DP Tool Club 19/CD_ASCQ_19_010295.iso/vrac/esteem.zip/ESTEEM.TXT

Text File | 1994-11-17 | 22KB | 433 lines

                         Self-Esteem Curricula
                              Don Closson

In the last several years a controversy has been building over the
use of self-esteem curricula in our schools. Educators claim that
these programs encourage creativity, increase concentration,
decrease drug use, and delay sexual activity. These so-called life
skills programs are being used in gifted, sex-ed, drug-ed, and
regular classrooms, in public and private schools.

Opponents of the programs argue that the current focus on
self-esteem is a direct result of a change in the way we view
human nature. This change has been towards a relativistic view of
morality, which discourages belief in transcendent moral values.
Students are prompted to seek truth within and to see moral values,
or ethics, as emanating from that process. Truth is seen as tied to
a particular person; it becomes biographical. What is true for you
may not be true for me.

Hundreds of self-esteem-oriented programs are now used in schools.
"Quest," one of the most popular programs, is used in 20,000
schools throughout the world. "DUSO" and "Pumsy" have caused
controversy in hundreds of elementary schools across the country.

Although the philosophical foundation for these programs goes back
a number of decades, a turning point occurred in 1986 when
California sponsored a study on self-esteem called the "California
Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem and Personal and Social
Responsibility. The driving force behind the legislation was
California State Assembly member John Vasconcellos. His personal
search for self-esteem sheds light on the nature of this movement.
Vasconcellos was raised in a strict Catholic home. He writes, "I
had been conditioned to know myself basically as a sinner,
guilt-ridden and ashamed, constantly beating my breast and
professing my unworthiness." (1) But in the 1960s he went through
a period of Rogerian person-centered therapy with a
priest-psychologist and claims that he became more fully integrated
and more whole. Thus he turned his life work toward this issue of
self-esteem.

Vasconcellos sees two possible models for defining human nature.
The first he labels a constrained vision, supported by the writings
of Adam Smith, Thomas Hobbes, and Frederick Hayek. The second is an
unconstrained vision, associated with Jean-Jacques Rousseau and
John Locke. The constrained vision sees man as basically evil,
needing to be governed and controlled. The unconstrained vision
sees man as "basically good, even perfectible." Vasconcellos chose
the second view after hearing Carl Rogers speak on the subject.
Vasconcellos argues that the self-esteem movement is built upon the
"faith that people are basically good and that a relationship
exists between self-esteem and healthy human behavior. He adds that
self-esteem is a "deeply felt appreciation of 'oneself and one's
natural being,' a trust of one's instincts and abilities."(2)
This information about Vasconcellos is important for understanding
why this controversy is so heated and significant. It is not just
about what curricula will be used to teach our children, but about
how we view human nature itself. Our view of human nature will
determine the kind of education we design for our children and the
goals towards which that education will aspire.

Visualization and Self-Esteem

Vasconcellos believes that self-esteem results from developing a
deeply felt appreciation of oneself and one's natural being. But
what is our natural being? Some who hold an Eastern view of human
nature have argued that our natural being is spiritual and
ultimately one with the rest of the universe.

A subtle example of this is a curriculum called "Flights of
Fantasy" by Lorraine Plum. The manual says that

"Flights of Fantasy is designed to enhance and refine children's
natural inclination to image and fantasize--to use this special
ability as a powerful vehicle for developing language, creativity,
relaxation and a positive self-concept."

It adds that

"only when we consciously and consistently provide experiences that
acknowledge the body, the feelings, and the spirit, and honor both
hemispheric functions of the brain, can we say with any sense of
integrity that we are striving to develop the whole person."(3)

Just what is meant by providing experiences that acknowledge a
person's spirit?

The author argues that two types of seeing are available to us. The
first is "external seeing," a combination of optical sensory
abilities and the interpreting ability of the brain. The other type
is "internal seeing," which utilizes the brain's ability to
visualize or fantasize. Plum believes that both are real
experiences in the sense that our bodies respond equally to both.
Finally, here's the pitch for an Eastern view of human nature: Plum
asserts that, with its visualization and fantasy experiences,
"Flights of Fantasy" will help students feel connected to nature
and the entire universe, be more open to risk-taking, develop a
sense of wonder, and become aware of personal power. All of these
notions fit well into an Eastern, New Age perspective.

