239 45 16MB
English Pages 1201 [1175] Year 2023
Springer International Handbooks of Education
Terence Lovat · Ron Toomey Neville Clement · Kerry Dally Editors
Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing
Springer International Handbooks of Education
The Springer International Handbooks of Education series aims to provide easily accessible, practical, yet scholarly, sources of information about a broad range of topics and issues in education. Each Handbook follows the same pattern of examining in depth a field of educational theory, practice and applied scholarship, its scale and scope for its substantive contribution to our understanding of education and, in so doing, indicating the direction of future developments. The volumes in this series form a coherent whole due to an insistence on the synthesis of theory and good practice. The accessible style and the consistent illumination of theory by practice make the series very valuable to a broad spectrum of users. The volume editors represent the world’s leading educationalists. Their task has been to identify the key areas in their field that are internationally generalizable and, in times of rapid change, of permanent interest to the scholar and practitioner.
Terence Lovat • Ron Toomey • Neville Clement • Kerry Dally Editors
Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing Second Edition
With 32 Figures and 26 Tables
Editors Terence Lovat The University of Newcastle Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Ron Toomey Victoria University Melbourne, Australia
Neville Clement The University of Newcastle Callaghan, Australia
Kerry Dally The University of Newcastle Callaghan, Australia
ISSN 2197-1951 ISSN 2197-196X (electronic) Springer International Handbooks of Education ISBN 978-3-031-24419-3 ISBN 978-3-031-24420-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9 1st edition: © Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2010 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Paper in this product is recyclable.
Preface
The first edition of the International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing was inspired by findings from the Australian Values Education Program (2003–2010). The program was funded by the Australian Government, taking a values education perspective and intervention into several hundred schools, public and private, primary, and secondary, across the country. Schools were coordinated into 51 clusters, where each school was working on a cluster-wide intervention for 2–4 years. Each intervention followed the guidelines of a national framework but was tailored to the context of the cluster, be it urban, rural, multicultural, Indigenous, etc. Each cluster was led by a coordinator and a lead school, supported by a university scholar, and overseen by a central committee. The entire program was the subject of a research study, Values Education Good Practice Schools Project, findings from which were further tested and measured by an evaluation study. These were the findings that inspired the first edition and remain the subject of several of the chapters in the current edition. Consistent across many international contexts, values education by whatever name seems to impact student well-being in several ways that stand up to empirical investigation. First, it assists in developing values literacy, as one might expect, a language that directs and behavior that follows overt values around respect, tolerance, care, responsibility, etc. Second, and not coincidentally, it impacts the ambience or school climate, demonstrated in less behavior management problems enhanced cohesion or “togetherness,” and what was referred to often as “student resilience.” Third, and albeit something of a surprise at first, it impacts overall achievement levels, or what we describe as “academic diligence.” As we have said many times, the surprise about achievement levels is really no surprise if we understand how human beings function and how social and emotional factors influence and determine intellectual factors. Be it from the testimony of the ancients like Pythagoras or the modern neuroscientist, student cognition is inseparable from everything else happening in their lives. The Pythagorean academies, principally directed toward mathematical acquisition, were characterized by a balanced curriculum including philosophy and creative arts, all underpinned by care and support for each individual student. Literature around Pythagoras, ancient and modern, refers to the language of imagination, his own imaginativeness, and the educational imagination that characterized his academies. Two and a half thousand v
vi
Preface
years later, we see the latest neuroscientific evidence offering insight into why these academies were so successful, how the brain responds to social and emotional experiences, and the overarching role of imagination in impelling optimal cognition. There are lessons here for education of any kind at any level and at any time. We believe we stumbled upon these lessons through our work in values education. Indeed, the overall pedagogical effects became so prominent in the findings that we coined a new term, values pedagogy, to capture them. In the first edition of the handbook, we reached out to researchers and practitioners across the globe whose work in values education, character education, and moral education, or by another variant term, seemed to resemble if not replicate our own work. In this edition, we have extended that reach to take in a raft of new work to be found in every corner of the world and across a wider array of disciplines. Some of the work is more theoretical, coming from educational philosophers, psychologists, neuroscientists, social theorists, and literature reviewers. Some of it is more empirical, taking the form of quantitative and qualitative interventions and their results. Other chapters come from practitioners who have taken values education into the classroom or tertiary setting and demonstrated its practical benefits. Coming from different disciplinary backgrounds and foci, contributions in this edition nonetheless cohere around a common focus on the pedagogical potential of values education. That is, regardless of the disciplinary flavor or the philosophical, empirical, or practical emphasis, the authors are of one mind that values education is far from a mere adjunct to efficacious pedagogy. It has the potential to be the pedagogy, to nurture, carry, and fulfill all the well-being measures, social, emotional, moral, spiritual, and intellectual, that characterize efficacious education. It is a potential we described in the original edition as a “double helix.” The double helix is a term found in the genetic sciences, denoting the two molecules of nucleic acids that fuse to form what we know as DNA. The fusion is said to resemble a spiral staircase where the two molecules wrap around each other, indispensable to each other in forming the “DNA staircase.” Similarly indispensable to each other, we suggested, is the fusing of values education and quality teaching in producing the optimal pedagogical effect, what we refer to, in shorthand, as values pedagogy. Values pedagogy connotes an approach to teaching and curriculum that prioritizes both the values-laden ambience of learning (e.g., caring, respectful, encouraging) and the values-laden focus of syllabus content (i.e., the personal, emotional, and moral lessons to be learned as far more important than the easily measurable regurgitative content). While the first edition of the handbook offered an array of indicative evidence of the potential for values pedagogy to nurture, carry, and fulfill all the well-being measures associated with efficacious education, this latest edition is fortified by evidence coming from updated research across a range of disciplines and an array of applications. Examples of disciplinary insights are to be found in stronger articulation of Habermasian epistemology and greater reference to the most recent findings in educational neuroscience. The ways of knowing and communicative action theories of Jurgen Habermas have been helpful in discerning why it is that pedagogies that optimize cognitive interest and engagement, such as values pedagogy, result in
