the orientation of present schools to optimal coverage of subject matter and the conventional authority-centered roles of teachers and administrators, the effects, at least, of covert as well as overt authoritarianism— that is the inhibition of real independent thought— may be disastrous. In our high-pressure certifi cation factories, students endure a great deal Of pressure to "progress beyond the rudiments of a discipline." Since performance on tests is the major concern of educators and the community, even those teachers who know what real learning is are not always free to "waste time" facilitating -Its occurrence. Since the children know that the really .
important things In schools are tests, their natural;:
Ingenuity leads them to devise methods of producing right
answers when they are required. Most often children rely
on their quick verbal memory to get through tests. Some
times they use a clever technique of asking questions and
observing the reactions of teacher and students. These
and similar unthinking methods— including "cheating"— are
especially called into play when the subject"mhtter areas
the child is supposed to learn are remote from his real
interests. And this is most often the case with all his
subjects. The process that the child internalizes, then,
and is taught to value, for it is the only activity that
is rewarded in the testing game, is the production of
"right answers" to "important questions"— that is, the
answers that the experts expect to questions they decide
to ask. Even the teacher, therefore, within a system with
implicit authoritarian goals who tells his students that
they are free to disagree is subtly invoking them not to.
Since the institutional and social rewards will be
reserved for those who don't waste time thinking but
instead get right answers on tests, the child knows full
well that his self-fulfillment will depend to a great
extent on his ability to conform to the demands of the
school, and that thinking critically and openly will only make his life more complicated. The values of the test-
oriented schools and the directive methods employed in meeting the testable objectives are therefore not only anti-human and anti-intellectual, but also inherently authoritarian.
There are also practical reasons why verbal expository teaching ought to be avoided whenever possible.
As children grow into their teens and increasingly shift
their social orientation away from the home and toward
their peers they begin to experience the incongruity between the socio-cultural expectations of their peer
society and the authoritarian behaviors and attitudes
usually exhibited by those who practice expository teach
ing. They perceive such teachers as aliens who not only have the social naivete to act as they do, but also the
audacity to force their incomprehensible and (to them)
absurdly archaic manners upon them. It is not at all .
surprising to find high school students whose major con
cern seems to be to "punish" the teacher’s inappropriate
(and frequently) insulting behaviors by counterbehaviors
ranging in subtlety from light and Joking forms of
ostracism through misconduct to the most outspoken forms of hostility .55 .
55The situation is perhaps analogous to that des cribed in Susan U. Philips, "Acquisition of Rules for Appropriate Speech Usage," Georgetown' Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics. James E . Alatis, ed., No. 23, l W , pp. 71-10.1. ;;■
Frequently, the notion of Independence employed by advocates of discovery learning relates only to the oper ation of the student at his own rate within the conven tional delineations of a particular subject matter area and Its methodology. Obviously, this restricted notion of
"independence1' which does not allow for reconceptualizations of problems and does not encourage questioning methodolog ical assumptions has serious limitations with respect to the true intellectual autonomy required for the advancement of knowledge and understanding. However, in the context of this paper, the most important consequences of this limited notion of independence among educators are the ones which interfere with the well-being of the individual and of society
^See Chapter one, especially sections 1, 3 and 4.
In spite of the iack of scope of the typical discovery-learning notion of Independence, Bruner seems to have been sensitive to the broader nature of intellectual autonomy when he said:
Schools should provide not simply a continuity with the broader community or with everyday experi ence . It is the special community where one experi ences discovery by the use of intelligence, where one leaps into new and unimagined realms of experi- .• ence, experience which is discontinuous with what . went before (p. 76) . . . 73- Education must also seek to develop the prooesses of Intelligence so that the individual , is capable of going beyond the cultural ways of his social world, and able to innovate, in however modest a way, so that he can create an interior culture of his own. For whatever the art, the science, the literature, the history, and the geography of a culture, each man must be his own artist, his own historian, his own navigator.57
57Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 26, quoted fromJ. S. Bruner,"After Dewey What?" Saturday Review. June17* 1961, pp. 58-59; 76-78.
However, it is hard to reconcile such a statement as this with Bruner's later writings which have served as a basis for programmed discovery learnings— attempts by experts to structure the significant data so that the significant principles can be discovered "independently by students In line with the notion that all real knowledge is self discovered." It seems that Bruner's sensitivity to the nature of Independent valuing and thought indicated in the above paragraph would have led him to an experience with education similar to Rogers'.
Rogers says that he was inwardly astonished at the fact that when he tried honestly to review his experience, teaching seemed so very unimportant, and learning so vastly important. This and his newly discovered educa tional "heresy" occurred while he was preparing a paper to be presented to a Harvard conference on "Classroom
Approaches to Influencing Behavior." The following of his statements Indicate the direction of his thought at the-
■ timeijD-v^ - &■! ':A5;' ';' ' My experience has been that 1 cannot teach another person how to teach. It seems to me that anything that can be taught to another is relatively inconsequential and has little or no significant influence on behavior. I realize increasingly that I am only interested in learnings which significantly influence behavior. I have come to feel that the only learning which significantly influences behavior is self-discovered,, self-appropriated learning. Such self-discovered learning, truth that has been personally appropriated and assimilated in experi ence, cannot be directly communicated to another. As soon as an individual tries to communicate such experience directly, often with a quite natural enthusiasm, it becomes teaching, and its results are inconsequential. As a consequence of the above, I realize that I have lost Interest in being a teacher. When I try to teach, as I do sometimes, I am appalled by the result^ which seem little more than conse quential, because sometimes the teaching appears to succeed. When this happens I find that the results are damaging. It seems to cause the individual to distrust his own experience, and to stifle signifi cant learning. Hence I have come to feel that the outcomes of teaching are either unimportant or hurtful. ‘As a consequence, I realize that I am only interested in being a learner, preferably learning things that matter, that have some significant influence on my own behavior. I find it very re warding to learn, in groups, in relationships with one person as in therapy, or by myself. I find that one of the best, but most difficult, ways for me to learn is to drop my own defensiveness, at . least temporarily, and to try to understand the way in which his experience seems and feels to the other person. I find that another way of learning for me is to ; state my own uncertainties, to try to clarify my puzzlements, and thus get closer to the meaning that my experience actually seems to have, This whole train of experiencing . . , seems to mean letting my experiences carry me on, in a direction which appears to be forward, toward goals that I can ;-75:; dimly define, as X try to understand at least the current meaning of that experience.58
^^Rogers.Freedom to Learn, pp. 152-15t.
When Rogers considers the implications of- his disgust with teaching and his fascination for learning, he shudders a bit at the distance he has come from "the commonsense world that everyone knows is right."59 Teaching would % ■
^Rogers. Freedom to Learn, p. 152. otherwise be done away with; people would get together if they wished to-learn. There would be no examinations, for they measure only inconsequential learning. Grades and credits would also be abolished for the same reason. Not only do degrees indicate an accumulation of inconsequential learning, they also suggest an end to something. A learner is Interested only in the continuing process of learning.
Finally, we would do away with "the exposition of conclu sions" for we know that no one learns significantly from conclusions. Rogers ends this paper with apologies, reiterating the fears that his feelings and experiences, are somehow too "fantastic" to be credible: As though there were even a chance that a brave man speaking honestly and frankly about his real experience would wander far from the experience of other thinking and feeling men I Unfortunately for us all, the response to this paper was "furiously crit ical for the most part, with only a few soft-spoken
Individuals speaking up, with gradually Increasing voice, to Indicate that their experience had led them to somewhat similar conclusions, which they had never dared to voice."60
^°Rogers, Freedom to Learn, p. 151.
I say unfortunately, for if this experience is at all representative of people's real feelings about learning, think of the damage In the name of science and reason that we are doing to children with our ever more elaborate curricula and teaching goals. The Implicit message behind such "expert" programs is that "the right questions have been asked, the right conceptualizations and procedures have been devised, and nothing has been overlooked, for teams of experts have done the thinking. All the learner need to do Is follow the prescriptions and consume the conclusions of the only competent thinkers— the experts.
To ask questions that the experts have not considered (or have arbitrarily Ignored) Is impudence or folly." When all the details of the specific subject matter have blurred or become forgotten, this message remains Indelibly etched In the brains of many of our children. The medium Is indeed the message. Even if we are arranging the data so that
"significant" generalizations can be "discovered" by children to attain some working-knowledge of various "disciplines," we are, nevertheless, In effect subtly inviting them to deny their own experiences, to deny their own valuing, so that they will conform with the arbitrari ness of In response to Bruner's "lofty and poetically expressed sentiments" concerning the development of intel lectual autonomy quoted above, Ausubel concedes that one "cannot simply soak up one's culture like a piece of blotting paper and expect it to be meaningful."**1 ^Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 26. Meaning can never be anything more than a personal phenomenological product that emerges when potentially meaningful ideas are Integrated within an individually unique cognitive struc ture. Invariably, therefore, the achievement of meaning requires translation into a personal frame of reference, and reconciliation with established concepts and propositions. All of this goes on in a program of meaningful expository teaching. ...®2 wcAusubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," p. 26, _ . ■ -$0^ 0 ) }:;f "rV. ■: j .: :; ■ -78 One cannot argue with these principles of the active involvement with "potentially meaningful ideas", needed for the individual to achieve meaning. Ausubel's apparent assumption that all the significant and fundamental generalizations and principles of knowledge and the values underlying them are known and immutable is used as justifi cation for the instructional efficiency of reception learning. "MoBt of what anyone really knows consists of insights discovered by others which have been communicated to him in a meaningful fashion."^3 ^Ausubel, "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique, p. 26. Obviously, if conventional discovery learning is objectionable on the basis of its destruction of intel lectual autonomy by interfering with the natural valuing process at the root of all self-motivated learning, verbal expository learning is even more so. Rogers once asked some prospective English teachers to list the values they most wanted to pass on to their students. He explains that: Several listed such things as "to speak cor-: rectly," "to use good English, not to use words like ain't." Others mentioned neatness— "to do things according to instructions"; one explained her hope that "When I tell them to write their names . in the upper right-hand corner with the date under • it, I want them to do it that way, not in some other form." - I confess I was somewhat appalled that for some 1 of these adolescent young women the most Important values to be passed on to pupils were to avoid bad grammar, or meticulously to follow teacher's In structions. 1 felt baffled. Certainly these behaviors had not been experienced as the most satisfying and meaningful elements in their own lives. The listing of such values could only be accounted for by the fact that these behaviors had gained approval— and thus had been introjected as deeply important. Rogers, Freedom to Learn, p. 244. - It is not unreasonable to suppose that the implicit values behind "canned" discovery learning would be introjected in exactly the same unthinking way. Hopefully, not too many will be as destructive of human individuals and of society as these "values" are. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of some of the consequences of such linguistic values. Perhaps it would be a good idea to explore'here what Ausubel could possibly have meant by real. It would seem that "real knowledge" for Ausubel is knowledge based on conventional and unquestioned values, methodological assumptions, and generalizations and principles derived from such givens. Apparently real means something entirely different to a man like Rogers. To Rogers, when knowledge is real, it is an extension and clarification of thoughts, . feelings, interests, and intuitions which already exist in some unformed way in the mental activity of the individual child. These thoughts, feelings, interests, and intuitions grow directly out of the child's experience of real life, or they are secondarily based on acquired knowledge which in turn is directly relevant to the real life experience of the child. Similarly, real skills are those which extend the child's Innate apparatus for gathering and sharing information relevant to those thoughts, feelings, inter ests, and intuitions. In keeping with what has been theorized as the learning process of children, the child forms schemata by which he Internalizes (in some way) the properties of the experiences he has. These internaliza tions of his perceptions of external events are integrated with behavioral schemata In such a way that he is satis fied with his ability to achieve his needs more appropri ately in the light of his new perceptions. When further experience teaches him that a particular schema is adequate to his purposes, he will continue to perceive and act on the incoming data according to that schema. That schema will dominate incoming perceptions— that is, the child will assimilate new data to the old schema— as long . as the schema proves adequate to his needs. However, when the incoming data becomes too complex to handle by means of the old schema, some modification or radical change may be needed in order for the child to achieve his needs adequately* That is, the child must accommodate his perceptual and cognitive apparatus to the new demands of the environment. > v-' ;' ;• V■''■'V V':- v ;, / V:'- 81 . With this naturalistic view of cognitive growth in mind, it would seem that much of what children are ex pected to do in school is irrelevant to them as persons. In the Rogerian sense of the word, the knowledge and ski11s are unreal.^ Although from the teacher's, perspective the ^ I n terms of the self-concept theory of learning, they have no perceived relation to the child's competence needs or they are related only to needs that are too far removed for those that demand more immediate satisfaction* knowledge and skills are real (I.e., to him), from the child's perspective they are hopelessly remote. For example, I once had a tenth-grade student who was extremely Interested in art. He avidly read every art book he could get his hands on. He had considerable skill with a realistic style, and nearly everything he enjoyed doing in art class was realistic. His art instructor continually hounded him to employ more abstract and unconventional techniques, attempting to free him from what he thought was the tyranny of literal forms. Although his drawings frequently fell into sheer saccharine sentimentality (a constant danger to those daring to attempt a realistic mode in our times), he chose to struggle with the difficulty of getting his own tenderness and compassion into the style he perceived to be his own, no matter what the dangers. He occasionally succeeded. His "Twin Sister," "Child of Two," (a copy of a magazine photograph), and "Mother and Child" showed that what he set out to do was not impossible* Unfortunately, he got no recognition from his art instructor, for he was not drawing in an "appropriate" style, he was not in step with the current vogue— in short, he was different. It always amazed me that under the circumstances this boy did not give up art entirely, and turn to develop exclusively his other real talent— basketball. The superficial concept of uniqueness in the mind of his Instructor— using orange peels, toothpicks, bottlecaps, or anything else one may happen to think of as material— had overshadowed the more fundamental uniqueness of Individual human beings. I had a lengthy conversation with him two years later and found to my Institutional delight that he had begun to "work hard at his subjects," so hard in fact that he expected to graduate within the top 2556 of the senior class. He may have realized that whether or not it made any sense to him he, had to meet the requirements of the art school he wished to attend, and whether or not it had to do with real competence he would have to present credentials which would indicate more that he had complied with the most arbitrary demands of the institution than that he had developed his capacity as an artist to the fullest extent* He was even convinced by this time that his own style was "wrong" and that his teacher was right all along— for it is obvious that what really matters is doing "what Is expeoted of you later on.? ’ In the sense In which Ausubel uses the term, this talented young man had finally come to "real" knowledge— "Insights discovered by others which have been communicated to him In a meaningful fashion." He had finally become a real person, for he now thought real thoughts and he knew that what Is really real is what the real world expects of him. The real knowledge that this student had acquired (apparently the "teaching" was successful) is precisely what Rogers found so appalling to# this young man had finally come to distrust his own valuing and his own experience, and he had perhaps had the possi bility of significant personal learning and development stifled. Real independence of thought, It would seem, needs to be motivated and sustained from within. And Internal motivation cannot be long sustained without external i reward and encouragement unless one has firm confidence in one's ability to deal with complex problems. The ques tions concerning the relationships between the methods of teaching and self-confidence, intellectual excitement and motivation in the learner are of great significance to the needs of complex problem solving. Ausubel attacks the claim that discovery is a unique and unexcelled generator of self-confidence, of intellectual excitement, and of motivation for sustained problem solving Qi| and creative thinking. He acknowledges that discovery methods like those advocated by Bruner lead to the develop- ment of constructive attitudes and convictions in the learner; however, he points out that failure experiences in "discovery” have the opposite effect on the learner's self- confidence. He also maintains, however, that reception learning can also develop these positive attitudes toward learning. In the absence of real data confirming either position, one can only conjecture about the attitudinal advantage of one method over the other. I tend to think that while both methods can produce students who believe . in "the existence of discoverable regularities in the universe," those students who have been encouraged to find, test, and apply explanatory principles will be more likely * • to believe in their own capacity to arrive at these regularities. Reception learners may be more likely to believe only that they can understand these regularities when they are discovered and explained to them by others. An excessive use of reception learning could therefore destroy the child's confidence in himself as an "inde pendent" thinker. Although one may concede that discovery learning may contribute more than expository teaching to the development of the child's concept of himself as an independent problem solver and tp the growth of his intrinsic motivation for further learning, it Is important to reflect on the limited nature of the "independence" and "motivation" which results from discovery learning. The independence and problem-solving motivation may be more apparent than real. In order to illustrate this, let us consider how exercises in generalizing from diverse instances in order to "discover" absolute principles for the solution of problems within a particular discipline whose concepts are simple (unlike those in real human problem situations) give children little experience with the attitudlnal and exploratory aspects of human problem solving. First of all, deciding in advance what problems children should be concerned with at each stage in their education bypasses several of