A monistic, Eastern world view believes that all is one.
Distinctions in the physical realm are mere illusions. When we get
in touch with this oneness, we will have inner powers similar to
Christ and other so-called risen masters. In a sense, humans are
gods, limited gods who suffer from amnesia. A consciousness-raising
experience is necessary to reconnect with this oneness. Various
meditative states, visualization techniques and Yoga are used to
experience oneness with the universe.

Not every instructor using these materials buys into this religious
view. Many use them innocently, hoping to bring experiences into
their classroom that might somehow benefit troubled students. But
authors such as Jack Canfield, a friend of John Vasconcellos, have
a definite purpose in mind. In his article "Education in the New
Age," Canfield promotes activities that put children in contact
with wisdom that he believes lies deep within each of us. He sees
himself as a bridge between Eastern and Western thought,
particularly in our schools.(4)

At minimum, "Flights of Fantasy" gives the impression that people
can change their psychological state by sheer self-will. The manual
states that if our mental images are

"portraits of self-doubt and failure, we have the power to replace
them with self-confident, successful images. If we are unable to
get into the image mentally, we will not get into the behavior
physically."

This view of human nature leaves out any notion of sin or an
obligation to a transcendent moral order. In its view we are
perfectible, self-correcting, autonomous beings.

The curriculum may also be laying the ground-work for an Eastern
view of human nature, one that conflicts dramatically with the
biblical view that we are the creation of a personal, all-powerful,
loving God.

Pumsy

A very popular theme of modern culture is the concept of "wisdom
within": the heroes in George Lucas's Star Wars trilogy used the
power of "The Force," and Shirley MacClaine's New Age gospel
teaches that we must turn inward to find truth. Pumsy, a
self-esteem curriculum used in primary schools across the country,
focuses on this "wisdom within" theme. Although Pumsy teaches
behavior that Christians can wholeheartedly endorse and attempts to
help children be independent from peer influence, it also teaches
in a subtle way that children have an autonomous source of wisdom
within themselves.

Advocates of self-esteem curricula argue that these programs are
needed to help those children who are overwhelmed by the negative
aspects of culture or home environment, but they also claim that
all children can benefit from class time spent focusing within
themselves and being told how naturally good they are. Again we
find the idea that by getting in touch with our natural goodness we
will automatically behave in a manner that is personally rewarding.
An example of this belief in our natural goodness is found in the
Pumsy student storybook:

"Your clear mind is the best friend you'll ever have. It will
always be there when you need it. It is always close to you and it
will never leave you. You may think you have lost your clear mind,
but it will never lose you."

Attributes of this clear mind are worth noting. According to the
workbook, "It always finds a way to get you to the other side of
the wall, if you just listen to it . . . trust and let it do good
things for you. According to the manual, clear minds are also a
source of peacefulness and strength.

When Pumsy, an imaginary dragon, is in her clear mind, she feels
good about herself; when she is in her mud mind, nothing goes
right--she doesn't like herself or anything else. Students are told
that they can leave behind their mud minds and put on a clear mind
whenever they choose to. In other words, bad feelings can be
overcome merely by choosing to ignore them, by positing a clear
mind.

Songs sung by the children focus on the same theme. Lyrics to one
say, "I am special. So are you. I am enough. You are, too." Another
says, "When I am responsible for my day, many, many things seem to
go my way. Good consequences. Good consequences. That's the life
for me! The message of this curriculum is not very subtle: Humans
have the  power to perfect themselves emotionally and
psychologically, they only need to choose to do so. The only sin
that exists is not choosing a clear mind.

This curricula  prompts some important questions. Are all negative
feelings bad? Is it necessarily a good thing to be able to shut off
mourning for a lost loved one? Can a person really alter his or her
situation merely by thinking positively? We all recognize the
importance of self-confidence, but how closely does the self-esteem
taught by this program match reality? Does it really benefit our
students? When we read that American students perform poorly on
international math tests, yet feel good about their ability to do
math, something is wrong. Could we be causing students to develop
a false security based on feelings that may not match reality?
From a Christian viewpoint, our children need to know that they
bear God's image, which bestows great dignity and purpose to life.
They must be aware that they are fallen creatures in need of
redemption and transformation and a renewal of their minds in order
to be more like Christ.