Preface
vii
enhanced student and teacher well-being and overall student achievement in ways that more instrumentalist pedagogies do not enjoy. In allied fashion, there has been an increasing recognition in recent years that neuroscience has a place alongside other disciplines in informing educational theory and practice. Several chapters in this handbook provide insight into the relevance of neuroscience for the theory and practice of values education. Attention is drawn to the nature of emotion as being endemic to our humanness, the interplay of emotion and cognition, the predictive nature of the brain, the nature of moral reasoning, and the influence of the experience on brain development among other topics. Thus, neuroscience adds to the insights provided by other disciplines to give a more complete understanding of the vitality of values education. Examples of new applications can be seen in the links that some of the new chapters make to issues of intercultural understanding, including between Indigenous and colonial populations, sustainability, and environmental concerns. Moreover, since the publication of the first handbook, there has been a growing interest in the nexus between spirituality and values education. The chapters in this handbook represent a range of perspectives on this nexus, including Indigenous, various other recognized religious philosophies, as well as spiritualities or philosophies not normally regarded as religious. We, the editors, thank the various contributors to this handbook and we commend it as one containing insights into education that go well beyond the normally understood boundaries of values education to encompass efficacious education itself. We believe the jury is in about values education as best practice pedagogy. The notion of a values pedagogy as the pedagogy for efficacious teaching and learning has been vindicated by the evidence. Callaghan, Australia Melbourne, Australia Callaghan, Australia Callaghan, Australia October 2023
Terence Lovat Ron Toomey Neville Clement Kerry Dally
Contents
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terence Lovat
1
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ron Toomey
21
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neville Clement
4
From Surviving to Thriving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kerry Dally
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in Colombian Schools Professional Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melinda C. Bier, Christopher D. Funk, Marvin W. Berkowitz, Nicole Bruskewitz, and Satabdi Samtani
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rodrigo Riveros and Mary Helen Immordino-Yang
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster Compassionate Morality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Darcia Narvaez
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education . . . . . . . . . . . Kris Acheson, Devi Bhuyan, Lindy Brewster, Jerry Burgess, John Dirkx, Steve Grande, Shagufa Kapadia, Ali Kenny, Kees Kouwenaar, Terence Lovat, Jennifer Ma, Wenjuan Ma, Yoshie Tomozumi Nakamura, Thomas Nielsen, Hajime Nishitani, Guanglong Pang, Christina Raab, Craig Shealy, Renee Staton, Lee Sternberger, India Still, John Style, Ron Toomey, and Jennifer Wiley
39
67
85
111
129
147
ix
x
Contents
9
10
Embrained, Embodied Values: Pedagogical Insights from Developmental Neuroscience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minkang Kim
175
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities in Cultivating Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tobin Hart
191
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity Kristján Kristjánsson
.......................
205
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Derek Sankey and Chris Duncan
219
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s Spiritual Relationships with the Natural World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lauren Foley, Amy Chapman, and Lisa Miller
235
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . James Arthur and Tom Harrison
267
13
14
15
Promoting a More Sustainable and Inclusive World . . . . . . . . . . . Ragný Þóra Guðjohnsen, Ólafur Páll Jónsson, and Sigrún Aðalbjarnardóttir
279
16
Creating Compassionate Futures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . James Biddulph
307
17
The Positive Action Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brian R. Flay, Carol G. Allred, Kendra M. Lewis, Niloofar Bavarian, and Meagan Haynes
323
18
The Value Base of Teacher’s Professional Ethics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kirsi Tirri
351
19
The Secret Workings of the Hidden Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J. Mark Halstead and Jiamei Xiao
363
20
Personal and Professional Values in Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David Carr
381
21
Values-based Education Neil Hawkes
.................................
397
22
Revisiting the “Quiet Revolution” Frances Farrer
.........................
413
23
Service-Learning as Values Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrew Furco
427
Contents
24
xi
Moral Education as a Constant Factor in the Pedagogical Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Olga Sukhomlynska and Alan Cockerill
449
25
Keystones of Holistic Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John P. Miller
471
26
Advancing the Science of Character Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melinda C. Bier, Mitch Brown, Robert McGrath Marvin W. Berkowitz, and Keith Johnson
483
27
Coping with Tradition and Secular Literacy Zehavit Gross
.................
497
28
Integrating the Personal with the Public Ruth Crick
....................
515
29
The Power of Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Matthew Davidson, Thomas Lickona, and Vladimir Khmelkov
529
30
Reviewing Values and Wellbeing Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thomas Nielsen and Jennifer Ma
555
31
The Noble Role of Teachers in Values-Based Education Ron Farmer and Suwanti Farmer
........
579
32
Values, Wellness, and the History Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Deborah Henderson
593
33
Sejahtera Academic Framework as Values-Based Platform for IIUM Post-Pandemic Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lihanna Borhan and Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
611
The Evolution of Values Statements in a Service-Learning Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jeremy Leeds
625
34
35
When Research Meets Practice in Values Education . . . . . . . . . . . James S. Leming
639
36
Integrating the Contours of Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bryan W. Sokol, Stuart I. Hammond, Kelly McEnerney, Melissa A. Apprill, and Marvin W. Berkowitz
661
37
Teachers as Key Players in Values Education Adrian-Mario Gellel
................