the most important parts of the problem-solving process. The child must first become aware that some problem exists, and there must follow a period of time during which this problem becomes perceived to be directly or indirectly related to the attainment of his needs. Next the child should have the opportunity to explore things which seem to be related to the problem he has identified in the hope of finding possible clues to Its solution. At this stage and throughout the execution of particular strategies for the solution of the problem, it is important for the child to keep one eye on the overall articulation of the problem which emerges from this ' 86 exploratory phase. Strategies which at first appear very promising may In fact turn out to have overlooked some important competing possibilities which will gradually emerge In significance If one eye Is kept on the whole open field. D iscovery courses which preselect problems and prearrange the "relevant" data may be no better than expository teaching in this respect— the child Is denied ' the opportunity to identify, clarify, and relate to prob lems of real significance, and he Is denied the experience of identifying (or imagining) the kinds of information which would lead toward solutions. Furthermore, simplistic, mechanistic pseudo problem 65 solving may, as was argued in an earlier chapter, lead ^^See pp. 31-^0 of Chapter 1 for a discussion of complex problem solving. to unwarranted expectations of mechanistic simplistic solutions to complex problems. The attitudes "toward learning and inquiry, toward guessing and hunches, toward the possibility of solving problems on one's own . • . and attitudes about the ultimate orderliness of nature and a conviction that order can be discovered" which Bruner claims as benefits of discovery learning may turn out to be more ■■■ hindrance than help in preparing children to solve complex problems. (Furthermore, the ambiguity and complexity \ > inherent in complex problem solving will be especially threatening to children who have consistently experienced the Intrinsic reward of well-constructed discovery learn ing— the "everything come out even effect." Children with such experience may be more likely to seek simplicity by denial or repression when confronted with complex problems; or, what's worse, they may be likely to seek out some external source (an authority, their peers, or a demagogue) to simplify or set up the problem so that they can reach "their own" solutions.) Perhaps extensive experience with such "discovery" learning will thus only contribute to the all-or-none scapegoating which is so common— it*s the war, it's the Democrats, it's the unions, it's the Colored, it's the President, it's the Commies, it's the system— and the kind of attitudes and closed thinking such scapegoating engenders. As long as we continue to bring up children to expect to find simplistic answers and to be pleased with any myopic pseudo-reasoning for solutions to real problems, we may continue to treat symptoms and never be able to solve the underlying problems. CHAPTER IV COMPLEX CONCEPTUAL LEARNING AND THE FACILITATIVE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT Summary and Introduotlon The previous chapters have been.an attempt to argue that there is a special need today for the implementation of educational alternatives which will develop first the qualities and skills necessary for the investigation and ultimate solution of complex, human problems (Chapter 1); to show how the conventional narrow curricular goals of language arts education (Chapter 2) and the conventional directive methods used for instruction in their area as well as in other areas (Chapter 3) interfere not only with the solutions of specific social problems (especially Chapter 2) but also with the very process of the complex- problem-solving process itself (Chapters 2 and 3)* The present chapter is an attempt to present some of the theoretical ideas upon which the notion of complex problem solving is based. It will, furthermore, draw from this theoretical framework some specific attitudinal conditions for the complex-problem-solving environment. It muBt be noted at the outset of this chapter that the educational alternative described in this paper is neither a method (although it may involve specific, deliberate steps or "methods" to be planned and executed by the individual teacher— i.e., facilitating group process and openness, presenting topics or works of art for initiating discussion, etc.) nor is it a curriculum (for although information is an important part of the process of complex problem solving, as it is in any kind of problem solving, remembered information in and of. itself is not the all-important goal: it is the openness to new informa tion, the search for new information, and the reality testing of new information and derived hypotheses which are most important). Briefly then, the educational alternative described here is a process. And, since it is a natural process of human learning which frequently gets shunted during the process of enculturation into a static gg °Although the societies at large in Western and Westernizing countries can hardly be called static, the initial cultural experience of the child in the home— the dominant attitudes of parents and the child-rearing, practices consistent with those attitudes— is not essentially different from the closed experience of children in primitive static societies. The schools, unconsciously perhaps, reflect the cultural lag of the taxpaying community; schools are usually an extension of the generalized cultural "snapshot-of-the-past" represented in the community. culture, the reawakening of the natural processes for complex problem solving will require a cultural experience; i- •• ■■ V, i-’ •/. /..'r .■ i. ; ■. . >■ ■ . • ■ •• • '■ / - . ■ ■ ■ ■1 • ■1 ■ • • ■ . • $ ■ : r, ^ ^ i - .. ^ •: , ■ k - ; . . ■ _ • i. . •. . , ■ i , . . ,, _. •, . , , V : s.mx- " y' ’ ’ ■v ’ \'V- : ■ ■ v '• ‘V •.• Y r‘.‘ VV ’, y V’’. 'iv'- ■ — ^/•v" ...... ^;;v; ,:/• .. 9 0 In the classroom which is open and dynamic rather than closed and static. Obviously, the creation of this kind of cultural experience In the classroom Is not simply a matter of the teacher's initiating skills and observable techniques. Teachers must be able to exemplify the attitudes and values essential to complex problem solving to the greatest degree possible. And these attitudes and values are not easily and mechanically acquired, like skills and informa- ' tion. . Model of Complex Conceptual Growth Cognitive growth consists In the elaboration of schemata which are, for the time being at least, adequate for the child's use; and the rejection and setting up of new hypotheses (other concepts or schemata to be tested out) when the old schemata prove Inadequate. This being so, the best learning atmosphere for the development of complex-problem-solving abilities will provide, more than anything else, situations where children will desire' to Qy explore their thinking verbally. / In doing so together ®^Unlike the situation In which a child struggles to give linguistic form to some recently acquired principle of say mathematics but has a clear unequivocal lmagistlc sense of the relationships he is concerned with, the child attempting to give form'to his life experiences and to communicate these is not only wrangling with elusive?•. concepts but with concepts whose relations with other. Ideas and experiences is not at all clear. In giving: linguistic form to his life experiences, the child le attempting to freeze Ills own ebbing thoughts and feelings in a form that will enable him to check out- his own thinking with that of others• To the extent that his ^ attitudes: and the attitudes of those around him remain open, this child will be able to sharpen his cognitive apparatus for handling complex human problems. These experiences are important to verbalize, even though they may frequently be in Ausubel's words "ambiguous, imprecise, Ineptly formulated, and only marginally competent11— even by a poet. Teachers, especially English teachers, must be sensitive to the Inherent difficulty of such a task as verbalizing complex thoughts. Certainly, children should not be distracted at such times with the fears of making grammatical or rhetorical blunders. More will be said about thiB and related problems in this and the following chapters. with others, the kinds of questions which ought to be raised and need to be reconciled with the child1s present Inadequately explored structures will be confronted. The Importance of attempting to verbalize perception and thinking cannot be overlooked, for language seems to be the most effective way of getting at unconscious general ized ideas and notions which have a powerful Influence on our thinking and activity. Since complex problem solving involves the use of fundamental concepts and others related to them (and perhaps constricted by them., if they are rigid and unqualified), it is necessary to examine how language may lead to modification and qualification of these fundamental concepts and how these concepts relaterto ~ complex human problems. It is quite clear that generalizations are made (perhaps nonverbally) and. are responded to and even reasoned upon (perhaps also nonverbally) / and it is also clear that this often unconscious process can dictate‘ totally irrational behavior if it is not frequently opened tip for critical examination and revision through verbal Interaction with others. For instance, James Moffett tells a story of a young boy who refused to eat. After several days and much worry, the boy’s father finally elicited an explanation of the boy’s behavior. When the boy found out that people die when they get old, he thought that if he did not eat he would not grow up, get old, and die. Although it is easy for us to point out the 68 °°James Moffett, Teaching the Universe of Discourse (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 19ob;, p. 2*4. “ fallacies and oversights which led this boy to his behavioral solution to the problem--"I will not eat"~it is far more difficult for us to see parallels in our own thinking which lead us to behavioral conclusions equally as disastrous. Through verbalization in interactions with others, we have the means to get these simplistic ideas and arguments out in the open and to find out how they do or do not fit the data of the external world. Moffett continues* A child is not an empty vessel when he enters school; he comes replete with a set of abstractions abput the world and himself, some of which he may have acquired ready-made from others but some of which he generated himself from his own experience. It is these latter that are troublesome to others, obscure to himself; and not very amenable to influence and possible correction. ^Moffett; Teaching the Universe of Discourse. p. 24. Actually, from the perspective of this paper, the former ("those acquired ready made from others") are most often equally as "troublesome to others, obscure to himself, and not very amenable to Influence and possible correction." They are also "unconscious, private (i.e., limited to a certain social group, in this case, rather than limited to an individual) and essentially non-verbal." They also "determine a lot of his behavior."7° ^Moffett, Teaching the Universe of Discourse, p. 24. The source of many social problems may well be analogous to the source of individual problems of adjustment to the environment— -egocentrism. Generalizations acquired from the person's immediate social environment and "con firmed" by direct experience— if left unchallenged and unarticulated— may be Inadequate as workable assumptions when viewed from the perspective of a social environment which includes others who do not share that narrow social experience• When such constricted social generalizations are allowed to go long unquestioned, unqualified, or unchanged in relation to the demands of the total societal environment in which that society is embedded, behavior Inadequate to the situation Is almost Inevitable. In order to promote the growth of a social group, continuing with the analogy, dialog with other members of the group (in this case, a group of groups) must be con tinuous. Only by being encouraged to make explicit what . submerged conoepts dominate a group's thought and behavior will it be possible for that group to view the possible Inadequacies of its behavior and the concepts from which it flows• It is essential, then, if this analogy can be trusted, that such dialog occur in an environment of openness, trust, and respect. All must adopt an attitude of willingness to change. Nonverbal attempts to break through toughened cognitive structures may provide the stimulus and an immediate example of the differences of various people's perceptual apparatus, but the real challenges to these structures come from the verbal discussion that they can Induce. It is too easy for an individual to interpret data inconsistent with his perceptual biases in defensive ways, and thus avoid the conflict and growth that more open perception would cause* The conflicts which will arise in the child's thinking as a result of talking out and reciprocal ques tioning may well cause the child to have more, or other, conceptual problems to solve. If.the child is to have an adequate internalized plan of external events he must attempt to find out why the oonfllots exist, and then make adjustments in his thinking to accommodate all the informa tion and perspectives (old and new) that he has been made aware of in this process. The child*s new problems (or his old problems that have been revised or refocused) and the structural accommodations made by the child to fit his schemata to the new data will provide him with a new perceptual set. He will begin seeing old things in a new ligiht and will become aware of aspects of his experiencing which under the old unchallenged schemata went unnoticed. The new perceptions thus produced will frequently involve him In discriminating things which formerly were not distinguished Besides being aware of new facets of his experienc ing as a result of his exploration of his ideas with others the child will also tend to seek out new information which will help him to clarify or resolve the conflicts he has thus been able to perceive. His interests, consequently, will be broadened, or his previous interests will be deepened because of his need for such information. The child's desires and plans for action may at that time reflect his changing interests and perceptions. Finally, new conflicts may arise in other parts of the child's cognitive system as a result of changes in the system made to accommodate the conflicting elements which 96 •\ 1 » , t . • , • ' > I. *'*” ' FIGURE 1. A MODEL OF CONCEPTUAL GROWTH IN A COMPLEX-PROBLEM-SOLVING’ CLASSROOM. NEED TO BUILD NEW PERCEPTIONS IDENTITY ACCORDING^. INTERESTS, PLANS, TO WHICH EXPERIENCE DESIRES, CONFLICTS. HAS MEANING NEED FOR ENGAGING ACCOMMODATION OF IN MEANINGFUL ACTIVITY STRUCTURES TO FIT AND/OR SEEKING OUT NEW DATi NEW EXPERIENCESi NEED TO ARTICULATE NEW PROBLEMS ARISE AND/OR ACT OUT FLANS OR OLD ONES ARE FEARS, DESIRES, INTERESTS REVISED OR PERCEPTIONS, CONFLICTS REFOCUSED ATMOSPHERE OF FREEDOM TO EXPRESS ONESELF PARTICIPATION IN GROUP CONFLICTS WITH PLANS, DISCUSSIONS AND _ V FEARS, DESIRES, J ACTIVITIES r INTERESTS, AND > 4k PERCEPTIONS OF OTHERS TOLERANCE OF COMPLEXITY OR AMBIGUITY (SEE FIGURE 2,) Initiated the growth. These new conflicts, then, will give rise to other new, or revised, or refocused problems as before, and wi11 result in further accommodations in the cognitive structures of the child. The child, as his cognitive structures grow, will find a need to rebuild his own identity so that his new experiencing has meaning. He will do this mainly by acting upon his new perceptions, desires and Interests, and also by deliberately seeking out new. experiences. •Whether a given child will be more inclined toward the active or passive way of finding self in his new thinking will depend, of course, upon his personality, his cultural milieu, and the availability of resources and conditions for experiencing, as well as upon less tangible variables such as feelings about self, and theimmediate social situation as he perceives it. In any event, an attempt must be made to give the child every possible opportunity to go about this phase of his learning in ways that he sees fit. The next three chapters deal more specifically with the kinds of discussions and activities which can provide those opportunities. The remainder of this chapter, however, is a discussion of some of the factors which facilitate or Inhibit free expression in the classroom, the first prerequisite of the open inquiry environment. Without an optimal degree of this freedom, significant 3-AAPnlncp fiflnnnt tftke nlftftfl. fnr» /HaniiflRlhn anirl upit: the main avenues of self-exploration and discovery as well as the Initial impetus for further cognitive growth. Classroom Atmosphere for the Optimal Growth of Complex Concepts In order for conceptual growth for complex problem solving to take place, at least two conditions in the learner's mind must exist (represented by the double arrows in Figure 1): freedom of self-expression and toler ance of complexity. Tolerance of complexity (uncertainty, ambiguity or ambivalence) resides entirely within the mind of the learner, although its presence is somewhat dependent upon external conditions and events. Freedom of self- expression, on the other hand, is more obviously and directly dependent on the external factors, namely, the presence of an audience of one or more persons, the occasion for expressing oneself and the opportunity to express oneself. The external factors of audience, occasion, and opportunity (and also the special problems connected with stimulating the child's natural need or desire to externalize his thinking and feeling) will be treated in some detail in Chapters 5, 6, and 7. The pres ent section will consider only those external factors which tend to induce psychological freedom of self- expression and freedom to tolerate complexity. 1 99 As can be seen in Figure 2, both of these psychological freedoms seem to be closely related, at least in so far as they appear to derive from a similar source— the security of the person. In fact, like many other hypothetical constructs attempting to describe psycholog ical processes, these three concepts may be considered different facets of the same phenomenon. However, for the sake of elucidation of the processes I am attempting to describe, I shall keep them (verbally at least) as distinct concepts. Security, among other things, enables a person to take risks, which are more difficult or impossible for relatively Insecure persons to take. Among these risks are the risks of exposing internal thought processes— both cognitive and affective— which for some, reason are regarded possibly (or certainly) as cause for disapproval or some other form of punishment from others. A person may, for Instance, be wary of exposing a thought or opinion for fear of having it labeled "wrong" or for fear of personal rejection by one whose love he needs or even for fear of physical punishment. It is obvious that the feeling of security and the risks that a given person will take will vary with conditions of time, place, presence and perceived mood of possible punishing agent(s), and various other internal states besides security. 100 FIGURE 2. A MODEL OF TOLERANCE OF COMPLEXITY AND OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN A COMPI£X-PROBLEMrSOLVING CLASSROOM. SPIRIT OF CONGRUENCE, COOPERATION GENUINENESS IDENTITY: WORTH, ADEQUACY "HEARING" EMPHATIC LISTENING GROUPNESS SECURITY UNCONDITIONAL POSITIVE REGARD SENSE OF CONTROL MEANINGFUL OVER ONE'S SELF-DIRECTED OWN DESTINY OPENNESS TO INQUIRY AND CHANGE ACTIVITY FREEDOM TO RISK: SELF-EXPRESSION, TOLERANCE OF COMPLEXITY I Tolerance of ambiguity or complexity similarly Involves taking risks, but in this case the punishing agent is within the person rather than outside him. While expressing oneself involves the externallzation of thoughts and feelings already acknowledged in the person's consciousness, tolerance of complexity is the freedom to acknowledge to oneself (without fear of "self-inflicted1' punishment— anxiety, uncertainty, depression, bad feelings about self, feelings of inferiority or inadequacy, etc.) the existence of experiences the person is undergoing which are potentially threatening. 