This blog is amid a series of postings. To date there has been “Early On,” “Representations
of Reality,” and “The TV Effect,”[1]
that address Americans’ proclivity toward deviant behaviors, at least as
compared to people of other societies.
To summarize, these postings have reviewed the nation’s targeted history
that has glorified the individual in his/her quest to obtain economic wellbeing.
The postings have also described a national
philosophy that has taken hold which demeans thought and reflection and has
made the here and now all important. Added
to this mix is a generally accepted psychological school of thought that lends itself
to the idea that all of these biases are natural and amply ensconced in human
nature.
Basing
its propositions on studies primarily done with clinical patients, the perceptual/humanist
psychological approach (referred to here as perceptual psychology) promotes that
clinical techniques be adopted and applied by those who run helping services,
such as education. Relying on the ideas
of two leading perceptual theorists, the late Carl Rogers[2]
and the late Arthur Combs,[3]
their main argument was that behavior is a product of perceptions; that
dysfunctional people in American society act deficiently because they have low self-regard
for themselves.
A
healthier path for these people, according to the perceptual approach, would be
to first, free themselves from social definitions of who they are or what they
should be about, and second, to get these individuals to define their own
standards of what is good and proper.
What is important in treating these people is not so much their
psychological background, but the immediate behaviors they actuate or the feelings
they express.
The
perceptual approach then, in applying this line of reason to schools, advocates
a curriculum that:
1.
Is characterized by a warm atmosphere, in which
the teacher is helper, communicates a warm positive acceptance, and demonstrates
empathetic understanding.
2.
Communicates that students can always accomplish
the objectives they set forth (making evaluation very problematic).
3.
Provides problems that are relevant to the
student (preferably identified by the student).
4.
And encourages the student to define his own
sense of morality (they speak of responsible choices, but this does not seem to
be defined).[4]
In the last few decades, some associate the self-esteem
movement in American schools as being derived from perceptual psychology.
This
blogger argues that perceptual psychology, to varying degrees, has been
accepted by educational academia and school district administrators. While its positivity can be of much help in
encouraging students, its either/or approach – either one is encouraging students,
or one is a negative factor in dealing with them – oversimplifies reality.
He bases that view on his own experiences –
over thirty years – as an educator.[5] This perceptual approach lends itself to softening
critiques of students’ work products and behaviors to the point of misleading
students in how well or productive they are.
With its emphasis on temporal perspectives and individualism, the
psychological school is highly congruent with the philosophical history of the
nation as described earlier in this series of postings.
But
more to the point of this presentation, as a prevailing accepted position among
educators, it has become part of the sociological forces operating in the
nation. Its effects have been to further
an atmosphere of irresponsibility. Adoption
of perceptual theory does this because it neglects communal realities. Culture and its sanctions toward improper
behavior are relegated, to a meaningful degree, as having an illegitimate function.[6]
Sanctions are seen as interfering with the development of
true self. Yesterday’s effects are cast
as unimportant, and with them, their source of shame for wrongdoing is
forgotten. Americans have done away with
a great deal of traditional social standards.
Yes, many should have been tossed out – for example, this blogger thinks
about standards based on racist beliefs.
But with its anti-federated notions – e.g.,
discarding communal supports and expectations – of what is right or wrong, there
has been the discarding of the very beliefs that underlie people becoming socially
and politically federated; that is, generating a sense of partnership among the
populous.
Statements of generally accepted notions of
right and wrong behavior are seen by this perceptual approach as cumbersome and
in the way. Discipline and its demands
are regularly seen as irrelevant, except as they might be useful to acquire
material success (a middle-class belief that is shrinking along with the size
of the middle class).
The
progressive pedagogy and its parent philosophy, pragmatism, lack a firm ethical
base and this has made advocates susceptible to the perceptual argument.[7] Peter F. Oliva identifies perceptual
psychology as a main branch of progressive education.[8] This blogger argues it is the one element of
progressive education that has been extensively adopted by the nation’s schools
in their practices.
[1] See Robert Gutierrez, “Early On,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 13, 2024,
accessed February 15, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/, “Representations of Reality,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 16, 2024,
accessed February 17, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/, and “The TV Effect,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 16, 2024,
accessed February 17, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/.
[2] Carl R. Rogers, “Learning to Be Free?” in Readings
in Curriculum, edited by Glen Hass, Kimball Wiles, and Joseph Bondi
(Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,
1970), 219-239.
[3] Arthur W. Combs, “Seeing Is Behaving,” in Readings
in Curriculum, edited by Glen Hass, Kimball Wiles, and Joseph Bondi
(Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,
1970), 210-219.
[4] For example, Paul Main, “What Is Carl Rogers’ Theory
of Personality Development?” Structural Learning, December 2, 2022,
accessed February 20, 2024, URL: https://www.structural-learning.com/post/carl-rogers-theory#:~:text=He%20believed%20that%20children%20learn,to%20accept%20their%20children%20unconditionally.
[5] For a more scholarly critique see Kathleen O’Dwyer, “’The
Quiet Revolutionary’: A Timely
Revisiting of Carl Rogers’ Visionary Contribution to Human Understanding,” International
Journal of Existential Psychology and Psychotherapy, 4, 1 (July 2012),
67-78, accessed February 22, 2024, URL: https://www.meaning.ca/web/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/186-13-347-2-10-20171212.pdf.
[6] This determination falls logically from the elements
of perceptual psychology, but its consequences have spurred an entire
literature bemoaning the lack of community in America. As an example see Naomi LaChance, “So Long,
Neighbor,” U. S. News and World Report, August 21, 2014, accessed February 21, 2024, URL: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/08/21/america-is-losing-its-sense-of-community-says-marc-dunkleman.
[7] To see an early attempt at establishing an ethical
standard by one of John Dewey’s disciples, read Boyd H. Bode. See “Boyd H. Bode and the Social Aims of
Education,” The Free Library by Farlex (n.d.), accessed February 21,
2024, URL: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Boyd+H.+Bode+and+the+social+aims+of+education.-a0142385289.
[8] Peter F. Oliva, Developing the Curriculum
(Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company,
1982).