683
38
Values of Problem-Based Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moira Gek Choo Lee
699
39
Teach Our Children Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mel Gray
711
xii
Contents
40
Values Education and Restorative Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Janene Rosser
725
41
Values Education as an Ethical Dilemma About Sociability Robert Crotty
.....
739
42
The Unhappy Moralist Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fritz Oser
753
43
Re-Valuing the Shadows: Reimagining Possibilities for Alternative Futures through/with an Agentifying Education for a Planet in Crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dalene M. Swanson
763
44
The Five Pillars of Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Omar Salim
783
45
Reframing Education for the Future Larry Culliford
.......................
811
46
Working with Leaders and Teachers to Grow Place Responsiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ron Tooth and Merryl Simpson
835
Student Teachers’ Experience of Values Education and Its Implications for Teacher Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nazreen Dasoo
855
Philosophical Inquiry and Enhancing Adolescents’ General Reasoning Abilities and Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rebecca Spooner-Lane and Elizabeth Curtis
869
47
48
49
The Most Significant Change Technique Shahida Abdul Samad
....................
889
50
Theorizing Social Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stephen A. Webb
905
51
Classroom-Based Practice in Values Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Laurie Brady
923
52
Toward an Ethics of Integration in Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inna Semetsky
937
53
Developing Student Wellbeing Through Education for Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Libby Tudball
54
Teacher Practice and Students’ Sense of Belonging . . . . . . . . . . . . Karen F. Osterman
955 971
Contents
xiii
55
Promoting Student Resilience and Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jing Sun and Donald E. Stewart
995
56
Values in Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Tim Small
57
Transmitting Social and National Values Through Education in Singapore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Jasmine B.-Y. Sim and Li-Ching Ho
58
Socratic Circles Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Catherine Devine
59
A Reflection on the Value Implications for Learner Well-Being of Engagement in Vocational Education and Training . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Richard G. Bagnall
60
Continuity and Discontinuity in Character Education . . . . . . . . . . 1085 Jacques S. Benninga and Susan M. Tracz
61
Mathematics Education and Student Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Philip Clarkson, Alan Bishop, and Wee Tiong Seah
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1143
About the Editors
Terence Lovat is an Emeritus Professor at the University of Newcastle, Australia, Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Oxford, UK, and Conjoint Professor at Glasgow University, UK, and Royal Roads University, Canada. He was a lead investigator on research projects that functioned as part of the Australian Values Education Program. Ron Toomey is an Emeritus Professor and former Head of the College of Education at Victoria University, Australia. He was a lead investigator on projects associated with The Australian Values Education Program. He co-edited a handbook and has co-authored many academic texts and refereed journal articles associated with these project findings. Neville Clement is an Honorary Associate Lecturer at the University of Newcastle, Australia. He was a member of the research team that evaluated values education for the Australian Government in 2009. He has co-edited books, including an international handbook, and co-authored or authored books, chapters, and journal articles on values education. Kerry Dally is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Newcastle, Australia. She is an educational psychologist and psychometrician whose main teaching and research focus has been on special and inclusive education. Her current research projects include whole school approaches to positive behavior support, and student and teacher well-being.
xv
About the Authors
Sigrun Adalbjarnardoottir is a Professor Emerita, School of Education, University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland Carol Allred is the founder and president of the Positive Action Program, Twin Falls, Idaho, USA Melissa A. Apprill is an Assistant Director at Good Neighbor Initiatives, Saint Louis University, USA James Arthur is the Director of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues at the University of Birmingham, UK Richard Bagnall is an Emeritus Professor and member of the Griffith Institute for Educational Research at Griffith University, Queensland, Australia Jacques Benninga is an Emeritus Professor at the Kremen School of Education and Human Development at California State University, Fresno, USA Marvin W. Berkowitz is the inaugural Sanford N. McDonnell Endowed Professor of Character Education and Co-Director of the Center for Character and Citizenship at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA James Biddulph is the first Headteacher of the University of Cambridge Primary School, UK Melinda C. Bier is currently the Co-Director of the Center for Character and Citizenship (CCC) in the College of Education, University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA Lihanna Borhan is an Associate Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University Malaysia Laurie Brady was a Professor of Education at the University of Technology, Sydney, Australia Mitch Brown is an instructor of psychology at the University of Arkansas, USA
xvii
xviii
About the Authors
David Carr is an Emeritus Professor at the University of Edinburgh, UK, and was lately a Professor of Ethics and Education at the University of Birmingham, UK Amy Chapman is the Director of the Collaborative for Spirituality in Education: Educating for a Democratic and Ecological Society and a Research Fellow at Teachers College, Columbia University, USA Moira Lee Gek Choo is the Director of the Learning Academy at Temasek Polytechnic, Singapore Alan Cockerill is a research affiliate at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Ruth Crick has held positions at the University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, and Bristol University, UK Robert Crotty is an Emeritus Professor of Religion and Education at the University of South Australia Larry Culliford is a psychiatrist in Sussex, UK Elizabeth Curtis is a Senior Lecturer of Education at the University of Southern Queensland, Australia Nazreen Dasoo is a Senior Lecturer at the Department of Education and Curriculum Studies, University of Johannesburg, South Africa Matthew Davidson is an original Founder and the current President of the Excellence with Integrity Institute, New York, USA Catherine Devine has worked with Melbourne Archdiocese Catholic Schools, Australia Chris Duncan was the Principal of Lindisfarne Anglican Grammar School, New South Wales (NSW), Australia Suwanti Farmer is the Director of the Australian Academy for Educational Excellence, Queensland, Australia Ron Farmer is the Director of the Australian Academy for Educational Excellence, Queensland, Australia Frances Farrer was a UK-based journalist who observed the values-based education work of Neil Hawkes at the West Kidlington School, Oxfordshire, UK Brian Flay was a Professor of Public Health at Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA Lauren Foley is a doctoral candidate in Clinical Psychology at Teachers College, Columbia University, USA Andy Furco is a Professor of Higher Education at the University of Minnesota, USA