71^his notion is perhaps identical to Rogers' "openness to one's experiencing," a primary characteristic of the "fully functioning person"— ;the ideal learner/ teacher. Throughout Freedom to Learn. one encounters the notion of openness not only fro one' s internal experiencing. but also to experiencing of external events, his "openness to change" may correspond to this external experiencing more specifically, however, and his "openness to one's experiencing" to the internal experiencing of self. Both are concommltants of one anotheK In any event, I Intend the term "tolerance of complexity" to cover of acknowledging "all" of a person's experie himself— internal as well as external events. (A very hairy philosophical issue arises when one considers the notion of acknowledging one's experiencing, in this external sense, for, in a very real sense, incom ing perceptions are not total and phenomenological, but rather selective and biassed by their very nature toward expectation and need. In other words, a person will only tend to see what he expects, needs or can afford to see. If threatening perceptions are pointed out, and the per son's security is not great enough for him to afford to see, he will tend to either hot see at all or to see and then quickly repress the threatening percepts. The question of changing actual percepts to reflect the complexities of hypothetical phenomenological perceptions ("complete" openness to experiencing of external events) is the key problem In the growth of complex concepts* Whether this growth comes primarily as a result of direct confrontation with verbal exposition by others, as was maintained In the previous section, or as a result of the "backtracking" to see what could be wrong" when two (initially and superficially at least) sets of contradictory percepts or Ideas become incompatible when they are explored more fully and collide may be unanswer able . At any rate, verbal exploration of thinking with others is instrumental to the development of both sources of conflict of ideas and percepts. This section Is dealing with the state of mind which will facilitate that process and the external factors of the environment which will induce that state of mind .) - “ — — — Since activity (constantly being demanded by the person In living) requires decisions, which In turn require the weighting and selection of alternative percepts, plans, and goals, "too much" complexity cannot be tolerated, for there isn't enough time. Narrowing seems to be essential for activity. There are serious conflicts that arise for the growth of complex concepts due to the constant demand for narrowing and closure. This conflict is nowhere more evident than in the growth of self-concept in youth. Kenniston, for Instance, has identified the conflicts of ambivalent experiences and perceptions of social role and societal values as one of the chief contributing factors In the etiology of "alienation" in American youth. Society demands of each child the adoption of a role, yet the existing roles as Illustrated by the people around him are unsatisfactory from various other points of view to which the child is sensitive. This requires the child to select Elements of the models he knows and to create’ an array: of possible identities for himself to become. In ^ addition, the values according to which he is told explicitly and implicitly by the society the good life is to be led frequently conflict with his own perception of the workableness of those values* He is thus cut off at the root from any stable and unambiguous value source from which to make such decisions. All of this complexity produces a great deal of anxiety, and thus, paradoxically, tends to destroy the very tolerance of the complexity, , which he. senses Is the only way for him to keep in contact with, and to cope with, the changing environment outside him* The resulting withdrawal (as in drugs), denial (as in becoming with a vengeance Mr, Normal), or non-constructive rebellion so prevalent in our society are perhaps the only alternatives available to many youth.72 72Complexity is aiso a raajor psychological problem for contemporary adults. See Alvin Toffler*s Future Shock. Complexity, however, need not be dysfunctional to the individual (and to the society he is part of) if he is generally secure with himself. Figure 2 indicates some of the possible factors of the classroom environment which can contribute to the growth of the child*s personal security and consequently to his capacity to cope with and benefit from complexity. io * "Security," at the center of the figure, may be * 8Imply another aspect of the same phenomenon suggested by two other notions in the figure, "Positive Identity: Con cept of Worth and Adequacy," and "Sense of Control Over One’s Own Destiny," Although in reality these three notions may not be distinct from one another but three ways of saying "Positive Self-Image," X will keep them distinct for the sake of the following discussion. It should be noted that the flow of arrows suggests that "Positive Identity" and "Sense of Control Over One’s Own Destiny" are conceived as mediators between the elements of the external environment and.the central notion of "security." The elements of the environment contributing to the security of students Include teacher qualities (circled), and classroom atmosphere and activity (boxed). First, since the teacher qualities are fundamental to the establishment of the classroom elements, and to some extent by themselves can contribute significantly to the positive personal feelings of students, let us consider the teacher qualities. One of the chief perplexities for youth today is the problem of finding a way of living comfortably in a time of rapid change. As was indicated above, this problem is not easily solved because there are few, if any, models in the community who can be imitated directly. The child, being thus thrust inward upon himself, must oreate an ideal image for himself using whatever seems sensible for his self-development. He senses, perhaps, the need to tolerate openness to his own thoughts and feelings (because he ean really rely on no one else) as well as openness .toward external models and attempts at guidance. Individuals are more or less attracted to the models provided by peers, the values and attitudes of peers more closely approaching those which he imagines that he can live with on the basis of present experiences. There is, furthermore, the lure of being with the current, motivated by one of the greatest sources of anxiety in change society— the fear of obsolescence. There are perhaps, few who can resist consistently the security resulting from the promise of the resolution of anxieties due to the complexity of self- definition and fear of obsolescence in this way. Since even this kind of conformist solution provides only temporary aid (new waves of change come with each new generation, or even more frequently), and since it is only a pseudo-solution to the problem of coping with change environment, a way of dealing squarely and effectively with the realities of change and ambivalence would seem to be the most durable solution to the perplexing and ever- renewing problem of change.73 ; A : ? Ivin Toffler's notion of a biologically given limit for the tolerance of new stimuli beyond which human . ^0" c ' i - ;V' v:^-:'.' ' S V '' ''''■' 1 0 6 beings cannot go without sometlines serlous psychological harm Is used aB a just!fyihg principle behind his fre quently escapist recommendations for the psychological problems of living In complexity. The therapeutic value of a retreat cannot be denied, for it often seems to provide enough relief from other anxieties to allow for resolution of others to take place. However, these kinds of solutions do not appear to me to be at all wise in considering the education.of children. We are protecting children from complexity (see Qlasser, Schools Without Failure). Bit it Is not working; repression and denial only make adjustment worse later since It is almost inevitable that the conflicts, allowed to build up over years, will eventually come to an explosive head. There is nothing more pitiful than the college-aged student who has suddenly come face to face with realities he has been allowed— and even encouraged by schooling— to deny. The kind of personality structure described by Carl Rogers--the "fully functioning person"— seems to be a realistic alternative to the solution of this greatest personal problem of coping with complexity and change, as well as to the solution of other problems more social In nature. I think that many people sense intuitively that the values, attitudes, and behaviors of people who approach this ideal are most workable and natural for living in any environment, but especially In one of rapid change. * The 74 See the overwhelming relief and joy expressed by student responses to various teachers' attempts to become this kind of person in the classroom in Rogers, Freedom to Learn. qualities in teachers Rogers identifies as those most conducive to learning and growth are perhaps the very ones which could enable our children to be better able not only w J .-v ■■■'-'i'1''-',". - " i v . '■ '■ 5$ ^ ■ * ' . :^V>: ^ ' to oope with complexity, but also to benefit from it. X Teachers can become models---and perhaps the only available ones to many children— of non-denying, coping persons. The presence of real models of such coping will relieve much identity anxiety in children and free them for growth and learning by giving them living proof that what they sense they must become can really exist. The first of the qualities of security-promoting teachers is realness, congruence or genuineness. Realness is valuable for at least two reasons: one, because it ip a clear model of tolerance of the most fundamental, pervasive, and frightening of complexities, one*s own being; and two, because realness can reduce the need for (and Incidence of) damaging teacher behaviors which result from denial and repression. If students see their teachers capable of being honest about themselves.and their real feelings as far as they know them, students will be perhaps better able to cope with the ambivalences they are experiencing themselves. Simply knowing that others are experiencing ambivalences similar to their own and are not always able to feel and act out consistently the ideals they have set for them selves, can be a relief from anxiety in those students who have great discrepancies between their ego ideals and perceived performance with respect to the achievement of those Ideals. The resulting reduction of anxiety will V - / • "release them" for further growth. Denying personalities thrive on projection and Judgment allsm. , This kind of behavior In teachers has perhaps caused untold damage to children In schools, especially among the so-called "disadvantaged. By ^^Por a comprehensive review of the research con cerning the notion of "self-fulfilling prophecy," see Pygmalion in the Classroom. Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson U'Jew York; Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1968). The teacher1s explicit and implicit judgments about his students, and hence his expectations about the performance of given students, lead to significant differences in the actual performance of those students. becoming aware of their real feellng3 and owning them as such, teachers can learn to state these feelings as they actually are— coming from within themselves— , and not as objective facts about the outside world.76 since the kind ^ Some insight into the ways in which language Itself perhaps contributes to the problem of unconscious value projection can be gotten from the writings of the General Semanticists. See pp. 100 ff., Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner, Teaching^as a Subversive Activity (New York: Delacorte Press, 19 b § ) ~ , - “ of projections described by Rogers and the related uncon scious judgments and expectations responsible for the retardation of the growth of many students apparently spring, from a common source— the lack of conscious aware ness of the teacher's own values and the relativity and idiosyncrasy of those values— it is especially important for teachers to have experiences which will help them to attain some awareness of and perspective on their values.. This problem Is dealt with again in Chapter 8 where some such experiences;-are .suggested.;: ; Although openness to change Is not explicitly mentioned by Rogers among the three qualities most desir able for teachers, this quality, perhaps Implicit in the general openness requisite for congruence or genuineness, seems to be of great Importance in the classroom treating complex issues. If the teacher* owning and. perhaps shar ing his own thinking?? with his students, can maintain an 77 11 See the following three chapters for the qualifi cation of teacher's sharing his own thinking and experience. attitude of willingness to change his mind when new evidence or ideas are explored further, other sources of anxiety can be relieved. These anxieties, often resulting from the feelings of helplessness that individuals and minorities experience in a mass society largely, motivated by blind convention and narrowly-conceived self interest, are perhaps the most compelling reasons for apathetic withdrawal, or overt rebellion among our young. The presence of teachers who demonstrate that change in adults is possible will enable children to maintain their hope for rational solutions to the problems which are at the source of their greatest anxieties.?® ?®Frequently, it seems that the kinds of "concerns," deeply felt and difficult to articulate, that students wants most to communicate to authorities in demonstrations are channeled into specific issues, arid are thus perverted and destroyed. The fundamental issue of war and hatred of man for man, and the mentality that promotes and feeds upon Buch Inhumanity becomes obscured by talk of when, and how many troops will be withdrawn from a particular war. The response to demonstrations if any, therefore, is on a purely superficial level of power. But the relief some times felt after "successful" confrontations of this sort is sure to be short-lived, for soon the realization comes that nothing has been done to change the underlying causes of the specific Issues— the provincial concerns and notions which dominate peoples' thinking. The frustration thus frequently becomes only deeper and more Intense. The same thing often happens in student confronta tions in schools. By responding seriously to trivial Issues (like picnic tables and coke machines) and trivi ally to serious issues (like the introduction of various innovative subjects into the curriculum and "individual izing" instruction) the underlying concerns are muddled and lost* Without open and understanding people who can hear what children are saying, these innovations count for little. And the students soon realize this. Again the response is to power rather than to rational c ommuni c ati on• The quality of "openness to change" is closely related to the third major teacher characteristic conducive to student security— "empathetic listening," "hearing," and "concern." Rogers has described beautifully the "releas ing" effect of "hearing" others and there seems to be little to add here (see quoted passage p.181* of this paper and other places in Freedom to Learn). However, a few words about the possible abuses of expressed hearing and the consequent loss of security in students. The first abuse is the very common "Ah! you must mean" syndrome and the second, a more subtle and perhaps more sophisticated version, the "I-hear-you-saying" syndrome. If teachers are fully aware of the likelihood that their own Interpretations of what students say Is somewhat different, these diffi culties can be avoided.^ 79gee Culture and Commitment. pp. 80-81. The fourth teacher quality for the growth of personal security among students is "unconditional positive regard." Obviously, for this quality to emerge, teachers need to develop values which are somewhat broader and more flexible than those acquired earlier In life. The "value directions" discussed in Rogers, Freedom to Learn indicate a dynamic concept of valuing which may best promote the development of this quality among teachers (see especially pp. 239-256). At the center of these values lies the supreme value of spontaneous, open and real human beings. Without this kind of valuing orientation, teachers will tend to value only those students who are compatible with the peculiarities of their own narrow systems. Their valuing of their students would then be conditional on the fin students' expression of specific attitudes and behaviors. 80 "Unconditional positive regard" is equally as important for thedevelopment of independence essential to coraplex-problem-solving capacity, as it is for the development of security needed for freedom of expression and tolerance of complexity. The social climate of the classroom most conducive to security among students would seem to contain elements analogous to the teacher qualities previously discussed. The growth of these elements among groups may depend largely on the presence of those qualities in teachers. For instance, "diffuse liking structure1' (an essential ingredient of spirit of cooperation and groupness as I am using the terms here) has been found correlated to teachers perceived by students as understanding them. In summary of Schmuck's research, Rogers writes, "where the teacher is more empathic, every student tends to feel liked by all the others, to have a more positive attitude toward himself and toward school."®1 It is also reasonable to 0*1 ■^Rogers, Freedom to Learn, pp. 118-119. suppose that the growth of genuineness among a group (another component of groupness) may depend on the pres ence of this quality in the teacher. As a result of the testing and grading orientation of conventional structured schooling, there is a great deal of competition among students. It is very difficult for a spirit of cooperation to exist among students when competition, either against a "standard" outside the group or against the other members of the group, is keen. Even the attempt to mollify the Inhibiting effects on coopera tiveness by setting teams against one another in competi tion leaves something to be desired. The cooperation that occurs is limited within teams,- and the motivation is still external to the Individuals and groups. Competition as a ! consciously employed motivating force In the complex- problem-solving class must be eliminated. When students, especially "failing" students, are In a non-competitive atmosphere, they will be better able to maintain their concept of adequacy and worth. It would also seem that for most, if not all, children, a more mutually helping atmosphere would make It easier for them to feel that they have control over their own destinies, for fulfilling their needs involves other people. Meaningful self-directed inquiry and activity, in lieu of compulsory or expected programs of study, will contribute toward the security of students in a number of ways. First, it will enable the student to live in a way consistent with the growth of personal responsibility, flexibility and autonomy essential to his present and Qp future adaptability to a changing environment. Being ®2That children at some age sense the importance of developing these qualities is suggested in Keniston, The Uncommittedt Alienated Youth in American Society (New York: Dell Publishing Co., Inc., i£oo), pp. 234-235, 237, 238, etc. able to act upon current interests and plans relating to the adequacy needs they perceived for themselves will enable students to experience the change process within themselves so that their faith in their own competence in acquiring adaptable and adapting change Identities for themBeIves will grow. Conversely, it would seem that limited experience in acting Upon one's Own Initiative and trusting one's own Judgment would arouse considerable anxiety In.some students, especially those who are particularly dependent on outside forces. Finally, self-directed inquiry and activity will contribute toward the security of students by giving them a greater feeling of control over their own destinies. Students will not feel the helplessness frequently associ ated with the passivity and dependence induced by the manipulation and control inherent In structured curricula. Some Further Environmental Conditions for flpen Inquiry of complex Concepts Since Integrating and extending ideas and experi ences according to the model of cognitive growth presented In the previous section requires verbalization orally or in writing, it Is clear that anything which tends to inhibit the child's natural desire to express himself verbally must be controlled or done away with. The superficial institutional kind of inhibition caused by the linguistic trivia game is one of the easiest to control: it can be taken out of the curriculum. In most traditional English programs the "cosmetic" approach is taken. Children;come to school speaking a variety of English which differs more or less in some details from the form of the lahguage which is tradition- ally used (in "formal" situations) by "educated" people. Teaching, therefore, is aimed at inhibiting those linguistic forms which are not standard, and substituting those which will mark the speaker as "learned." This same emphasis on trivia is carried over to writing. When chil dren spend much of their energy Inhibiting natural but unacceptable linguistic forms and sorting through hundreds of rules for mechanical accuracy, it is no wonder that little energy is left over for the real activity of writing — thinking. Many children are so convinced by the time they reach Junior high that they can do nothing worth while linguistically, that they not only appear to have nothing to say orally or in writing, but they seem to believe it, too. This destructive and negative activity must be stopped. As it turns out, those minorities who speak dialects further removed from the standard dialect are discriminated against in a most cruel way. Their intel lects are tied in a mass of trivial convention (at least In the classroom) and made to appear inferior. The beauty, creativity, and uniqueness (not to mention the self-images) of these children are systematically destroyed. There are, however, other sources of inhibition which may be worse and which are less easily dealt with. These arise out of everyday situations which the teacher finds himself In. In an urban school in Columbus a situ ation arose which will serve as an illustration of this source of inhibition. The teacher had considerable success in getting the students involved in classroom discussions and projects. The class decided that they would like to write a novel. At first almost everyone was involved in some way. Many contributed to the development of the plot by suggesting incidents to further the action. Others developed the incidents and created the dialogue. Still others drew illustrations of key incidents in the story. One girl served as secretary, recording the final version of each passage as it was composed and revised on the blackboard. The three white boy3 in the class had been among those eagerly contributing to the development of the plot. They had Introduced a white character whom they wanted treated sympathetically. Although some disagree ments arose as a result, they felt somewhat successful in having their part in the direction of the story. In order to do this, however, they had to sustain some ridicule from the others in the class. After some weeks these boys . ■ ' — ■ * developed deep resentment for the other boys in the class, until finally they reached the point of open hostility when they were ridiculed for their suggestion of the make and model of car which the hero of the story was to drive. After this incident the three withdrew entirely from the group*s activity. Sensing this, the teacher took these boys aside one day to discuss their lack of participation in class. Since she had established an open atmosphere in her class, these students felt safe in sharing their feelings openly with her. They responded by saying that they would not take that humiliation from those "black bastards" any more. Unfortunately, the teacher responded to the overt racism of their remarks (as most of us would) Instead of listening to their message. She went on to reject those feelings as illegitimate, and made the boys feel even more frustrated and humiliated. Instead of accepting those feelings and restricting her comment and questioning to behavioral alternatives and making this a constructive learning situation by indicating the similarity between this situation and the one frequently encountered by Black people in our society, she unwittingly betrayed the trust which she had managed to establish with them. Since their success in the course depended entirely on their willingness to contribute to group projects, these boys felt that they were being treated unjustly since they knew that they would have to continue to be humiliated and rejected by their peers if they did what was required. In addition to the inhibition due to the "cosmetic" approach to language in the classroom and the inhibition due to the possibility of rejection and ridicule by peers as well as teachers, there is a third source of Inhibition .