Quest

Quest is one of the most used drug-education programs in America.
It includes high-school, junior-high, and some grade-school
components. What makes discussion of this curriculum difficult is
that its founder, Rick Little, is a Christian who used input from
other Christians in its development. In its original form, the
program used values clarification and other non-directive
techniques, visualization exercises, and moral decision-making
models. These methods have not proven successful in reducing drug
use and have been accused of promoting a value-relative world view.
Howard Kirschenbaum, who is closely associated with the
values-clarification movement of the 1970s, was hired to write the
original curriculum and directed the program towards this approach.
Quest makes some of the same assumptions about human nature as
Pumsy. If students get in touch with their true selves, which are
by nature good, they will not do drugs or be sexually active at an
early age. If they see their true value, they will choose only
healthy options. The key, according to Quest authors, is not to
preach or be highly directive to the kids. Teachers are to be
facilitators of discussion, not builders of character. The students
naturally determine what is right for them via the decision-making
model presented in class. Once they arrive at the right values,
Quest assumes they will live consistently with them. The
presumptions are that humans desire to do what is right once the
right is determined and that they can do so using their own moral
convictions.

To be fair, some of the more blatant values-clarification and
visualization techniques have been removed, and Kirschenbaum is no
longer part of the program. But many still find the overall
emphasis to be non-directive and morally relativistic. Ken Greene,
an executive director who left the company in 1982, has said,

"We thought we were doing God's will and had invested tremendous
amounts of energy and time. . . . It still leaves me a little
confused. I sometimes say "Lord, did we forsake the cross?"(5)

Dr. James Dobson, a contributor to the original Quest textbook, has
recently voiced his concerns about parts of the program. Although
he notes that the curriculum has positive aspects, he adds that the
authors have incorporated the work of secular humanists into the
curriculum and have prescribed group exercises and techniques
closely resembling those employed in psychotherapy. This, he
argues, is a "risky practice in the absence of professionally
trained leadership."(6) According to William Kilpatrick,

"Despite its attempts to distance itself from its past . . . Quest
remains a feelings-based program. It still operates on the dubious
assumption that morality is a by-product of feeling good about
yourself, and it still advertises itself as a child-centered
approach."(7)

In spite of the fact that non-directive, values-clarification-based
curricula have been used for decades, there is little evidence that
they actually reduce the use of drugs or other harmful behaviors.
In 1976, researcher Richard Blum found that an "affective drug
program called "Decide had little positive effect on drug use.
Those who sat in the class actually used more drugs than a control
group. He found similar results in a repeat of the study in 1978.
Research was done on other affective programs in the 1980s.
"Smart," "Here's Looking at You," and Quest all were found to
increase drug use rather than reduce it.(8) Some states have
removed Quest from their approved drug education list because it
fails to comply with federal mandates that these programs clearly
state that drugs are harmful and against the law.

Criticism and an Alternative

Although an early advocate of non-directive, self-esteem-oriented
therapy, humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow began to question
the use of this approach for children later in his life. He argued
that

"self actualization does not occur in young people . . . they have
not learned how to be patient; nor have they learned enough about
evil in themselves and others . . . nor have they generally become
knowledgeable and educated enough to open the possibility of
becoming wise.

"They have not acquired enough courage to be unpopular, to be
unashamed about being openly virtuous."(9)

Nondirective therapeutic approaches used by Carl Rogers, Abraham
Maslow, and William Coulson produced a pattern of failure in
schools even in the hands of these founding experts. Coulson now
says, "We owe the American public an apology. Can we expect
relatively untrained teachers to achieve better results?
One specific objection to these programs is their use of hypnotic
trance induction and suggestion techniques. Psychologists feel that
the constant use of trance-induced altered states of consciousness
may cause difficulty for some students in differentiating reality
and fantasy. An altered mental state is the mind's defense
mechanism, particularly in children, for enduring extremely
stressful situations. If these self-protective mechanisms are
taught when a child is not under life-threatening stress, the
ability to distinguish reality from fantasy in the future may be
impaired.
Some feel that affective educational programs undermine authority
as well. Along with an emphasis on moral tolerance, these programs
often state that there are no right or wrong answers to moral
questions. This leaves students open to the considerable power of
peer pressure and group conformity and reduces the validity of
parental or church influence. Although this approach may leave
students with an uncritically good feeling about themselves, there
is little evidence that this feeling correlates to academic success
or healthy, moral decisions.

Many wonder whether schools can deal with values in a manner that
isn't offensive to Christians and still be constitutional. Dr.
William Kilpatrick, an education professor at the University of
Boston, thinks they can. He advocates "character education, an
approach that fell out of favor in the 1960s.