About the Authors
xix
Adrian-Mario Gellel is a Professor and the Head of the Department of Early Childhood and Primary Education (Faculty of Education, University of Malta) Mel Gray is a Professor Emerita of Social Work at the University of Newcastle, Australia Zehavit Gross holds the position of UNESCO Chair in Education for Human Values, Tolerance Democracy and Peace and is the Head of the Sal Van Gelder Center for Holocaust Instruction & Research, School of Education Bar-Ilan University, Israel Ragný Þóra Guðjohnsen is an Assistant Professor of Education at the School of Education, University of Iceland J. Mark Halstead is an Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of Huddersfield, UK Stuart I. Hammond is an Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Ottawa, Canada Tom Harrison is a Reader, HEA Principal Fellow, and the Director of Education at the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham, UK Tobin Hart serves as a Professor of Psychology at the University of West Georgia, USA Neil Hawkes was a Headteacher in Oxfordshire, UK, and is now the Director of the Living Values Trust, UK Deborah Henderson is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Creative Industries, Education and Social Justice, Queensland University of Technology, Australia Mary Helen Immordino-Yang is a Professor of Education, Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of Southern California, USA Xiao Jiamei was awarded the Vice-Chancellor’s prize for the most outstanding PhD thesis at the University of Huddersfield, UK, in 2008 Ólafur Páll Jónsson is a Professor of Philosophy at the School of Education, University of Iceland Vladimir Khmelkov is Vice-President of the Excellence with Integrity Institute, New York, USA Minkang Kim is a Senior Lecturer of Human Development and Education at the School of Education and Social Work, the University of Sydney, Australia Kristján Kristjánsson is a Professor of Character Education and Virtue Ethics and the Deputy Director of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham, UK
xx
About the Authors
Jeremy Leeds was a Teacher and Coordinator of Service Learning at the Horace Mann School, Riverdale, New York, USA James S. Leming was the Carl A. Gerstacker Chair of Education at Saginaw Valley State University, USA Ho Li-Ching is an Assistant Professor of Education at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Thomas Lickona is an Emeritus Professor of Education at the State University of New York at Cortland, USA Jennifer Ma is a Research Fellow of Psychology and Education at the University of Canberra, Australia Kelly McEnerney is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at the Southeast Missouri State University, USA Robert McGrath is a Professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University, New Jersey, USA John (Jack) Miller is a Professor at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada Lisa Miller is a Professor in the Clinical Psychology Program at Teachers College, Columbia University, USA Rodrigo Rivera Miranda is a cognitive neuropsychologist who works at the Center for Affective Neuroscience, Development, Learning and Education, University of Southern California, USA Darcia Narvaez is a Professor Emerita of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame, Indiana, USA Thomas Nielsen is an Associate Professor of Education at the University of Canberra, Australia Fritz Oser was a Professor of Education at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland Karen F. Osterman is a Professor of Education at Hofstra University, New York, USA Dzulkifli Abdul Razak is the Rector of the International Islamic University, Malaysia Janene Rosser is the Principal (Headteacher) at Newcastle High School, Australia Omar Salim is a Professor at the School of Interdisciplinary Studies, Durham College, Ontario, Canada Shahida Abdul Samad is an internationally accredited organizational consultant from Malaysia
About the Authors
xxi
Derek Sankey has worked at the Hong Kong Institute of Education, Seoul National University before moving to Australia Inna Semetsky is a Research Fellow at Columbia University, USA Craig Shealy is a Professor of Graduate Psychology and Executive Director of the International Beliefs and Values Institute at James Madison University, Virginia, USA Jasmine B.-Y. Sim is an Assistant Professor at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Merryl Simpson is a Senior Teacher at the Pullenvale Environmental Education Centre, Queensland, Australia Tim Small is a former Headmaster and Head of Research and Development for Vital Partnerships, Ahead Space, Bristol, UK Bryan W. Sokol is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Saint Louis University, Missouri, USA Rebecca Spooner-Lane is a Senior Lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology, Australia Olga Sukhomlynska is the Head Researcher at the V.O. Sukhomlynskyi State Scientific and Pedagogical Library of Ukraine, National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine Dalene M. Swanson is a Professor of Education at the University of Nottingham, UK Kirsi Tirri is a Professor of Education at the Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland Ron Tooth is the founding Principal of the Pullenvale Environmental Education Centre, Queensland, Australia Susan Tracz is a Professor Emerita at California State University, Fresno, USA Libby Tudball is a Senior Lecturer of Education at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Stephen Webb is a Professor of Social Work at Glasgow Caledonia University, Scotland
Contributors