-teaching style* Traditional methods of presentation, questioning, and testing carry in them the implicit message that teachers (and.of course textbooks) have all the answers. The teacher disgorges himself before the class, often bringing up no more than the textbook pro vided him with* Then he asks questions only about those things which he can answer* If the children can give him back what he gave them, he is delighted. If the children offer answers which he has not considered (i.e., those not in the book), after momentary confusion he states that that was not what he wanted. From here on it becomes clear to the children that the idea of education is not to think of possible answers or solutions to problems but to give the teacher what he wants. When the test is given at the conclusion of the unit, the children know that it doesn't matter what one might think. The only answer allowed is the "right" answer (i.e., what the teacher wanted). . Children grow to adulthood being utterly dependent on the authorities to tell them all the answers. If the reader thinks that this point is. overdrawn, let him visit a university class.where the Instructor leaves the do o r open to students' thoughts about the subject. They think that he has all the answers and that he is going to tell them in sequence thus: The first point I would like to make the second point, etc., etc. The students of this instruc tor, think that his openness is a Joke. Maybe it Is, in a sad sort of way. The Joke Is the irony In the lack of intelligent response and the intellectual passivity to which people "educated" for 12 years have been conditioned• If direct teaching styles inhibit student thought and verbalization, more indirect styles may encourage them. (The qualified use of teacher-directed activities is taken up in Chapter 7.) The research done with various teacher- pupil interaction instruments indicates that indirect strategies encourage more student verbalization and inter est than do direct strategies. When pupils of teachers on a continuum from very direct to very indirect were compared on their accomplishment of certain tasks, it was found that the peaks of achievement curves occurred at points near the center of the continuum for variables other than creativity. . For creativity, however, the curve peaks at the indirect end of the continuum. ^Robert Soar, "Optimum Teacher-Pupil Interaction for Pupil Growth." in Educational Leadership, Dec., 1968, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 275-280".' ’ ““ There is good reason to believe that the desired verbalization of experience and the extension and modifi cation of ideas in writing is related to creativity in these experiments. If this is so, it seems obvious that English teachers will need to have the opportunity-to develop a repertoire of/teaching strategies which include the most Indirect. --■'-/.‘-v-- ■ It is assumed that before verbal sharing will be attractive to the child, an atmosphere of respect and trust must be established with the class. By encouraging the questions and ideas important to the child, and by voluntarily returning to these Issues as student-raised concerns and referring to them frequently in later dis cussions and presentations, the teacher can do much to establish his respect for students. In doing these thlngB the teacher will also communicate his positive regard for student-initiated questions and thinking. Furthermore, it Is assumed that the teacher is aware enough to realize that he may not presume to give satisfactory answers to the questions raised by students. He must strive to achieve and maintain a peer relationship with his students in intellectual matters. There is another factor facilltative of student verbalization which is related but perhaps not identical with indirect teaching style. This factor.is.the group- directedness of the classroom activities. In a time when individualization of instruction is being.advocated and worked out, it is necessary not to lose sight of the social origin of much individual motivation. Many of us were motivated to learn In school by a desire to identify with an image of social role played by someone we chose as a model. At a time when social and technological change had not reached the maddening pace of the past decade/it was rather easy t o find a we Undefined model for self-identity. Now, however, it is far more difficult— or even impossible— for children to find such identities. Their disillusionment with and revulsion at the values of their parents and of their government has forced large numbers of young people to identify more strongly with peer values, however ili on defined these may be. n As a result children will more ®^They live in a world in which events are presented to them in all their complex immediacy; they are no longer bound by the simplified linear sequences dictated by the printed word. In their eyes the killing of any enemy is not qualitatively different from the murder of a neighbor. They cannot reconcile our efforts to save our own children by every known means with our readiness to destroy the children of others with napalm. Old distinctions between peacetime and wartime, friend and foe, "my" group and "theirs"— the outsiders, the aliens— have lost their mean ing. They know that the people of one nation alone cannot save their own children; each holds the responsibility for the others* children. Mead. Culture and Commitment, pp. 75-7 6 . . " ” " .;;.... readily listen to one another than they will to adults, who represent for some a kind of negative model— what not to become.s*nce this is so, it is imperative that teachers ®^The problem of identification is Inevitably more complicated for young Americans. Partly because of the pace of social change, identifications must be cautious, selective, partial, and Incomplete. Work changes; the skills essential to our parents no longer suffice for.us; it is a rare (and usually unsuccessful) farmer or carpenter who does exactly what his father did. Women, too, know in their bones that the ways they were raised as children may not suffice for their own children, and anticipate that the fashions of child-rearing will continue to swing as they have in the past. To choose to be exactly like one's father or mother is to choose obsolescence; Indeed it is literally impossible, if only because a pattern of life considered normal forty years ago would evoke such a different (and incredulous) response from one's contem poraries today; Kenlston, The Uncommitted: Alienated Youth in American Society. p. 232. v and school systems make no assumptions about what each child must know, what values each child must exhibit, arid so forth. If teachers and school systems continue to make these assumptions and act accordingly they run the risk of driving peer culture further from the acceptance of pieces of the present value system which may under other circum- 86 stances be considered desirable by children. The 86 "Total rejection" is a phrase that comes readily to their lips, often before the mind provides even a blurred picture of the new culture that is to. displaoe the old. If there is anything about the ethos of Black Power that proves particularly attractive even to young white disaffiliates who cannot gain access to the movement, it i3 the sense that Black Power somehow implies an entirely new way of life: a black culture, a black consciousness . . . a black soul which is totally incompatible with white society and aggressively proud of the fact. Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture, p. 44. Inversion of the values that the schools have held so dear in rebel cultures within our society illustrates this principle at work. The task that each child now faces is the construction of a society (or set of alternative societies) which may become, at the same time that he con structs a possible personal Identity (or better, a set of possible personal identities) in these hypothetical worlds. Obviously this is a much more difficult task than any of us was called upon to do. The continuation of present school practicesin which a temptingly comfortable quasi-system is forced on children in school will make it increasingly more difficult for children to do so. On the other hand, schools where children alternately assume, build on, extend, and modify and then perhaps tear down and rebuild from other assumptions models for the future will prepare them better for the possibilities of what is to come. When children perceive that this is their world and that the future is theirs to mold as well as to become a part of and that the school is there to help them to prepare for this formidable challenge and obligation, they will embrace the responsibility and work avidly with one another toward these ends. In an atmosphere where the situation that children face together is clearly understood, and where they are helped to become aware that sharing perceptions and ideas may be Instrumental to them in solving these perplexing problems, there will be strong motivation for students to verbalize their experiences. In order to establish and maintain this motivation, the teacher's role must be non-directive. But this is not to say that his role will not be important. In fact, his role will be of critical importance in school. The children will regard his as a "natural" authority. His experience will be drawn upon as some kind of tentative testing of . alternatives (although these were from a cultural milieu which may well be non-existent in the near future) and a way of anticipating consequences of assumptions and courses of action which may not be apparent to children hypothesis* ^ . ing about these assumptions and actions. Under no circum stances must a teacher allow himself to become an unquestioned authority, even If children were to allow this. If he did this he would run the risk of making students dependent on his judgment. Dependence will cause the breakdown of the "inquiry" environment: students will say what is expected of them and not what they think. Conse quently, student self-directed motivation will be destroyed. .;-vr’ ;■ . , ,v ; CHAPTER. ''S ~ SOME KINDS OP GROUP DISCUSSION FOR THE EXPLORATION OP COMPLEX CONCEPTS Introduction After considering In the previous chapters the destructive effects of conventional content-oriented, conforraity-with-authority based education, and after considering the conflicts that this kind of education causes for many children whose experience leads them to suspect the inhumanity and lack of wisdom of much tradi tional thought, it becomes clear that a successful class room experience must grow out of the needs of the children themselves. A good deal of the teacher's energy must therefore be directed to devising activities which will extend those needs beyond the relatively narrow limits of each individual in the class. Group Discussions for the Discovery of Relevance To the hypothetical wise man nothing is irrelevant: every piece of information has something to do with hi3 con stantly growing schema of the world which he constructs to help him achieve his goals. To us mortals, however, our 126 bar" ‘ ' .... t according to the means we choose to reach their fulfillment; lead us in pursuit of one thing, then another. Circumstances usually dictate certain limits within which we can search. And circumstances change. Yet many of us as adults find that to some extent we are stuck with what was more relevant to our needs at an earlier stage of our evolution. In looking back it Is often difficult for one to "remember" his own previous needs. It Is more difficult to anticipate one's own future needs. Obviously it is an even more difficult task to estimate the needs of others in such a way as to know what will be perceived by them as relevant. I have heard many teachers argue that their subject is relevant— it can give insight into human beings and thus facilitate one!s practical dealings with others, it can be used in industry and help one to land a good Job, it will prepare one for tough college courses and will thus lead to even higher-paying Jobs and more prestige. These arguments are supposed to be foolproof. Certainly if the subject is related to greater spclal competence, more money, or more prestige there is no one who would not perceive the subject as relevant. However, these arguments, based as they usually are on cultural value assumptions frequently not shared by students, as a rule have little effect. V/hile the attempt to teach relevance is an admirable step toward ' rV"v^ . ' 127 making education work In our age, and shows some sensi tivity to the problem on the part of the teacher, “teaching", relevance is most frequently doomed to failure. Too many children will be lost and remain resentful. It may be Impossible to argue someone else into accepting the relevance of something without certain prior experiences and time. Sometimes such argumentation does seem to have its Intended effect. Even then, however, one wonders whether the argument was anything more than a catalyst to what had been ready to occur anyway. Some of the time in the classroom should, therefore, be devoted to the exploration of the Interests and percep tions of the children. This can be done in broad open- ended sessions where children are encouraged to talk freely of things suggested by selected topics, and have the opportunity to articulate their concerns, Interests, and plans. They can receive feedback from other children which can clarify their ideas further. Their enthusiasm will gradually spread out to Include more and more diverse areas i as they see the relatedness of these things. Although pieces of information offered by Individuals may or may not be relevant to the discussion as a whole or to the experi ence of every child in the group, such group meetings can suggest relatedness possibilities that may become signifi cant breakthroughs in the thinking of individual children. X have frequently experienced this when listening to people discuss things which I am particularly Interested in. A casual comment has often caused me to consider the similar- ity of two apparently unrelated situations. Suddenly this newly perceived similarity arouses an intense interest in studying my first problem in terms of the exploration of the new one. When I have gone "far enough" with this exploration,.the intensity of the drive falls off and often remains at a relatively high level. Although an explored issue is sometimes scrapped as a dead issue, these explorations frequently come alive later in the context of new thinking. Although undisciplined discussion may seem "pointless," it is perhaps one of the best ways to stimu late thinking and to extend relevance. In these open-ended discussions there should be no attempt to keep children strictly to the point. While it is. important that the children are gradually weaned away from the egocentricity of their thinking it is unwise— at least in some of the discussions— not to allow expression of any "obscure" or egocentric remark. In my experience following group discussion, there have been observations which at first struck me as totally irrelevant. After considering them.further, however, I discovered that these comments were often made in response to- the trend- of the dialog as a whole rather than to the remark immediately preceding. Although such generalized responses can K - •. v'■■ ■:■> 1 2 9: sometimes end lively discussions abruptly, one can hardly say that they are Inappropriate. The relevance of a remark of this sort, however, would be more obvious after some generalization about the trend of the Interaction had been made by some other student or by the commenter himself. If generalized responses prematurely stop discussion too often and the group finds It especially difficult to get started on a new path, it may be necessary to call attention to what is happening. The student may be asked to Jot down the generalization summary together with his response so that he will be free to follow the discussion to its con clusion. When there 13 a natural break in the dialog he can reintroduce the topic and give his response. Formula tion and discussion of general observations and personal responses to them are Important because such generaliza tions, sometimes clearly supported by the limited data presented in the discussion, can get by unqualified. A stated generalization, however, is a clear invitation for counter examples. For Instance, if a series of anecdotes about older brothers suggested that all older brothers are treated preferentially and I had no older brother, I might be inclined to believe that they are universally preferred by parents. As soon as I state the generalization or respond to it ("I don1t think it's fair that the older boys get better treatment11) .counter evidence will be likely to 130 come out, (I assume that within a discussion, say, of \ injustice, counter examples to this generalization would not be likely to occur spontaneously, since the focus of the discussion was not on parents* treatment of older brothers. The stated generalization or generalized response would be the only way of achieving this new focus and hopefully eliciting qualifying information.) Exploratory Group Discussions Distinguished from Sensitivity Training The open-ended sessions described here and the other types of group activities described in this chapter must be distinguished from psychotherapeutic sensitivity sessions. In group therapy it is Important that generalization and generalized responses be inhibited. "Intellectualization" destroys the effectiveness of therapy and wastes people's well-pald-for time with the group and therapist. As long as Interaction remains on this level, people can avoid really confronting one another with their real thoughts and feelings about one another. Only by letting down ond'.s facades and revealing one's guarded thoughts and feelings can one proceed toward self-knowledge and acceptance. The idea behind such sessions is not to brainstorm about human experience but to live it. The focus of the group activities for the classroom, on the other hand, is most often on problems external to the psyches of Individual students. The purpose of these activities ranges from sharing experiences and thoughts relating to seleoted Issues in non-directed talk to attempting to find solutions to various kinds of problems-— social behavior problems, and problems relating to individual Writing difficulties or group efforts, such as play-writing, play production, media displays, and film shooting and editing. However, if deep and open personal Communication arises in these discussions it should certainly not be diverted. Since students are frequently talking to one another in the kind of classroom described in this paper, there is increased possibility of open communication with large numbers of students. The openness characteristic of therapeutic sessions can take a natural leisurely course developing and will contribute toward the emotional as well as intellectual growth of children. An important thing to consider in the creation of an open environment is the show of emotion. It may be essen tial to the openness of the environment to allow not. only the expression of the natural warm feelings of children for each other and the teacher, but also the hostility and aggression that arises from time to time. Glasser seems to have overlooked the importance of this. George Dennison*s experience at the First Street School in New York City was that some children need to show aggression physically as ' well as verbally in some situations. Many of the stories he tells, reminiscent of experiences we all had as children, indicate that there may be something conducive to warm feelings and willingness to cooperate in the unambiguous expression of our feelings of hostility. Once we have done this our energies can be directed toward the development of common ties. The threat of a newcomer can be especially provoking "* ' to a not-too-secure leader, and an immediate physical con frontation and perhaps occasional others may be needed to help reaffirm his insecure position. The objective, of. course, of the teacher of such a child is to move the child away from his dependence on physical domination to the fulfillment of his needs through less antisocial and undemocratic actions. Increased Involvement in the group discussions and projects can help to do this. It would seem to be very important, however, for the teacher to be patient with the child during the time when he is developing a new social identity in more satisfying rela tionships growing out of involvement. When occasional relapses occur, a3 they certainly will, it is possible to be very firm in rejecting the behavior, but one should not withdraw love. The fact that he has fallen into the old patterns of behavior may indicate that his self-esteem has dropped to a critical low level which prompted him to retreat to his old sure-fire method to rebuild it. An honest expression of the teacher's feelings about the behavior and the consequences will be additional motives for trying again as long as the love relationships remains firm. Without this love he may be caught in a cycle of Insecurity and aggressive behavior, from which it is impossible to escape. Since the extremely aggressive child*s new behaviors and self-identity will be unsure, he may need to become temporarily dependent on the teacher's love to survive the period when he is building strength to operate in the new mode on his own. Social Behavior Problem-Solving Discussions dlasser has found that social behavior problems are frequently minimized when students become Involved through regular discussions in class. To deal with the problems which do arise in school, however, he suggests the use of class meetings set up for the purpose of airing the problems and discovering ways of solving them. This kind of task- oriented discussion, involving the immediate social prob lems of the group, would seem to be of great vaiue as a stimulus to the growth of complex concepts. The process of exploring problems, finding alternative solutions and being committed to one of them is a further opportunity for children to learn about the advantages: and limitations of commitment, as well as about the social necessity of "responsible" behavior; Since children are frequently involved in social* problemB outside the classroom, some sessions could be directed at exploring these. This can