Character education is not a method. It is a comprehensive
initiation into life rather than a debate on the difficult
intricacies of moral dilemmas. It assumes that most of the time we
know the right thing to do; the hard part is summoning the moral
will to do it. Thus its emphasis is on moral training; the process
of developing good habits. Honesty, helpfulness, and self-control
need to become second nature, or instinctive responses, to life's
daily temptations and difficulties.

In reality, one cannot choose to do the right thing unless he or
she has the capacity to do so. Selfless behavior is only possible
for those who have been trained, via modeling and correction, not
to be self-centered. Until we recognize that the virtuous path is
the more difficult one, we rob our children even of the possibility
of moral discipline. Values-clarification methods, on the other
hand, are easy to teach and are fun for the kids. They require
little commitment or moral persuasion.

The apostle Paul wrote to the church at Philippi,

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right,
whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute,
if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let
your mind dwell on these things."

This maxim transfers well into the secular realm. Children who are
exposed to noble,virtuous behavior, who are given heroes that
exhibit selfless sacrifice, are much more likely to do the same
when confronted with moral choices.

Notes

1. Andrew M. Mecca, ed., _The Social Importance of Self-Esteem_
(Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989), xv.
2. Ibid., xii
3. Lorraine Plum, _Flights of Fantasy_, (Carthage, Ill.: Good
Apple, 1980) 2. Emphasis added.
4. William Kilpatrick, _Why Johnny Can't Tell Right from Wrong_
(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992), 216.
5. Michael Ebert, _Quest's Founder Listens to Kids_ Citizen (20
July 1992), 15.
6. Ibid., 2.
7. Kilpatrick, _Why Johnny Can't Tell_, 47.
8. Ibid., 32.
9. Kilpatrick, _Why Johnny Can't Tell_, 33.

Copyright 1993 Don Closson

__________________________________________________________________

A note from Kerby Anderson, CEO of Probe Ministries:

Dear friend of CIN,

  Thank you for your interest in Probe Ministries. Because Probe
may be somewhat new to you, I thought you might like to know more
about us.

  PROBE IS COMMITTED TO RECLAIMING THE PRIMACY OF CHRISTIAN THOUGHT
IN EVERY AREA OF OUR LIVES. Whether it's a college student seeking
help to defend his faith in a philosophy course, a homemaker
struggling to witness to a "New Age" friend, or a serious Christian
thinker seeking resources for continuing personal growth, you're
likely to find Probe involved.

  WE AT PROBE BELIEVE THAT THOSE OPPOSED TO THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
HAVE DOMINATED THE CENTERS OF LEARNING, COMMUNICATION AND POWER IN
OUR CULTURE FOR TOO LONG. Through myths and unproven theories,
increasingly aggressive humanists have sought to douse the light of
God's Word.

  How is Probe responding? For 20 years we've been exploding these
myths and boldly proclaiming the truth of Jesus Christ. Our team of
scholars, speakers, and writers is strengthening Christians and
winning non-Christians through our radio programs, in secular
university classroom, in churches, and through award-winning
literature.

  MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, PROBE MINISTRIES IS A RESOURCE. We are
pleased to make our radio transcripts available to you here on CIN.
Other literature is available from our office. I have written a 24-
page booklet entitled "Confronting Key Issues" that deals with such
topics as pornography, drug abuse, the New Age, and rock music.

  We also have a newsletter called the "Probe Vanguard." We want
you to be on the vanguard of information and insight. Probe's
quarterly newsletter takes you to the cutting edge of issues we
address on our daily radio programs by providing excerpts from our
best radio programs. It also includes additional material about
books, pamphlets, and tape packages. Many of the book review,
concise synopses, and book offers can only be found in this
newsletter.

  The Probe Vanguard is regularly sent to Probe donors. Because you
have already demonstrated an interest in Probe Ministries, I wanted
you to know that this newsletter is a resource available to you.

  Your first gift to Probe Ministries will ensure that you will
receive the newsletter for the next year. Just drop us a note with
your name and address, and let us know if you would like to receive
the "Confronting Key Issues" booklet and/or the Vanguard
newsletter. Also, please tell us that you received this transcript
on CIN.

  Thanks again for your interest in Probe. Please don't hesitate to
contact us if we can ever be of further help.

Yours in Christ,

Kerby Anderson
Probe Radio Ministry

                            Probe Ministries
                      1900 Firman Drive, Suite 100
                        Richardson, Texas  75081
                 [phone]            (800) 899-PROBE