Kris Acheson Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA Sigrún Aðalbjarnardóttir University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland Carol G. Allred Positive Action, Inc., Twin Falls, ID, USA Melissa A. Apprill Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA James Arthur University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Richard G. Bagnall Griffith University, Nathan, Australia Niloofar Bavarian California State University, Long Beach, CA, USA Jacques S. Benninga Bonner Center for Character Education and Citizenship, California State University, Fresno, CA, USA Marvin W. Berkowitz University of Missouri, St Louis, MO, USA Devi Bhuyan Sheppard-Pratt Psychology, Ellicott City, MD, USA James Biddulph University of Cambridge Primary School, Cambridge, UK Melinda C. Bier University of Missouri, St Louis, MO, USA Alan Bishop Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Lihanna Borhan International Islamic University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Laurie Brady University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Lindy Brewster OR Consulting, Virginia, USA Mitch Brown University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA Nicole Bruskewitz CoSchool, Bogota, Colombia Jerry Burgess Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK David Carr University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
xxiii
xxiv
Contributors
Amy Chapman Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA Philip Clarkson Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia Neville Clement The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia Alan Cockerill Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Ruth Crick WILD Learning, Bristol, England Robert Crotty University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia Larry Culliford Sussex, UK Elizabeth Curtis University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia Kerry Dally The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia Nazreen Dasoo Department of Education and Curriculum Studies, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa Matthew Davidson Excellence with Integrity Institute, Manlius, NY, USA Catherine Devine Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia John Dirkx Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA Chris Duncan The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia Ron Farmer Toogoolawa Schools Limited, Ormeau, QLD, Australia Suwanti Farmer Toogoolawa Schools Limited, Ormeau, QLD, Australia Frances Farrer Former Education Journalist, Oxford, UK Brian R. Flay Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA Lauren Foley Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA Christopher D. Funk University of Missouri, St Louis, MO, USA Andrew Furco Department of Organizational Leadership, Policy, and Development at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA Adrian-Mario Gellel University of Malta, Msida, Malta Steve Grande James Madison University, Virginia, USA Mel Gray University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia Zehavit Gross Bar- Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel Ragný Þóra Guðjohnsen University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland J. Mark Halstead University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK Stuart I. Hammond University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
Contributors
xxv
Tom Harrison University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Tobin Hart University of West Georgia, Carrollton, GA, USA Neil Hawkes International Values Trust, Oxford, UK Meagan Haynes Boise State University, Boise, ID, USA Deborah Henderson Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia Li-Ching Ho Madison, WI, USA Mary Helen Immordino-Yang University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA Keith Johnson Fairleigh Dickinson University, Hackensack, NJ, USA Ólafur Páll Jónsson University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland Shagufa Kapadia The M.S. University of Baroda, Vadodara, India Ali Kenny LeaderWise, Montana, USA Vladimir Khmelkov Excellence with Integrity Institute, Manlius, NY, USA Minkang Kim The School of Education and Social Work, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Kees Kouwenaar Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Kristján Kristjánsson University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Moira Gek Choo Lee Temasek Polytechnic, Singapore, Singapore Jeremy Leeds Founder and former Director of the Center for Community Values and Action (from 2006-2020), Horace Mann School, Bronx, NY, USA James S. Leming Character Evaluation Associates, Ocean Ridge, FL, USA Kendra M. Lewis University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA Thomas Lickona State University of New York at Cortland, Manlius, NY, USA Terence Lovat The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia Jennifer Ma Faculty of Education, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia Wenjuan Ma Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA Kelly McEnerney Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau, MO, USA Robert McGrath Fairleigh Dickinson University, Hackensack, NJ, USA John P. Miller University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada Lisa Miller Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
xxvi
Contributors
Yoshie Tomozumi Nakamura The George Washington University, Washington D. C, USA Darcia Narvaez University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA Thomas Nielsen University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia Hajime Nishitani Soka/Hiroshima University, Hachioji, Japan Fritz Oser University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland Karen F. Osterman Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY, USA Guanglong Pang Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA Christina Raab Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria Dzulkifli Abdul Razak International Islamic University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Rodrigo Riveros University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA Janene Rosser The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia Omar Salim Durham College, Oshawa, ON, Canada Shahida Abdul Samad Educational Consultant, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia Satabdi Samtani Louisiana State University (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA Derek Sankey The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia Wee Tiong Seah University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia Inna Semetsky The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia Craig Shealy Western Washington University, Washington, USA Jasmine B.-Y. Sim National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore Merryl Simpson Pullenvale Environmental Education Centre, Pullenvale, QLD, Australia Tim Small Ahead Space, Bristol, UK Bryan W. Sokol Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA Rebecca Spooner-Lane Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia Renee Staton James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA Lee Sternberger International Beliefs and Values Institute, Washington, USA Donald E. Stewart Public Health, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Contributors
xxvii