be done directly by pursuing them when they come up in discussions directed toward other ends (i.e., relevance, literary interpreta tion, hypothetical problem solving, etc.). If the atmosphere of openness and trust has been established among the class, children will find the risk of verbalizing their personal problems, say, of relating to their parents, less forbidding. Ideally, It would seem that these problems.and the alternative ways of looking at them provided by an open discussion would be most beneficial to all concerned If they are dealt with directly and specific Issues can be related to the discussion. If the specifics cannot be shared in such discussions the discussions may not be as meaningful because of their generality or lack of focus. In lieu of more direct exploration of specific problems raised by members of the group, fictitious or hypothetical problem-solving situations can stimulate Intense Involvement. Most children will feel freer to explore the problems they face by projecting themselves into these situations which are more remote from them personally. Problem situations can be presented in a number of forms: a short essay describing the characters, background, and current situation to be read by the 135 students (composed by teacher or students); a series of' photographs or slides with i is open interpreta tion of the events left to the students (compiled also by teacher or students)j a short film dramatizing a sequence of events, again leaving some ambiguity for interpretation; or simply a verbal description of a situation presented to the group. By means of a verbal or a combination of verbal and non-verbal presentation, the focus of the problem can be narrowed to keep the complexity of the decision making within the limits of the group. As the group is able, more ambiguous data can be admitted in the presentation of hypothetical problems. These hypothetical problem-solving activities are likely to stir up considerable involvement in the interpre tation of data, matching of cues and discovery of solutions. In the process it will be possible for students to discover some important faults in perception and thinking.. Some will have attended to cues which prejudiced the outcome of their thinking in spite of contrary data which were screened out, ignored, or "explained away." Others will have observed and made judgments and theories upon entirely different or contrary sets of cues all in the same data. In the group’s search for larger theories to explain all the data, it will be possible for the students to have experienced and argued out differences of perception and theory building, each recognizing the limitations of his own thinking. He will have also experienced for himself and seen in others the tendency to hold on to initial perceptions and fight the mounting evidence against that Interpretation in spite of himself* Most of all he will have learned the value of exploring a much wider range of possibilities of Interpretation of data.and solution activities than is possible for him to devise alone. He will thus be better able to learn from feedback generated by his own activities in regard to the problems discussed by having at least the germ of multiple, views of what has occurred in these situations. His narrow egocentric cycle of expectation-confrontatlon-expectatlon will thus have been broken into for further growth. Initiating and Sustaining Class Discussions Most teachers are somewhat apprehensive about getting meetings started and maintaining them. They .fear that not enough hard, substantive, goal-directed talk is going to take place in the time they spend in getting meetings going to Justify "wasting" the time. Actually, for us who have been brought up with fact-memory education such meetings can appear to be a bothersome waste of time better spent in giving facts and explanations, in spite of our lately acquired conviction that these meetings must lie at the center of a meaningful education. The fervor of industry's worship of the goddess of efficiency has infected our schools. "Time is money" and "Money is all." We somehow feel that the time could be used to teach valu able skills which "everyone needs," like spelling. If we worked more on these things we would not be hearing stories about people who "after all these years in school still don't know the difference between there and their." Unfortunately, the annoyance that some of us experience when we encounter a misspelled word is indicative of the. neuroticism induced by our triviality minded culture, more than it is indicative of needed emphasis in English classes. To some extent this anal compulsiveness about trivial but relatively attainable goals and our nonchalance about problems concerning the emotional well-being and even the very lives of our children Is characteristic of those of us who have partaken of this culture most fully. In addition to the vague feeling of guilt and annoyance about the possible "waste of time," in spite of our conviction to the contrary, there are other fears and anxieties about initiating classroom discussions. Since many of us have not had the opportunity to experience real group activity, unless it was clearly directed toward reaching the teacher's conclusions, we fear the process simply because it is unknown. We have no idea what to expect, and therefore we have no way to anticipate which turns will occur In the Interaction. At this stage (and perhaps for all time) knowledge of group process Is like history— non-p re diet lve. It may be possible for the student of group process to state like the historian that "this was a classical example of something or other." They cannot use the future tense, however. This Is perhaps true because group process is too much like real life. In fact, It Is life: human beings, each with unique person alities, operating to achieve their own goals within a common situation. The life-sltuation of the process-centered classroom causes a conflict with our unconscious models of good teachers. Our experience taught us that a good teacher knows his stuff and knows how to teach it. Although the Intensity of this conflict will diminish with time and experience, it will probably remain for some time with each of us to some extent. Hopefully, future generations . of teachers will not have to spend so much of their psychic energy In unlearning inappropriate role models. Finally, the anxiety which is perhaps most obvious is the fear of failure. Somehow teachers expect them selves to be able to Initiate good discussion although they have not had experience participating in, much less con ducting such sessions. We should not despair/ because even the most experienced facilitators have their share of "failures." There are many subtle factors beyond the leader's control which profoundly affect the mood of the class, and we cannot blame ourselves for these things. The one important ingredient seems to be persistent conviction. In Glasser's experience, children are very patient with the experimenting teacher— -apparently because of their belief in the value of classroom meetings, however initiated. A good class discussion is often dependent on the questions the teacher uses to stimulate it. For children of all ages, Glasser has found that general questions such as "Why do we go to school?" stimulate only remembered cliches. "A good education leads to a good Job. Education is Important for college. Education is important for life." By putting the subject into a fresh perspective, he maintains that children respond more easily with their own thoughts. "If each of you could have a million dollars right now, a sum that would be ample for the rest of your life, would you continue to go to school?" When some of the children respond that they would not go to school, he then would ask what they would do. - After some "nervous, Joking" responses to this question, "Just eat candy. Watch TV. Go to ball games," many kids end up admitting that they probably would go to school. Now when the ques tion, "Why do we go to School?" is asked, children are thinking of it In some unique framework and their responses are more real. (■.. ■;■'■' ■■■"’ ■' V'V"';' '• ' ; "; ■■■ 'W. '■■"-v' .v.':"■'" / ;■ ' v.:' - : ' ' ■ ■■/ ■■■ Qlasser suggests that another concrete way of getting at, say, the reasons for attending school Is confronting the child with the following very "unlikely request"s "Suppose your mother said that you should stay home from school today because school is a waste of time. Would you be willing to stay home? If you did stay home what would you do? Would you watch television? Would you play with your games?. Do you think you would enjoy staying home as much as going to school?" While these questions are open-ended enough and they state the topic in terms of imagined concrete situations that children will be able to relate to, there is some danger in making questions less abstract. In doing so we run the risk of begging certain other prior assumptions which are perhaps the more interesting and valuable ques tions to be asking. Children will perhaps leave discus sions which do not go all the way back with a vague feeling that they, have been duped. Repeated experiences of this sort may ultimately destroy their enthusiasm for future discussions. An illustration of the kinds of questioning I am here referring to can be found in Glasser's Schools Without Failure. p. 169. Here are some questions intended to lead into a discussion 'of the relevance of history; "Have you ever heard of a school where history was not taught? Why is history so important that it is taught in , every school?" There are several assumptions, each actu ally more crucial to raise and discuss than the focus of the question Itself, which are glibly passed over and left unchallenged. First, it assumes (and asserts IndirectlyI) that history Is of utmost importance. (Why Is history so Important . . .?) Furthermore It assumes (and asserts) that reason to believe in the utmost Importance of history Is Its universal presence In schools. (I.e. Whatever is taught universally In schools is of utmost Importance.) This kind of questioning is almost dishonest. It. precludes the "open-discusslon" of the possible importance Of history and biasses it toward a closed-minded rational ization of widespread practices. Once the teacher has prejudiced the children toward the question by revealing her own position on the topic and the apparent universal convictions of society the children may be predisposed to give her what she want3. Although there may be a hearty, inquiring soul in the class who will point out the assumptions she is making, there is good reason to believe that most children will be unable to shake the initial prejudice and display of superficial evidence even if the teacher later agrees with the brave child's objections. With such specific questions, therefore, the teacher has contributed to the maintainence of cultural mythology and- has helped many of his students close their minds to the possibility that the study of history may not only be a waste of many people's time but also dangerous for the ' future of mankind since historical generalities*may seduce us Into approaching tomorrow's problems In terms of yester day's solutions. It may have been better in this class if the teacher had stated an unconventional position and then challenged the very arguments that would have been implicit in such specific questioning. Glasser continues the discussion of the. relevance of history with the following set of questions: "Have you ever looked through an old family album and found it interesting to see the pictures of relatives who lived many years ago? Have you ever found that the articles in a museum, especially the articles from many years ago, are really interesting to you? What can we learn from these old albums and old articles? Is what we learn history?" He discusses the situation further: ' . . . i f students can't discover from these leading questions some of the reasons why they learn history arid why history is interesting and important, I believe the teacher needs to spend some time with her class teaching the relevance of history. Stu dents should be able to do better on these questions than most classes that I have led. In my experi ence, most of the students haven't the vaguest idea why they study history. Teachers don't discover this until they ask a series of open-ended ques tions and find that the students can't answer even . the most obvious questions relating to history, such as, 'Why we enjoy looking at old family albums ■ and pictures of our relatives from many years back?'87 V-" ^Glasser, Schools Without Failure. pp. 170-171. :\:.; V ■■ :;y;';;■'":' - ; " v ^ '■ - !v." ' ■ ?r^3;: I am one of those students. I can't answer "the most obvious questions relating to history" first because I do not particularly enjoy looking at old family albums and old articles. Or maybe this is the reason that I am not interested in history. But I thought that the question was really why history is important. Now that the reason ing is apparent (history Is important because it is inter esting, but so is sex and sex is not studied in every school) I am at a loss to figure out what the teacher is getting at. If the argument is that one ought to be Interested in old albums and history because history is important, I am being asked to accept as evidence in favor of this proposition a moral Imperative which derives its force from the question that I am begging. Unfortunately (or fortunately), some children sense that this kind of thinking is gibberish. They seem to be born with the capacity to develop very sensitive "crap- detectors." Something seems to happen to the detectors of some of.them in the process called enculturatlon. There are an amazing few successful adults around these days who have even a remnant of theirs left. Perhaps this is due to their being so thoroughly enculturated. But more and more children are becoming better and better crap detectors. This in spite of our best efforts to stop it! The resulting withdrawal from use of "logic" and hard thinking arid the resort to sheer emotionalism, if it comes to be the way of life In America, we will all have to thank our diligent teaohers for. Some teachers may be concerned that if the truth is openly discussed there will be no one studying the tradi tional subject matter areas. This is certainly not true. In fact, there is good reason to believe that children approaching their various studies will become more relevant and thus significant scholars. Knowing that the subject v* •' , may or may not have something to help them solve problems they will encounter, they will have a mature attitude toward their subject. (X still hear people who have studied a great deal of history say "the poor are always among us" as though historical precedent is a kind of Infallible edict that indicates what can and cannot happen. The use of history to Justify not doing what can be done or even what ought to be done is perhaps one good reason not to study it.) Let each student approach his studies with an open mind.about the possible Importance or relevance of each. Let each student be responsible to discover the relevance that his subjects have for him and society. Let no teacher bedevil the mind of any student with specious arguments Intended to make the child believe. Children learn more of what really counts from honest, thoughtful, intelligent teachers; they learn honesty, thoughtfulness and intelligence. They sometimes love them for this. .cj',.*;; \ ^ ■. r ‘ r 1 ' '.w. ■; "t-\ / " 7 . • ■ 1 •. -v ’- • : '' ' V .. v ' jV;v ‘ . _ ! ■' " i . ■ ; i// 7. ‘ \ \ \ V , ' ' ' ‘ ‘ ' ■ - ! ‘ -f. ’ 'V - i'7 7 ’ 145 Qlven the fact that we as teachers are rather' :v perfectly enculturated into a more or less consistent world view with its values, assumptions and attitudes mutually reinforcing to one another, it is not at all unlikely that we will find ourselves engaging in such specious arguments without realizing it. The values inherent in that culture will appear to us so "obvious" that any kind of argumen tation-even appeals to tradition, or one*s idiosyncratic "interest" or "fascination" with the idea will appear ample justification for that idea. If a teacher discovers through the discussion that he has made such assumptions in the phrasing of questions, it would be a good idea for him to point this out to his students. By this example, then, the teacher can turn his own learning into an extremely valuable lesson for his students— that our unconscious values and attitudes frequently lead us to accept unquestlonlngly certain kinds of argumentation that make little or no sense in reality. By sharing his ! ■ . ' confusion and temporary disorientation with his students at such a time, he can give his students a model of courage to emulate when they are confronted with similar painful self-discovery situations. Even if the teacher has cheated in this situation by retreating into assertive dogmatism, the situation can be turned into an even more instructive event. The next class he may admit what he did and tell r how he felt when he reacted the way he did. The reactions of the students to his behavior can then be investigated to explore the effects of closed-mindedness on others. Perhaps some "rules" for open-ended sessions should be discussed and agreed upon prior to further discussion, especially If early trial discussions Involve widespread use of arguments from convention or authority. Ideally, the realization that such arguments are Inadmissible except Insofar as they are accompanied by an investigation of the rationale and evidence presented by the authority would come from the students experience in discussion. However, the teacher may be justified in making a presentation in which he demonstrates how conventional or authoritarian arguments can destroy the inquiry process by justifying opinions without exploring them in relation to all the available evidence. Greater cultural perspective can be. achieved by choosing illustrative material from conven- tional authoritarian beliefs among peoples outside our own culture. For example, the,teacher may cite the taboo of some South Sea Island tribes. The prohibition against marriage of people from the. same island, which was probably based on the real, direct observations of the early forebears of the race that such marriages resulted in children who were frequently ill-formed or sickly, is now an institutionalized convention considered to be beyond question. The problem of inbreeding has been faced by all peoples, and different arbitrary mechanical decisions have been made to avoid the unhappy consequences. Often, however, the reasons for these taboos become obscured with time and the survival of the tribe depends on the survival of the culture. Therefore, it would seem that quick and almost spontaneous communication of the attitude of unquestioning reverence for the teaching of the elders of the community so characteristic of children until they come into full contact with the larger world culture has served a crucial role in the survival of the human race. The teacher may point out also that there are those today who believe that this mechanism in human nature, so useful in a pre-scientific culture, is no longer of any use. In fact, this predisposition to accept unquestioningly the value assumptions of the factions of the world community we happen to be b o m into may be the very cause of our failure to form a workable, cooperative world community. These people believe that solving problems on a small scale has led to the tightening of provincial attitudes and goals at the expense of other people• Only by stripping away all preconceived notions of what ought to be in terms of what has been done and what we have come to believe in, by whatever means, can people sit down together to discover what needs to be done to solve the bigger problems of all people. And governments will not deprovlnciallzetheir ■■ ;/' V ^ v " ^ : .':V.' ;’ ::v ; ./ i 4 8 attitudes until the people they serve become aware of their cultural blindspots. It may be necessary to Impress upon children who ,have not already gained some insight into the dangers of authoritarianism the atrocities that can be perpetrated by man against his fellow man under the banner of respectabil ity, honor, and duty. History is full of examples of this, and only a few will be needed to illustrate, the point. The wholesale slaughter of Jews in Germany, the slaughter of millions of critics in Lenin's Russia, and our present endeavors in Southeast Asia to make others like us by force, indicate clearly what can be done in the name of "national security" or "defending the national honor." The worst crime is to make people believe that in. doing these things they are acting virtuously by obedience to one's country. However the teacher chooses to accomplish the goal of demonstrating the need for real individual thinking, it is reasonable to suppose that children faced squarely with this challenge will respond eagerly to the responsibility. When they realize that what is desirable in discussions is what makes sense and not who says things and how many people believe them, the process will be directed toward real knowledge. The extent to which a particular group of students will require direct instruction with respect to the rules of discussion will depend on that group's orientation toward authority as well as their experience In group process. In the case of very docile students who are relatively successful in traditional school work, direct confrontation on the Important issue of belief in authority must be Initiated by the teacher before the children will be able to take the bull by the horns. For many such students there will be a very strong tendency to resist the thought that they must accept the responsibility for their own thinking and decisions. The comfort of the small, closed world in which clear guidelines are set by tradition and indicated by authority is too enticing to the otherwise Insecure child. The successful child has frequently con structed his identity in terms of his ability to do success fully what he has been told, and questioning the validity of his identity can be traumatic. It is extremely impor tant, therefore, that teachers are sensitive to these children's needs at such times, and that they can empathize with their feelings of rejection and disorientation. It may be impossible for the child to begin his meaningful education until he has grappled with this problem and accepted.the responsibility of directing his own thinking. For however long this takes, it is crucial that the teacher sustain his belief in the child. If the child senses the teacher's impatience with him, the too-long dependent child may have no choice but to reaffirm his old Identity by clinging to authority and convention, or with- . drawing . for lack ; of support •’ • Group Discussion for the Interpretation of Literature and kllma Discussions of literature and films can be an excellent way to expose some of the differences in percep tions , values, and thinking among the group. In inter preting literature and film together one ground rule is necessary to keep the discussions from rambling too far from the text: none of the details of the piece can contradict a proposed interpretation, and all the details must be explicable in terms of the meaningful whole. This is essentially the approach of the organic theory of literary criticism. The organic theory thus provides a framework for * activities which Is perfectly consonant with and supportive of the general learning goals advocated in this study. It is Important, however, to consider the possible consequences of adhering too rigidly to this approach. If it were true that the approach to art must parallel the approach of a "rational" and open person in real life situations, one would have to accept the objec tive critics* approach unqualified. Furthermore, if it were not possible to enjoy art except hollstically and objectively, and the object of art were granted to be the enjoyment of the audience,. one would also have to accept this approach. However, neither of these claims can be made. The objective critics would be the last to say that art is created in order to make people "rational1' and that Schools should teach art and literature for this purpose. Many people enjoy only parts of certain works of art. Taken as a whole, these things are perhaps exasperating and tedious; viewed as fragments they can give intense pleasure. When asked to respond to a poem in which no such image Is objectively referred to, one may exclaim excitedly that he saw a bird flying alone high in the evening sky. Although no one else can verify that this image is in the poem, the poem had evoked this Image and given the reader delight. Therefore, I find it difficult to advocate, an exclusively objective approach to art and literature. I suggest that the best of both approaches can and should be maintained In the classroom. It Is possible to respect the bizarre and highly idiosyncratic interpretations of individuals (and perhaps share some of their enthusiasm) at the same time that more easily verifiable interpretations are discussed. As long as the imaginative child is led to recognize that the peculiar enjoyment that the poem gave him was not what the poem said, but what some set of unique experiences afforded him, the "educational" objec tives of seeing works of art holistically and using verifi able data to test alternative hypotheses are not destroyed. The child must learn that two different kinds of things— one more cerebral than the other— can happen to the reader. The child offering an Idiosyncratic Interpretation should never be made to feel ashamed of his Insight; severe damage to his self-concept as well as to his Intelligence may result If he feels that he has to Inhibit what Is so meaningful and exciting to him at that time. Both kinds of responses should therefore be encouraged and rewarded, not S_ ■ ■ just tolerated. It Is better that the child come away from this experience with the warm glow of having created something beautiful In his mind (even if he misses the point of the poem as It is), than for him to feel that his perception was wrong and he failed to see the point. When the group activity is centered around the more social kinds of activity which objective criticism and hypothesis testing * involves, the child will be naturally drawn Into the verification process. If he is shamed, he may not trust himself enough to Join in even passively. Another aspect of literature and art discussions which is important to consider in this connection is the hallowed-masters attitude. If all pieces that are studied are technically and reputedly good, children will be denied a valuable experience— understanding the development of their own literary taste. Nothing could be worse than the attitude conveyed directly or implicitly that one 153 should like (respond to) certain pieces because of their literary merit." Such an attitude Is akin to other kinds of prejudice. When children respond to poems because they are about things that they like and this is their reason for liking them, it is irrelevant and damaging to talk about technical "flaws" or to appeal to some authoritative or principled judgment of "merit." Children must be allowed to experience a wide variety of literary works, some of which are "better" than others so that they can form means of Judging from these experiences. It is nearly impossible to explain why one piece of literature is not good and that another is good when the child's perception of the good and the poor are reversed perhaps because of his Interest in the subject or his response to the rhyme or rhythm of the poorer piece or because of the need to conform to the apparent taste of the group or teacher. As the child's interests change, he will begin to change his perception of these earlier-appreciated works. After his contact with literature has been expanded, he will begin to understand why he was originally attracted to the.works which he now rejects as trite. It would seem that such experience with literary taste would provide a base from which he can learn the tentativeness and relativity of human judgment— especially his own. He will alBo have the opportunity to investigate some of the forces which affect his judgments. 154 Such learning will help to develop the much-needed respect for other people's taste through the discovery of one's own . taste and the basis for it at each stage of its evolution. It may be that such understanding (perhaps basic to mutual understanding between people) can be acquired only through this kind of self-understanding. Children who have had these experiences may be better able to reject their own judgments when they perceive new perspectives, or at least suspend them during periods during which they are exploring other alternatives. Exploring literature together in this way, children can learn from each other about themselves things which cannot be taught from outside. They will be able to expand their innate capacities and techniques for learning outward into the world of experiences which is constantly widening and deepening and which will continue to do so throughout their lives. Conversely, it will not allow them to become dependent upon external sources of reward for the construction of their identities arid Intellects. They will be as confident, free, and open to .the environment as they . were when they were born. Their maturity will be their clarity and breadth of vision rather than conformity to arbitrary conventions. Besides whole-group discussions for the sake of discovering relevance or solving social problems within the ; : ..■ v; ■ ; Vv ■'■ 155 ‘ group, they can be used for diagnosing the growth of certain concepts and the need for various kinds of informational input as Oiasser has suggested. Such meetings may be use ful, especially where teachers are working within rather rigid "content11 requirements. If there is no set timetable for acquisition of skills and concepts, artificial means of diagnosing student growth will probably be unnecessary, for these things can occur spontaneously and naturally as they arise. Group activities, described in Chapter 6, will generate topics for other meaningful discussions. As Moffett has suggested, teachers should generally play a facilitative role in student-centered activities and not be directive of the content. This role will be made clear in the following chapter. " CHAPTER VI GROUP ACTIVITIES FOR THE EXPLORATION OF COMPLEX CONCEPTS Introduction ■ Any activity which requires the cooperation of several students can be a stimulus to the development of their social-linguistic competence. More Importantly, however, the coordination of efforts required In coopera tive activities give rise to situations in which complex concepts are frequently involved and challenged. Such activities are, therefore, of Importance in the exploration of personal thinking In the context of social process. Furthermore, participation in group activities can provide students with experiences which can lead to an appreciation for the value of commitment. At the same time, however, students will be able to experience some of the not so desirable consequences of commitment, like perceptual narrowing. Students will thus be better prepared to understand some of the joys, practical advantages, frustrations and possible dangers of commitment in adult life. Consequently, they will be more adequately prepared to cope with and actually benefit from the series 156 ; ■; 1 5 7 of temporary commitments required of participants In rapidly changing society. The Planning and Evolution ' ' of GroupProjects- ■ * Planning can begin with a brainstorming session in which a great variety of topics and Ideas are explored prior to a decision about the direction of that particular activity. The total group may not be able to agree on one particular subject or unifying point of view at this stage; they may prefer to get some materials together to see what can be made out of them. Later, when the materials are collected and examined together, themes and ideas . - about further development suggest themselves. At that time then it may be decided that certain fragments will be excluded from this project and held for possible use in another, rather than there being an attempt to use all of the raw materials at once. The collection of the remaining needed materials can then be planned at this time when some unifying theme or point of view is decided upon. (Each situation may require different approaches. Let the group make the decisions.) Some interesting and valuable insights about per ception and point of view can be acquired during sessions such as these. For instance, a picture taken at a zoo by one of the children of a crocodile devouring his food may be selected as part of a slide show dealing with the wild, fierce, and hostile aspects of nature, Found within the content of photographs taken from magazines when villages are being destroyed by lava flows, earthquake, floods, or hurricanes, or cattle are caught in snow drifts far from food and shelter, this picture may appear.inappropriate to the photographer. He has taken this photograph within the larger context of man's control and dominion over the fierce aspects of nature. If the setting 13 naturalistic . and this photograph does not include cues that Indicate this human control element its inappropriateness will be apparent only to the child who has taken the picture. Similarly, among a group of pictures (or scenes) illustrating various ways to have fun, there may be a picture of a football player successfully completing a pass. If this picture were taken by a boy who has endured heart surgery and can never engage in vigorous physical activity, the personal meaning of this scene is obviously more than what has been made of it In the context of the other pictures. This unique dimension can be explored with others if the atmosphere of openness and acceptance, has been established, and it may suggest a new direction for the development of the materials. Other students will then be able to contribute ideas which will throw the focus on the perceptions of those who are unable to enjoy the things which they take for granted. From these illustrative examples it is clear that the planning and organizing aspects of group creative activity must remain open to change from beginning to end of the process. An initial decision of selectlonal criteria may serve to narrow the focus until further possibilities of restricted focus evolve from the group decision-making process. If children feel that they must remain oomitted to an initial perspective and purpose when another perspective takes precedence among their interests, an Important experience in growth will be denied them. At some point along the way a division may occur in the total group; for instance, one sub-group may wish to develop more fully the first arrived at subject or perspec tive, another group, may wish to redesign the project to accommodate a newly perceived perspective. Two or more projects from different perspectives on the same general topic may thus be developed by the total group. This situation 1b desirable and Is not to be discouraged, for the contrast between these different views of the same data will be a constant stimulus for thought and discussion. Finally, when the products are viewed (or listened to), significant insights into human experience can be shared and understood in terms of real personal experiences. ■'■■■v'V,-v^Vvv'.}'■■' ^ : ' 160 . As an example of the division of the total group Into subgroups, suppose that an Initial decision waB made to make a slide show about school life. Most students may respond by bringing in materials and Ideas revealing a generalized "objective" view point. Pictures of classrooms (full and empty), libraries, cafeterias, gyms, locker rooms, halls, offices, athletic fields, playgrounds and parking lots will portray various physical aspects of school experience, and situations and activities will depict the more obvious happenings in the course of the school day. Some students, however, may decide to portray a more specific and humanly Involved perspective of schools. They may choose to present a humorous account of the distortions in the perceptions of a ravenously hungry youth who rising too late in the morning did not have time to eat breakfast before going to school. Walking down the hall toward his locker he sees (and privately covets) the fruit on Miss Gratchett's 10-year-old hat. At his locker,, he smells the salami sandwich somebody brought for lunch. He drools over the oranges, grapefruits, and limes on the biology teacher's dress, and.imagines the pig embryo on the desk roasted with an apple in its mouth. Geometry class poses similar problems of concentration, for the day's . lesson includes the formula for the area of wedge shaped portions of circles (well illustrated on’the chalkboard). ' ■ ;-'''"S 161 Other students may want to look at the sdhool day in a more serious way: from the point of view of a child who daily goes to school nearly starved. Needless to say, the treatment of the material and the techniques must be quite different to convey this new attitude toward the subject. Although the slmulus material may be identical (Miss V- Gratchett's hat, the smell of the salami sandwich, the biology teacher's dress, the pig embryo, and the geometry lesson) the means of portraying the appropriate attitude will require different skills. For instance, a series of general views of the room from the point of view of the hungry student's desk (e.g., straight forward, right, left, down, up) may be followed by a sudden and rapid zeroing in on the biology teacher's dress. By flashing shots of the student's hungry face at increasingly closer range as the fruit bn the dress becomes more distinct, the humorous effect will be enhanced. The contrast between the different treatments for contrasting attitudes toward the same subject— hunger in the classroom— will be a good source for learning techniques in the various media. School can be viewed through many other points of view, and children can thus explore further human percep tion and life. Some of these are school through the eyes, and ears of the failing child, the chronic bad reader, 162 the minority child, the foreigner, the new student, the child who has undergone some tragedy (death of parent, close friend, divorce, breakup with girl friend, etc.), the straight "A" student, student who got a new car, the most popular person in the class, etc. In some cases only small groups or individuals will be Interested in pursuing these points of view. These ought to be encouraged when they arise. The projects described above as examples of the kinds of things students will come up with and as a general indication of the group developments one may expect to occur in a hetergeneous classroom suggest some possible ways of getting at the human experience of the children in the class. It is important for children not only to reflect on these experiences (which will come even to those in the group who are least active in the process) but also to attempt to articulate them in some symbolic communicative media. This kind of activity is perhaps the sine qua non of the development of complex-problem-solving ■ ' capacity. . The solution of problems seems to depend first on the awareness of them, next.on the articulation of them— that is, the exploration of the related aspects of problems (possible causes, contributing factors, and consequences) va in some manipulable symbolic form. Wise and "rational" » • . ' ^ .1 ’ :.r.» " ■ ; i1 v .. i,...- :. •:.i . : . .Vif- ; t . • • .» r .^ • .• r ; V' • ‘ - ' V - ' ’ V ;• ’• .v ‘ ■>. - .. . ’• ■' "" ^ : £ ’;£v ■ r;'- =■’ ■ ■ V ■. ! l 6 3 solutions to problems will come only from an open awareness of all the relevant Information, Narrow, provincial, egocentric solutions will come to the extent that the information taken into account is selected a priori because of individual or cultural bias• The last phase of problem solving is the open exploration of possible behaviors which will effect the solution of the problem, and, finally, decisions as to how to proceed with the solu tion activity which seems most adequate. All of these phases of complex problem solving are inherent in the process of working and thinking together necessitated by such activities as these. The active engagement of personal feelings and thoughts in active creation and communication through various media will be a much-needed antidote to the anti human message of education generally. The implicit message that the scientific technocratic society communicates in the very structure as well as the content of its educa tional institutions is that what the Individual feels and thinks is a distorted picture of the external world. Natural perceptions are not accurate: one needs external Instruments to see the. real.reality which lies somewhere : beyond the realm of natural human experiencing. Logically therefore, since we cannot trust our own experiencing and since we cannot make use of all the extensions of man's nervous system (scientific instruments) to compensate for our inadequacies, we must ultimately beg at the feet of the experts in the sooiety for our opinions about important human matters. The message in short is that given human fallability and capriciousness, the best one can hope to do is to give up and trust the Impersonal, "objective11 machine. Whether such human experiencing in one class will be able to compensate for and defuse the destructive power of the opposite message in the large context of "education" is difficult to assess* At least, active involvement in exploring the children's own feelings will be one step further toward the goal of humane judgment than is provided in the typical passive humanities studies where "exposure", to the great minds is the major concern. The old English classroom attitude is analogous to the "expert" mythology so necessary to the maintenance of the technocracy, and for this reason, perhaps, has not been challenged. By creating' and enjoying and communicating among themselves children will begin to sense and desire the most significant of values, the beauty of being human. Feeding the Natural Process; Constraints on the Teacher’s Introduction of Technloal Innovations. New Ideasand ' Mew Perspectives The examples of "English11 projects discussed In the previous section seem to presuppose some degree of technical skills. Direct "teaching" of skill, however, whether in writing or other media, can he a source of inhibition for the exploration of ideas in these symbolic media. Tech nical skills, it would seem, are best left to develop out of the needs encountered by the groups' attempts at performance. The next section will attempt to clarify the delicate problems of stimulating the growth of technloal skills in communicative media considering the negative effects of direct instruction and the expertise mentality it may imply. . The reason that children do not write is probably that they do not feel that they need to write and also that they have nothing worthwhile to say (results of our authoritarian "expert-centered?1 culture). Furthermore, they know that when they have attempted to write in the past, they have been told what was wrong with what they did, and frequently those criticisms were so trivial that the effect was like being told, that one's neck tie was crooked when he was obviously bleeding to death. Much of what we have done in writing classes has thus been des tructive of the attitude of confidence and belief in the ' V:-v. ^ ■V S ^ : value of what individuals have to say, and this. must come , , first In any creative act. . '■ Likewise with media other than language. The atmosphere of openness and valuing of Individual contribu tions must be created and maintained. Techniques for their own sake must never be imposed until that openness and valuing Is firmly established and the group or individual Is strongly enough motivated from the inside to withstand the negative inhibiting effect of frequently trivial external constraints. Models of technique and skill can be of great value to the development of one's own skill. However, care must be taken that young writers, film-makers, and artists are not intimidated by the technical success of the masters. The central focus must remain on the value of the child's own experiencing and not be shifted toward some trivial, external, skill-oriented (and usually testable) "subject matter." (If the testing game cannot be disposed of, at least within the English classroom, the teacher will be hard put to convince his students that their experiencing is of any real importance. The students will know that the "real" value is the grade, for grades are marketable (like everything else which is valued in our society) or at least grades can lead to the possibility of further. . credentialllng and are indirectly marketable.) Models of professional or classical literature or i : : film can be used to stimulate and feed the concerns of the group as well as contribute to their knowledge of conven tional techniques. Too much stimulation external to that spontaneously generated by the group, however, may surfeit the Imagination and leave the group temporarily disoriented. This frequently happens when an extensive monologue Is. interjected into group discussion. It often happens that the new structuring