India Still Atlantic City Municipal Utilities Authority, Jersey City, NJ, USA John Style Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain Olga Sukhomlynska Ukrainian Academy of Educational Sciences, Kyiv, Ukraine Jing Sun School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia Dalene M. Swanson University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK Kirsi Tirri University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Ron Toomey Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia Ron Tooth The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia Susan M. Tracz California State University Fresno, Fresno, CA, USA Libby Tudball Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia Stephen A. Webb Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland Jennifer Wiley CoreCollaborative International, Harrisonburg, USA Jiamei Xiao University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy The Double Helix Terence Lovat
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schooling and Disadvantage: Overturning Old Paradigms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Australian Values Education Program: An Emerging Double Helix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Confirming the Double Helix: Values Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Calm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Safe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 2 5 9 10 11 13 15 17 18
Abstract
The chapter will introduce the handbook contents by summarizing the recent history of relevant pedagogical research insights and applying the findings to values education. The demonstrated claim, supported by evidence drawn from this research and further supported by findings from the Australian Values Education Program, is that values education constitutes good practice pedagogy. The relationship, referred to as values pedagogy, represents a double helix effect whereby two elements are linked as a complementary whole, each contributing to the inherent goals of the other. Keywords
Values education · Good practice pedagogy · Values pedagogy · Double helix · Carnegie Task Force T. Lovat (*) The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_1
1
2
T. Lovat
Introduction The chapter will summarize research findings from the late 1980s to today that identify the clear link between a “values” approach to learning and good practice pedagogy in eliciting maximum student effects as measured across a range of developmental factors, including academic achievement. These findings will then be brought forward to explain the holistic effects demonstrated in projects that ran under the umbrella of the Australian Values Education Program (2003–2010). The Carnegie Corporation Taskforce Report on Student Achievement (1994) will be identified as a keystone moment in which both the values and pedagogy agendas of the 1990s into 2000s were prefigured. Carnegie challenged earlier beliefs about the relative impotence of schools to make a difference. It also provided a holistic definition of learning that stretched traditional conceptions beyond the more predictable matters of separable cognition, to include measures such as communicative capacity, empathic character, reflectivity, and integrity as central to effective learning, including academic achievement. Carnegie effectively spurred a raft of pedagogical research that spawned greater optimism about the school’s role in student success. It also illustrated the inextricable “values” component of good practice pedagogy, an insight confirmed in more recent research in the field of educational neuroscience. The chapter will briefly highlight the ways in which the values and pedagogy agendas have interfaced in research and classroom innovations internationally and then offer special attention to findings from the many projects emanating from the Australian program. Findings revealed a double helix effect between values education and good practice pedagogy, so justifying the language of “values pedagogy.”
Schooling and Disadvantage: Overturning Old Paradigms Talcott Parsons and Robert Bales (1955) proffered the view that families were “. . . factories which produce human personality” (p. 16). Christopher Jencks (1972) agreed, relegating the school to one of relatively minor influence: “. . . the character of a school’s output depends largely on a single input, namely the characteristics of the entering children” (p. 256). In other words, children from an advantaged background were destined to attain academic success while disadvantage was deemed an inextricable barrier to school achievement. The Carnegie Corporation’s 1994 Task Force on Learning (Carnegie, 1996) challenged earlier research of the kind mentioned: One of the problems that has undermined school reform efforts . . . is the belief that differences in the educational performance of schools are primarily the result of differences in students’ inherent ability to learn (or not). This belief is wrong. (p. 3)
In a word, Carnegie placed the final responsibility for student achievement on the school, and especially on its teachers, regardless of student starting point. The report
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
3
also redefined and broadened what was meant by achievement. While intellectual achievement remained at the core of the definition, other features of human development were noted as being relevant if not inherent to such achievement. Communication, empathic character, reflectivity, and self-management were named. By defining student achievement in holistic terms, Carnegie’s challenge to earlier assumptions about school systems’ priorities and the role of the teacher was profound. Hence, we find in the 1990s and beyond, a series of more interventionist studies designed to test the limits of what schools could achieve regardless of students’ starting points. The sharper focus of these studies was on testing whether a particular approach to teaching, teacher education, and schooling could break through the disadvantage effect and do justice to the broader conception of student achievement being touted by Carnegie. As a result, the language of “quality teaching,” “authentic pedagogy,” or the like began to appear as a way of capturing the findings of such research. The Stanford-based Linda Darling-Hammond was a member of the Carnegie Task Force and so in prime position to engage in this more interventionist research (Darling-Hammond, 1996, 1997, 2012, 2016). Her vast store of empirical data has continued to show the potency of the quality teacher, and associated teacher education, to break through disadvantage. Wisconsin-based Fred Newmann’s work (Newmann et al., 1995, 1996) did the same through intensive classroom-based research, studying just what it was about teacher practice, or authentic pedagogy, that produced the optimal effect. The research focused on identifying practice around the notion of “pedagogical dynamics,” ranging from factors like “sound technique” and “updated professional development” through to “catering for diversity.” Beyond individual teacher practice was the factor described as “school coherence,” connoting a total school environment committed to the well-being of the students in its care, and “trustful, supportive ambience,” concerning the relationships that surround the student, most centrally the relationship with the teacher(s). The five pedagogical dynamics worked together to produce the optimal holistic effect, meaning that personal, emotional, and social well-being could be achieved regardless of an individual student’s disadvantaged origins. When this occurred, the potential for intellectual achievement was also maximized, regardless of students’ starting points: We found that authentic pedagogy helps all students substantially . . . Neither gender, race, ethnicity or socioeconomic status significantly affected the impact of authentic pedagogy on students. (Newmann et al., 1995, p. 8)