required to accommodate new and puzzling Information is too much for the group. Although the hiatus In the natural group process is not desirable, the growth of adequate cognitive structures requires con frontation with the perceptions and thoughts of "profes sionals" and "experts," Prom my experience, it seems that ideas Imported Into the group process, if they come into discussion at all when they are first Introduced, are forced and contrived. If the group has been operating at a more personal (and meaningful) human level of Interaction, the introduction of "foreign" ideas has an effect similar to the presence of an outsider: individuals suddenly feel N restrained and if they operate at all with the new ideas and do not avoid them by introducing and pursuing topics or targets of their own, they will attempt to deal with it (out of courtesy) in a detached, impersonal manner. I have frequently found those "foreign" ideas which seemed s' •''' .X / • ‘VV *v;. v : '• .:,v\+ ; •'-• . •. _\ • 168 to be duds when I first Introduced them coming up naturally In student contributions in later meetings within an interaction context which made them meaningful and exciting. Intellectuallzatlon is painful for a group which usually functions well on a warmer personal level, and the tendency will be for that group to gravitate toward those topics which will allow for this level of operation. The teacher has personal needs, as well as the group, and it is important that he is able to fulfill these if he is to be able to function best within the group. He must main tain his identity as a member of the group like all the . others, so that he can respond and be responded to on the most meaningful level the group is capable of. Yet he must sometimes sacrifice the comfort of that position in order, to contribute to the growth of the group and individuals in it. He must accept the fact that his stimulation of the group will sometimes be received with apparent indif ference and hostility because it has forced them to move to a different level of functioning than the one that is most natural to them at the time. The teacher must be very strong in his individual- identity and not need the group identity for. his self definition. If he is personally weak, he will also be unable to challenge in a non-defensive personal way the — behaviors and interaction which are not conducive to growth. v ' - * '* ■ He must be a: model of oaring, and caring is best demon-' strated by being willing to sacrifice his own comfoft and acceptance in the group by challenging those behaviors which are potentially destructive Of the group and of individuals. He must be able to do this as himself, not passing the institutional buck so that he does not need to take full personal responsibility for his actions. If he is not acting as himself (playing the role of “teacher"— one cog in a huge Impersonal machine who obeys and is to be obeyed) his "caring" will be perceived as phoney. Children can too easily object that the teacher does what he does because he is expected to, not because their welfare makes a difference to him. Furthermore, by playing the abstract mechanical role, the teacher Insulates him self from personal Involvement with his students. He remains aloof and virtually untouchable. Without some measure of observable personal commitment and consequent vulnerability to the group, the teacher hiding behind such a role has an unfair and Inhuman power advantage over the others. He can attack but npt be attacked; he can invoke a ready-made institutional justification in any emergency. In extreme situations, teachers who play the abstract teacher role get nothing in their classes but docility and submissive cooperation or the infernal game playing to thwart the teacher's effort to maintain order said achieve "behavioral objectives.” These games seem to be the only way kids have of breaking through the tough institutional exterior to get at the person beneath. While it is perhaps impossible to indicate, even in a general way, mechanical steps for teachers to follow in making decisions about how to bring new ideas and technical Issues into the natural process, an enumeration of some of the constraints on the introduction of such material may be helpful. First, the autonomy of the group must be respected x and an atmosphere of openness and acceptance must be developed and maintained. Presentations and attempts to test and evaluate "learning1* also threaten the groupness and humanness of the class by introducing the one-agalnst- the-others notion where the all-for-all notion ought to prevail. Presentations or illustrations from professional models for the sake of testing can be categorically re jected as Inherently inimical to real learning because they foster attitudes toward others in the group as well as toward the teacher and the institution that violate the atmosphere of trust and mutual concern. Furthermore., they Introduce values external to the group and thus tend to undermine their natural valuing process and independent Judgment one hopes to nurture among the members of the group. A second constraint is the self-confidence and feeling of adequacy and worth which is essential to effective group activity as well as Individual endeavor. Groups must be allowed (and feel that they are free) to make mistakes. As long as the notion that there Is some "right way" exists, creativity will be inhibited. Creative thought.Is frequently inhibited by the pressure of external or relative standards of excellence. The thinking stimu lated by such an atmosphere Is frequently related more to self-perception and invidious comparisons than to the performance of the task. Even when external or comparative standards are not explicitly imposed, competition can arise and have its inhibitory effects on creativity. In a methods class I once divided a class into two groups of seven students each. I then instructed them to come up with some situation which they Could act out together after the coffeebreak. Goth groups at opposite ends of the room began in a rather, subdued way suggesting possible scenes and exploring them. Suddenly, one suggestion brought fits of laughter from one of the groups. At each further elaboration of the scene, new laughter and wisecracking took place. During this time the other less fortunate group became more subdued even than before, and their discussion seemed utterly dry and mechanical. By the time the successful group had finished planning the details of their skit, the other group were almost expressionless, looking at one another in desperation 172 for an Idea. The successful group, finished well before I had expected it, acted out their: scene before the break. After the break the students reconvened to discuss the feelings that they experienced while they were planning and executing (or witnessing) the production. One girl who was the least reluctant to reveal her feelings told the class that she felt left out and as though on the losing team as soon as she realized that the other group had hit upon an exciting (and funny) idea. This state of mind she said, blocked her own attempts to come up with an equally exciting idea. Others in that group agreed that they had similar experiences, and that anything that they had hit upon seemed hollow and lifeless knowing the spontaneity and liveliness of the other group with their idea. The third constraint to be considered in connection with stimulating group activities is the needs of the group and their capacity to handle the information available in the presentations or examples one wishes to use. Although the teacher or the individual student making a presentation may have a particular point he feels is needed by the group, the group may not have reached a stage of development at which the information would be meaningful or useful. However, fragments of information from the presentation may be found useful from existing perspectives of individuals in the group. Sometimes the group will be stimulated to move along analogous structures j or tangents to the presented structure; or within a small segment of the presented structure. Although these responses seem more or less superficial to the one who has given the structured presentation and they leave him with a vague frustration at not having communicated that structure; the teacher or student must keep In mind the fact that even If each member• of group had indeed grasped the total significance of the presentation, they may not have been able to respond to the whole. They may not have been able to respond simply because the structure was totally new or perhaps familiar but threatening. Or it may be that the group sensed that to deal with that structure it would have been necessary to operate on a level of functioning that would have opposed the needs of the group at that time. It would seem that if this situation arises every time a presenta tion is made, and especially if there is obvious avoidance of the stimulus, that the group needs to be made aware of this behavior. This should not be done, however, with the intention of making the group feel that they ought to deal with the presented structure out of courtesy, but only with the intention of exploring that behavior for its own sake. Significaht learnings about self and the group can arise from this kind of confrontation, as well as some insights into problems of communicating larger structures to others who are unable to focus on the field because of Intense Involvement with some detail of the structure or analogous concept. Those learnings will serve as an experiential base from which students can understand the problems of Interpersonal communication. CHAPTER VII . INDIVIDUAL DIRECTIONS Out of the questioning and sharing of thoughts and experiences in the group discussions and group activities in the open Inquiry classroom will grow individual Inter ests. When these arise it is Important that the individual feels that he Is welcome to go in his chosen direction until he is satisfied with his progress. When further ’ Investigation of a special problem seems unfruitful to the student, he should be free to stop his Investigation. Nevertheless, the student ought to be encouraged to articulate exactly where he stands with.his investigation. If he has concluded that the investigation is still impor tant to his concerns, he should be able to explore this relationship in some explicit way. In order to be an adequate resource person, one would expect that the teacher have broad Interests and wide experience. However, the teacher does not need to regard himself as the sole source of information. Being an adequate source of information outside his own special field is perhaps impossible. His major concern should be helping his students articulate the problems they are 1 7 5 concerned with. Other teachers with special interests and experiences can serve as consultants for students. . Librarians and directors of media materials resources can be helpful in leading students to standard sources of v Information. Even other students can be helpful in sug^ gesting sources. As a matter of fact, sources suggested by other students are often more readily used than those suggested by the experts. People outside the school may be the most likely sources for information on certain topics; children should be encouraged to find these people and to make use of the information they can provide. In order to make use of these human sources, it is clear that students must have skill in asking questions which will elicit the information they need. Interviewing techniques, however, may not need to be learned explicitly apart from the actual experience of interviewing various people. The most important part of the preparation for an interview is thinking the problem through prior to the Interview. The students may be able to do this on their own,or with the help of other students. However, situ ations may arise when children Intuit that some information that the person has will be of value to him, yet they are unable to specify clearly what kind of questions will lead to that information. In these cases it is important for the teacher to be perceived as one who will be patient to encourage children to do their own:thinking by providing children with an ear and some supportive feedback. Raising questions about the validity or the utility of the outcome of the searches Initiated by students is not generally wise since there is danger that the students' initiative and confidence in their ability to conceive and investigate ideas could be destroyed. Children must be allowed to explore their own conceptions of problems without excessive distracting information or questioning. If their own thoughts are not given form so that they can see the relationships among the various parts of their idea, they will perhaps never be able to get their concep tions into symbolic form which will allow them to deal with them rationally— that is, reject them if necessary, or keep them open as possibilities until further investigation of - * ' . * the ideas is possible. Even if a child seems self-confident enough to benefit from questioning and presentation of counter- evidence in the articulation phase, it is important for the teacher to keep in mind the possibility that his strong exterior hides a frail person beneath. The child may have been bold enough to approach the teacher.with a novel conception (at least novel for him) and as seen as he meets the first opposition abandon his own thought in favor of the more acceptable and conventional point, of view implied by the teacher's position* Needing the approval of the' teacher, he may abandon or repress his own Idea for the sake of meeting his more Immediate need for conformity and agreement. Obviously, no learning will take place in such a case; it will become more difficult or Impossible for the child to explore and eventually reject his conception of the problem since it is now charged with emotional, inhibitory factors which it would not have had if the child had been encouraged to do his own thinking unimpeded. In a non-defensive atmosphere the child will be free psycho logically to reject his own notion when he finds it Inadequate for his purposes, for exploring and rejecting the idea has been his own idea. He has conceived, examined and rejected all by his own ingenuity. Once an idea has been rejected or at least qualified in the articulatory-exploratory process, it will no longer obtrude itself on the child as he thinks through the problem in the future. He will be free to range over all conceivable perceptions and possibilities without the anxiety caused by teachers over-zealous to "set the child straight." (This phenomenon may be the basic cause of the widespread separation of thought and feeling character istic of Western Culture [Erich Fromm]. In schools where the child is taught the "facts of life and the great wisdom of the culture" in an implicitly authoritarian manner which Implies, "to disagree is to be wrong,, ignorant, Insane, or wicked," individual perceptions are regarded as aberrations from the prized "objective mental- '' ity," As a result the child rapidly learns to repress his own experiences and thoughts unless they are- somehow legitimized by some authoritative source. It Is the • relatively rare but now increasingly more common Individual whose real experience and thoughts Influence his playing conventionally defined roles. This increase in dependence on one's own experience and rejection of external models is perhaps an Inevitable result of the generally high infor mation level and the questioning spirit of the time.) If the child is to come to take full responsibility for his thought and action, he must be given the opportun ity first to approach the problem or idea in his own way. But obviously he must not be allowed the luxury of considering the idea apart from other perspectives which other students and the teacher and authoritative sources can give. He must be pressed to explore the consequences of his idea as well as presenting evidence in its support• Evidence contradictory to the idea must not be rejected outright and left unexplored. The idea must remain open to the Implications of counterevidence. These refining factors can arise first from getting feedback from other students in the group. If the group is truly ^ ^ • 180 heterogeneoust the great variety of experiences and personalities will Insure that a fair number of the significant questions will be raised given the existence of a free and psychologically safe atmosphere. Students can get this feedback by presenting their findings to the group either in a formal presentation of their thinking or In informal discussions which the students initiate and direct. The degree to which the teacher may enter the questioning process without predetermining the outcome of the process depends on his perceived relationship with * i the group and the group's maturity and autonomous responsibility. In the initial stages it would seem that a laissez-faire role would be necessary. In general his role in the group should be as described in the previous chapter in connection with other types of discussion, feeding in his own ideas and questions as he perceives the capacity of the group to maintain their own autonomy. The growth will be affected by student presentations or student initiated exploratory discussion in the same ways described previously in connection with other types of discussion. A particular social problem, say, not being able to use the car on weekends, may lead past the game- playing cycle of one-upmanship in getting back at each other to a discuss!on of how the parents fee1 and the factors involved in the decision to let a seventeen-year;. old use the cap. Such a discussion may open up an interest in some students in chiId-rearing practices and possible solutions to problems that students may face in a few years/ Other students may take off on the suggestion that there is a basic distrust which the parent feels for the child. He may decide to Investigate the question of trusting rela tionships, how and when they occur, how one had evidence of trust, and ultimately he may be able to develop some theory about how trusting relationships can be fostered and developed. He may be thus led to interviewing fellow students, teachers, parents and clergymen to find out, their experience and perhaps theoretical knowledge. Perhaps a child will find it easier to approach the teacher or an individual student rather than the whole * group. While the ultimate goal may be to bring the child's thinking and concern to larger and more diverse groups of people forcing this on the child may be damaging. The decision as to when he wishes to bring his thought before the group must be made voluntarily. This is especially true when the student's idea or concern contradicts or calls into question.the norms, values, or behaviors of the group or exposes himself as otherwise an alien. A great deal of courage and personal strength is required to be able to confront the group with such behaviors as, say, the avoidance of threatening or complex matters when they 1 8 2 arise. One girl In a group of college seniors was appar ently very concerned that the group was not sticking to the topic when questions of particular interest, for her arose. At the beginning of the course she had been very articulate, but as the course progressed she became increasingly quiet. She approached me about the problem and asked me to do something about It. I agreed that the group seemed to be avoiding dealing with some crucial Issues and suggested that she confront the group with her observation. She never did confront the group as a whole; however, she did continue tq talk with me and others individually about her concerns. It Is Important that teachers be aware of another possible function that individual projects may serve. That is, they can be used as a first real approach to con tact the outside world in children who perceive themselves as socially handicapped. A colleague once told me about a girl In a Junior high school where he taught who said nothing to anyone for a considerable length of time. She always avoided him as well as her classmates. Finally, she had her opportunity to use a simple camera to photograph whatever she wanted. Her project consisted of a series of shots of the members of her family and their home. The family was obviously very. poor. Whatever the message was that this child felt she needed to communicate, it seems that doing this project and having it accepted by her teacher enabled her to begin to loosen some of the bonds which held her. She became increasingly freer with her teacher during the remainder of the school ye.ar. ; This incident seems very much like the kind of "release11 which often results from "hearing" as described by Rogers in Freedom to Learn. - When I say that I enjoy hearing someone r mean, of course, hearing deeply. I mean that I hear the words, the thoughts, the feeling tones, the personal meaning, even the meaning that is below the oonscious intent of the speaker. Sometimes, too, in a message which superficially is not very Important, I hear a deep human cry, a "silent scream," that lies burled and unknown far below the surface of the person. So I have learned to ask myself, can I hear the sounds and sense the shape of this other person's Inner world? Can I resonate to what he is saying, can I let It §che back and forth in me, so deeply that X sense the meanings he is afraid of yet would like to communicate, as well as those meanings he knows? X think, for example, of an interview X had with an adolescent boy, the recording of which X listened to only a short time ago. Like many an adolescent today he was saying at the outset of the Interview that he had no goals. When X questioned him on this he made it even stronger that he had no goals what soever, not even one, I said, "There isn't any thing you want to do?" "Nothing . . . Well, yeah, I want to keep on living." I remember very dis tinctly my feeling at that moment. I resonated very deeply to this phrase. He might simply be telling me that, like everyone else, he wanted to live. On the other hand he might be telling me, and this seemed to be a distinct possibility, that at some point the question of whether or not to live had been a real issue with him. So I tried to resonate to him at all levels. I didn't know for certain what the message was. I simply wanted to be open to any of the meanings that this statement might have, including the possible meaning that he might have-at one time considered suicide* I didn't respond ver bally at this level. That would have frightened him. But I think that my being willing and able to listen to him at all levels is perhaps one of the things that