There are several aspects of this research that are of special interest to the consideration of values education and its relationship to good practice pedagogy. The school coherence and trustful, supportive ambience factors are among them. The fact that they stand alongside, if not indeed outweigh, more anticipated factors like sound technique and updated professional development is instructive for anyone contemplating what works in teaching and learning, be it teachers, school leaders, or educational bureaucrats, regardless of their interest or not in values education per se. The idea that care and trust are central not only to general student well-being but
4
T. Lovat
to their intellectual well-being specifically can be found in the ancient world in Confucian philosophy (Brooks & Brooks, 1998), the medieval world in the work of Abu Al-Ghazali (1991), the Persian Sufi, and in updated educational research by the likes of Nel Noddings (1995, 2002) and Ken Rowe (2004). Furthermore, recent insights from the field of educational neuroscience offer neural explanations why emotional and social factors, like care, trust and empathic character, are so central to holistic student well-being, including intellectual achievement (Clement & Lovat, 2012). Mary Immordino-Yang and Antonio Damasio (2007) proffer: Modern biology reveals humans to be fundamentally emotional and social creatures. And yet those of us in the field of education often fail to consider that the high-level cognitive skills taught in schools, including reasoning, decision making, and processes related to language, reading, and mathematics, do not function as rational, disembodied systems, somehow influenced by but detached from emotion and the body. (p. 3)
Darcia Narvaez (2010, 2014, 2016; Narvaez et al., 2013), neuropsychologist and educator, makes the link between emotion and imaginative cognition in suggesting that imagination unlocks the emotions that impel sound reasoning. Accordingly, cognition connotes rationality and emotionality, both relying on imagination for optimal effect. Imagination, however, does not arise naturally from pedagogical efforts. What is needed is an imaginative pedagogy, requiring a safe and secure learning environment as well as the guiding hand of efficacious teaching. As noted above, the point about the necessity for a safe and secure, or caring and trusting, learning environment is replete in educational research, ancient, medieval, and modern. It is also surely the most fundamental requirement for any successful teaching and learning venture. We know that no one functions well in a competitive, least of all harsh or punitive environment, so the idea that young people could learn well in such an environment defies common sense. A values-laden ambience replete with care, trust, fairness, and encouragement is therefore best regarded as a sine qua non for any efficacious learning to result (Lovat, 2021). The second point about the need for a guiding hand is arguably not as clear in the literature. That teaching should revolve around sound technique with a trained and updated professional is taken for granted but Narvaez’s neuroscientific insight into the synergy between imagination, emotion, and sound cognition adds a dimension to the notion of efficacious teaching that is arguably not so apparent in educational research findings. Again, the clue might well be in Newmann’s authentic pedagogy: Authentic achievement has aesthetic, utilitarian or personal value beyond merely documenting the competence of the learner . . . student accomplishments should have value beyond measuring success in school. (Newmann et al., 1995, p. 3)
In other words, imaginative pedagogy that impels the emotions that underpin sound cognition possesses its own values-laden requirements. Pedagogy that merely requires students to “. . . memorize isolated facts about a wide array of topics (for testing . . . doesn’t) require deep understanding or elaborate communication”
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
5
(Newmann et al., 1995, p. 3). Such pedagogy does not fit the criteria for authentic pedagogy. It is this coagulation of research around authentic pedagogy, student intellectual achievement, and holistic student well-being that offered clues regarding the “double helix” effect between values education and good practice pedagogy (Lovat & Toomey, 2009). In the Australian research, we spoke of values education as constituting a “two-sided coin,” encompassing both an implicit and explicit dimension. By implicit, we meant that the learning environment must be values-filled, characterized by care, trust, respect, and encouragement. The explicit side of the coin is seen in the orientation of the learning discourse being around the values inherent in curriculum content, rather than merely the most easily measurable features of the content: The principle of explicitness applies more broadly and pervasively than has been previously recognised . . . values-based schools live and breathe a values consciousness. They become schools where values are thought about, talked about, taught about, reflected upon and enacted across the whole school in all school activities. (DEEWR, 2008, p. 37)
To employ Newmann’s (Newmann et al., 1995) language, the learning accomplishment must have “value beyond measuring success in school.” For learning to be efficacious in a holistic sense, “aesthetic, utilitarian or personal value beyond merely documenting the competence of the learner” must be transacted. One of the many misconceptions about values education is that it means doing something additional to the standard curriculum. In fact, it does not require separation from the prescribed curriculum content; rather, it is that values education has the potential to determine the direction of the curriculum through becoming the pedagogy. As a firmer way of flagging this notion, we eventually employed the language of “values pedagogy,” connoting the double helix between values education and good practice pedagogy (Lovat, 2017a, 2019; Lovat et al., 2011).