made it possible for him to tell me, before the end of the interview, that not long before he had been on the point of blowing his brains out* This little episode constitutes an example of what I mean by wanting to really hear someone at all the levels at which he is endeavoring to communicate* I find, in therapeutic interviews, and in the intensive group experiences which have come to mean a great deal to me in recent years, that hearing has consequences. When I do truly hear a person and the meanings that are important to him at that moment, hearing not simply his words, but him* and when I let him know that I have heard his own private per sonal meanings, many things happen. There is first of all a grateful look. He feels released. He wants to tell me more about his world. He surges forth in a new sense of freedom. I think he becomes more open to the process of change. I have often noticed, both in therapy and in groups, that the more deeply X can hear thd meanings of this person the more there is that happens. One thing I have come to look upon as almost universal is that when a person realizes he has been deeply heard, there is a moisthess in his eyes. I think in some real sense he is weeping for joy. It is as though he were saying, "Thank Cod, somebody heard me. Someone knows what it's like to be me ,11 In such moments I have had the fantasy of a prisoner in a dungeon, tapping out day after day a Morse code message, "Does anybody hear me? Is there anybody there? Can anyone hear me?" And finally one day he hears sone faint tappings which spell out "Yes." By that one simple response he is released from his loneliness, he has become a human being again. There are many, many people living in private dungeons today, people who give no evidence of it whatever on the outside, where you have to listen very sharply to hear the faint message from the dungeon.80 Rogers, Freedom to Learn, pp. 223-224. \ .185 Suppose that the teacher had not responded to the : message of those photos, but only mechanically discussed technical flaws. The gesture intended by the child to establish contact would have been cruelly rebuked, and it is likely that her hopes of ever establishing this contact would have been darkened even further. She was very lucky that her teacher had the sensitivity not to slap her hand as she was reaching out. Although the personal meaning of an individual project may be apparent, deeper meaning may be present in projects where little evidence lies close enough to the surface to reveal it. It is therefore important for teachers to "listen" carefully so that they will be more likely to "hear" the messages and respond appropriately for students. Often we are so engaged in technical trivia and personal concerns that these messages cannot penetrate our awareness. In an extreme case such as the one mentioned here, it is important that the child is not forced to expose more of himself than he is willing to risk of his own accord. If the child can trust only the teacher with meaningful personal messages, it is critical to maintain this trust and to attempt only very gradually to build upon it and extend it to other people. To force the child, for instance, to share his products with the group or to give , , 186 him the Impression that such sharing Is necessary to maintain his relationship with the teacher could be very destructive. An occasional suggestion or invitation by the teacher or other students that the student share his things will be sufficient to encourage him to take the risk when he is able. CHAPTER VIII TEACHER EDUCATION ■ Introduction ’ It Is apparent that teachers will need a different kind of preparation for a student-centered English class room. The set of attitudes toward subject-matter, the role of the teacher, the role of the students and the source and test of knowledge acquired during the tradi tional educational experience of most prospective teachers conflicts radically with the attitudes needed to sustain an open and personally responsible environment in the classroom. Teachers must therefore have as much experience as possible as students in this new kind of learning environment. Personal Development and Experiences In order for prospective teachers to experience freedom to learn, some of the college faculty must attempt to provide an open, questioning, and trusting atmosphere in their classrooms. There are probably as many ways in which this atmosphere can be produced as there are personalities. As Rogers points out, it is important for the individual to give only as much freedom as he Is comfortable In giving Similarly, all of us will find personal limitations with respect to other aspects of facultative behavior. He [the facilitator of learning] can only be understanding to the extent that he actually desires to enter the inner world of his students. He can only share himself to the extent that he is reasonably comfortable in taking that risk. He can only participate as a member of the group when he actually feels that he and his students have an equality as learners. He can only exhibit trust of the student's desire to learn insofar as he feels that trust. There will be many times when his attitudes are not facultative of learning. He will find himself being suspicious of his students. He will find it impossible to accept attitudes which differ strongly from his own. He will be unable to understand some of the student feelings which are markedly different from his own. He may find himself angry and resentful of student attitudes toward him and angry at student behaviors. He may find himself feeling strongly judgmental and evaluative. When he is experiencing attitudes which are non-facultative, he will endeavor to get close to them, to be clearly aware of them, and to state them Just as they are within himself. Once he has expressed these angers, these judgments, these mistrusts, these doubts of others and doubts of himself, as something coming from within himself, not as objective facts in outward reality, he will find the air cleared for a significant interchange between himself and his students. Such an inter change can go a long way toward resolving the very attitudes which he has been experiencing, and thus make it possible for him to be more of a facilitator of learning.V ^Rogers, Freedom to Learn, p . 166. The most important factor of teacher training then, is the attainment of self-awareness. In order to be able to "hear" others and to respond genuinely it is crucial that teachers "be open to tiheir own experiencing"— that they are able to "be their feelings." Rogers considers "openness" to one’s experiencing to be the opposite of "defensiveness." Defensiveness In the "organism’s response to experiences which are perceived or anticipated as in- congruent with the structure of the self. In order to maintain the self-structure, such experiences are given a distorted symbolization in awareness, which reduces the Incongruity. Thus the Individual defends himself against any threat of alteration In the concept of self." Once a person has begun to attain the kind of fluid self- organization described by Rogers, he will be Increasingly able to hear and prize otherness and difference. Satis fying communication will result from such growth and the Individuals in these relationships will be able to help one another toward even greater growth. Defensiveness Is perhaps the single most powerful block to interpersonal communication. v In order to become a facilitator of growth and learning, a prospective teacher must also be able to develop the personal strength needed to trust others. If he is treated without suspicion and distrust, he will be able to internalize this model of behavior and he will find it easier to treat his own students with trust. Similarly if he is treated in a non-evaluative and non-Judgmental way he will be better able to be accepting of the differences he will encounter among his students. The faculty of the teacher preparation Institution can thus contribute a great deal to the initial development of personal strength in their teachers. Obviously, this process of growth toward psycholog ical maturity should begin as early as possible in the training of teachers. Changes in self may begin to occur, and sometimes rather quickly and intensely, with the exploratory-discussions mentioned earlier. Some people, however, may need and desire more opportunity for growth than others. The teacher training institution should make available many intensive group sessions for growth under professional guidance. Good non-directive counselors who can work with individuals on special personal problems should also be made available if these arise since the regular faculty may not be able to serve the students as counselors in these matters. In addition to having opportunity and encouragement for personal growth, prospective teachers should have experience doing some of the activities that they will expect to initiate in their own classrooms. First, there ought to be open exploratory discussions analogous to the discussions for the discovery of relevance described earlier (Chapter 5)* It is important to investigate in these sessions the possible functions of education, its relations to the individual and society, the effects of grading and competition on the social atmosphere of the schools and special problems of children growing up in complex, changing times. Other topics which ought to be pursued are teaching of literature, grammar, media, etc. In such discussions it is Important to bring in perspec tives of people other than those characteristic of the academic community. Since it is often not possible to elicit these points of view from the members of the group and the faculty except in a diluted and intellectuallzed form, it Is perhaps necessary to invite some articulate young people and minorities to these sessions. Discussions on these topics are frequently more enthusiastic and stimulating if they arise spontaneously within the context of the group process and are not deliberately imposed on the group. Social problem solving meetings may be used in case there are tensions arising within the group. If the stu dents are practice teaching or working with other group projects, problem situations can be brought up to the group for discussion. Non-social problem solving situ ations will be experienced in group projects of the kinds described in Chapter 5 for school children. Small group writing and editing sessions will involve prospective 1 9 2 teachers in selecting and developing topics as well as suggesting possible versions of already written pieces for improvement of style and usage. Acting out scenes and short plays written together will further broaden the range of experiences of the prospective teachers, arid having experienced these activities themselves they will be better able to understand some of the difficulties. experienced in the group productions of their students. Reading poetry and other short pieces of literature together and exploring possibilities of interpretation will deepen the teacher's understanding of how children feel when they participate in similar activities. Being involved in group film-making will give prospective teachers experience in use of techniques as well as in the decision-making phases of planning films and editing footage.■ The purpose of active involvement in group projects is twofold. First, there is the practical matter of becoming familiar in an active way with the concepts, materials, and techniques required by these.creative activities. Technical courses in which the principles are abstracted and discussed apart from real involvement are less valuable for acquiring the skill and excitement which accompany engagement in such activities. Flaying a game is often quite different from following a description of the plays. Next, most prospective teachers have had little or no experience In working In groups. The experience of Interpersonal relations In such group work will be essential to develop an understanding of pupils' thoughts and feelings in these situations. Sometimes, members of the group are willing to share their experiences openly with the whole group. Such understandings may be essen tial later when they are teaching in solving problems of repeated non-cooperation or disruption by particular students. Empathic understanding will result quite natur ally from the group's reflection on their own experiences. Prospective teachers ought to have some awareness of the problems which are most significant to the children’ they will be teaching. Standard courses in childhood psychology or adolescent psychology would serve to open up some of these for consideration. Yet, there are other problems which are best experienced by working directly with children. Unfortunately, the total experience of present and future generations of children will probably remain somewhat out of reach for adults, and teachers should be warned not to expect their own experiences to be identical to the experience of these generations as qo Margaret Mead has said. Group meetings to which 9®Mead, Culture and Commitment, p. 63 (and other places) # " - ■ i 9 ' 4 articulate students (particularly those who are dissatisfied with schools) have been Invited will help to orient teachers toward the world as many students see it. Academic Development In order to understand the responsibility for learning they want their students to experience, it is Important that prospective teachers experience this responsibility themselves. Self-selected academic courses will provide kinds of information that will be more personally relevant and will therefore be more likely to be of value in the spontaneous situations which will arise in the open inquiry classroom. Required courses frequently give students little information which is personally meaningful and which is likely to enrich personal inter action with students in the classroom. The directions that a student's interests take may i be erratic (Judging from the outside), and it is often difficult to be patient with the seeming irrationality of course selection. Some may wish to concentrate their efforts on literature and the arts* Others will concen trate on psychology, culture or change. As long as the central focus of the group discussions is the needs of people, the problems they are encountering and the part the school can play in contributing to the solution of these problems, the individuality of the student's program of academic study will be his best preparation for conducting open Inquiry classes* Some areas of study which will help develop a fuller understanding of the growth of linguistic competence, cognition and social process are listed here. A under standing of some of these subjects will provide the teacher with concepts which may help him to recognize and to . articulate (or help him to aid his students to recognize and to articulate) some of the interaction phenomena which, occur in the classroom. Information from these courses is also useful in the interpretation of literature and art. Stimulating open-ended sessions can also be initiated by presenting some "facts," theoretical notions, or experi mental procedures used in these- disciplines. Developmental Psychology Speech Linguistics Group process Socio-linguistics Abnormal Psychology Psycholinguistics Counseling Perception Education Reading Cognitive Psychology Learning theory General Semantics Logic Rhetoric The following are areas which will contribute to the teacher*s understanding of creative activity, and will provide him with basic familiarity with materials, tech niques, and resources. Obviously, these subjects are useful In suggesting to teachers activities which students can be encouraged to try. Source material for presenta tions, discussions, and readings are also available in these v ' : ' : V-/ i ' 196 courses, especially literature. The technical courses will give teachers understanding and skills which may be of great value In making presentations or suggesting alterna tives to students engaging In these activities. Literature Creative writing or composition Aesthetics and literary criticism Speech and drama courses Theater production and directing ' Film production Film criticism and technique Courses In materials and methods Photography Journalism and reporting Audio visuals : Areas which will contribute to the teacher's knowledge of culture, change, and contemporary life and problems can be selected from: Anthropology Theology History Philosophy Sociology History of film, T.V., radio Minority studies Political science Psychiatry Economics Psychology Education Civilization It is Impossible to specify a set of academic courses as necessarily contributing to the professional growth of a teacher. Since teachers must e-xperience responsibility for their own education, the selection of courses appropriate to Individual teacher's preparations ought to be left open to the individual. However, it might be necessary for teacher training institutions to specify some minimum study in some of the areas mentioned. If the required group discussion and group project aspects of the teaching program are working well, information drawn by Individuals from specific course work areas will be brought into the process. It would be very unlikely under these circumstances that teachers would come through their education with complete ignorance of the major ideas from these areas. In fact, diverse specialization among the members of the group will result not only in the presence of more information but also the need for real questioning, clarification and elaboration among the group. The students1 learning will be broader and more highly Integrated, and the process will flourish by the heightening of individual differences in experience and learning. Once the group of "specialists" has learned to talk and work together in their group meetings they will be prefixed to use each other as consultants for special problems and needs. Hopefully, this interdependence will carry over to the schools where they can continue to learn from one another by talking to one another and making use of their special knowledges. Early In the course of the teacher(s education, he should have opportunity to attempt to Initiate discussions with groups of junior high or high school students. Ideally,these experiences would occur simultaneously with ongoing classes for discussions among his peers. Getting ■ ' ' ■ ' 198 experience as a facilitator while he has a model will give him a chance to try; perhaps meet with something less than success, and have the opportunity to get some insights into what happened by observing more intently (or consciously) what is happening in the seminars. Because of his personal involvement in social process and his need to know more about.it, his perceptual apparatus will be set to note the subtler conditions for facilitating group inter action. Bach teacher must be encouraged to find himself in all this; ultimately, he will become successful when he develops a— perhaps unique— style with which he is comfortable. Instructional techniques discussed in methods and media courses can be practiced at almost any time In the teacher's education with good effect. Perhaps mini lessons with small groups, video taped and reviewed with other members of the group would prove helpful. BIBLIOGRAPHY ’ Ausubel, David. "Learning by Discovery: Rationale and Mystique," in Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals ^December. I9biJ. Baratz, Jean C., and Shuy, Roger W., eds. Teaching Black Children to Read. Washington, D .C .: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1969. Bruner, Jerome. Toward a Theory of Instruction., New. York: W. W. Norton & Co., inc., Chickering, Sherman B. "How We Got That Way," in Natural Enemies. Edited by Alexander Klein. New York: Lippincott Company, 1969. Flavell, S. H. The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, N.Y.: £>. Van Nostrand do., IncT, 1963. Fromm, Erich. Escape from Freedom. New York: Holt Rine hart & Winston, inc., 1941. (Avon Paperback edition.) . . "In the Name of Life," in Natural Enemies. Edited by Alexander Klein. New York: Lippincott Company, 1969. Glasser, William. Schools Without Failure. New York: Harper & Row, 19&9. Goodman, Paul. "The New Aristocrats," in Natural Enemies. Edited by Alexander Klein. New York: Llpplncott Company, 1969. Keniston, Kenneth. The Uncommitted: Alienated Youth in American Society. New York:—bell Pubiishlng Co., Inc., 19b0. . "The Alienated," in Natural Enemies. Edited by Alexander Klein. New York:nLlppincott Company, 1969* Labov, William. "Some Sources of Reading Problems for Negro Speakers of Non-Standard English." in Teaching Black Children to Read. Edited by Jean C. Baratz and ftoger w.“shuy. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1969. ______. "The Logic of Non-Standard English," in Monograph: Series on Languages and Linguistics, No. 22. Edited by James Alatis. Georgetown University, 1969* Mead, Margaret. Culture and Commitment: A Study of the Generation Gap. Garden city, New York: Natural History Press/Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1970. Moffett, James. A Student-Centered Language Arts Curriculum, K-1$. New- York: Houghton Mifflin, 1968. ______. Teaching the Universe of Discourse. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 196S. Neisser, Ulric. Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 19 6 7 . Phillips, Susan V, "Acquisition of Rules for Appropriate ; Speech Usage," in Georgetown Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, No. 23; Edited by James E. Alatis, 1970* Piaget, Jean. The Language and Thought of the Child. Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., l9b9^ Postman, Neil, and Weingartner, Charles. Teaching as a Subversive Activity. New York: Delacorte Press, . W 7 — ------ . "The Politics of Reading," Harvard Educational Review (May, 1970). Rogers, Carl R. Freedom to Learn. Columbu3, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, l9fc>9. Rosenthal, Robert, and Jacobson, Lenore. PyCTialion in the Classroom. New York1: Holt. Rinehart & Winston, 1968. ' Roszak, Theodore. The Making of a Counter Culture. Garden City, N.Y.: boubleday & Co., 19&9. 2 0 1 Soar, Robert S. "Optimum Teacher-Pupil Interaction for Pupil Growth,” in Educational Leadership, Vol. 26, No 3 (December, 1968). Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock. New York: Random House, 1970. " """ "■ Torrey, Jane W. "Illiteracy in the Ghetto,” Harvard Educational Review (May, 1970). Whorf, Benjamin Lee. Language. Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings~of Benjamin Lee V/horf . Edited by John B. Carroll. Cambridge, Mass.”: M.I.T. Press, 1956. Vygotsky, L. S. Thought and Language. Cambridge, Mass.; The M.I.T. Press, 19b£.