The Australian Values Education Program: An Emerging Double Helix The Australian Values Education Program (2003–2010) was a fully funded Australian Government initiative that developed as part of a revision of policy concerning the role of moral development as a proper goal for public education (Lovat, 2017a, b, 2020a, b). The Program began with a pilot study, Values Education Study (DEST, 2003), followed by the development of a National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools (DEST, 2005). Several research and practice projects took place from 2005 to 2010, the largest comprising the two stages of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project (DEST, 2006; DEEWR, 2008), followed by an evaluation study, Project to Test and Measure the Impact of Values Education on Student Effects and School Ambience (Lovat et al., 2009). Three hundred and sixteen schools, involving some 100,000 students, 5000 teachers, and 55 university researchers, were involved in the two stages of the
6
T. Lovat
main project, “Good Practice Schools Project.” Fifty-one clusters, involving schools across all age groups and sectors, followed the principles of the “National Framework” in constructing a project that focused on school ambience and a classroombased intervention. Each cluster project was evaluated by means of formative and summative assessment and reporting by an appointed university researcher in conjunction with the lead research team. In the year after project completion, all findings were subjected to further evaluation in the form of a mixed methods study designed to test and measure the results (Lovat & Dally, 2018). Findings illustrated the connection between values education and good practice pedagogy, with positive effects being demonstrated across a range of educational goals, including emotional, social, moral, and academic effects. Many of the reports from the school-based projects identified a greater sense of calm and improved behavior and communication among students and between students and teachers. Reports spoke of enhanced reflectivity on the part of students, greater responsibility being demonstrated over local, national, and international issues, enhanced student resilience and social skills, and improved relationships of care and trust among students and between students and teachers, with students claiming a greater sense of belonging, connectedness, and resilience. Allied to these areas of development was a consistent improvement in “academic diligence” (Galla et al., 2014; Lovat, 2010; Lovat et al., 2009, 2011). Following the guidance provided by the National Framework and informed by earlier pedagogical research, the learning ambience and classroom teaching were the two main focuses of attention. Following Newmann’s work, the trusting, supportive learning ambience was considered a sine qua non for all learning but most obviously learning being guided by a values pedagogy. The sine qua non comprised the implicit values dimension (Lovat, 2021). Meanwhile, the explicit dimension entailed the way in which classroom teaching proceeded, with special attention being given to the learning goals vis-a-vis curriculum content. As explicated elsewhere (Lovat, 2022; Lovat et al., 2011), Jurgen Habermas’s ways of knowing theory (Habermas, 1972, 1974) helped to guide planning around learning goals. In many ways consistent with the pedagogical findings and neuroscientific insights outlined above, Habermas depicts three ways of human knowing, each emanating from a cognitive interest. “Empirical-analytic” knowing results from the interest in knowledge control, “historical-hermeneutic” knowing from the interest to find meaning in knowledge attainment, and “critical-self reflectivity” knowing from the interest in being free in one’s knowing. The first way of knowing is about the facts and figures, the objective or easily measurable, while the second way of knowing is more subjective, interpersonal, and less easily measured. Meanwhile, the third way of knowing is deeply personal where self-knowing is the marker and the measure not in knowing facts or even meanings but in action, what Habermas refers to as praxis. It is the supreme knowing where actions speak louder than words or, to employ Newmann’s language, the knowing has value beyond school-based success. It is also the kind of knowing that challenges cognitive imagination, rather than merely the cognitive retention that is so often the goal of classroom-based learning.
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
7
Hence, in the explicit dimension, normally connoting a classroom-based intervention, content was normally derived from the curriculum content of the standard syllabuses. Instead of focusing merely on the standard objectives, largely the easily measurable ones, the values inherent in the content became the added-value focus, thereby stretching rather than limiting the cognitive powers being called for. In other words, instead of simply rolling out the content because it was there in the syllabus and because a measurable outcome for reporting was demanded by the system, teachers were encouraged to begin lesson preparation with questions like what value is in this content? What value for students’ important knowledge, vital understanding of the world into which they are moving, crucial skills and competencies for future work, important insights for their well-being and the well-being of those with whom they will form relationships? What value is it to their future personal and social development? What value is it for the world in general? What vital lessons about humanity and the Cosmos, if any, might be contained in this content? By gearing lesson intentions to these values-oriented ends, rather than mere measurement-related ends, the conditions were being laid for imaginativeness to be impelled, a la Narvaez, so leading to the positive emotional state underpinning sound reasoning. The goal, a la Newmann, was to elicit the aesthetic, utilitarian, or personal value beyond merely documenting the competence of the learner. The “surprise effect,” as originally dubbed (Lovat, 2017b), was that when these kinds of values questions were stimulating and determining the pedagogical direction, then the easily measurable content knowledge normally occurred anyway. In many cases, evidence suggested that, in all irony, students were more likely to remember the facts and figures at the center of such content knowledge, far beyond the measuring device, apparently because of the contextual stimulation that was being applied. Data from the projects testifying to these claims include the following: Everyone in the classroom exchange, teachers and students alike, became more conscious of trying to be respectful, trying to do their best, and trying to give others a fair go. We also found that by creating an environment where these values were constantly shaping classroom activity, student learning was improving . . . (DEST, 2006, p. 120) The pedagogies engage students in real-life learning, offer opportunity for real practice, provide safe structures for taking risks, and encourage personal reflection and action. (DEEWR, 2008, p. 9) (Values education) . . . requires students to scrutinise questions that are difficult to resolve or answer, and focus on listening, thinking, challenging and changing viewpoints within a guided and safe environment. (DEEWR, 2008, p. 28) The structured discussion and agreed values that govern the engagement provide safety and support for students as well as an expectation that correction and revision are part of the debating process. It promotes critical thinking and encourages an obligation to respect one’s fellow inquirers. It attempts to produce better thinkers and more caring members of society, who accept differences and, at the same time, submit conflicts to reasonable scrutiny. (DEEWR, 2008, p. 28)
8
T. Lovat
The above quotes capture a range of features of the project findings, described as predictable, less predictable, and unpredictable results (Lovat, 2019). The predictable results concerned student accrual of personal and social values, as one might expect from a program targeting values per se. The National Framework (DEST, 2005), effectively the program’s charter, included explicit values language and so, as with any targeted program, one would predict findings to accord with the target: Everyone in the classroom exchange, teachers and students alike, became more conscious of trying to be respectful, trying to do their best, and trying to give others a fair go. (DEST, 2006, p. 120)
Less predictable were findings concerning improvements in student behavior and student and teacher well-being: . . . the documented behaviour of students has improved significantly, evidenced in vastly reduced incidents and discipline reports and suspensions. The school is . . . a “much better place to be”. Children are “well behaved”, demonstrate improved self-control, relate better to each other. (DEST, 2006, p. 41) . . . teachers and students were happier, and school was calmer. (DEST, 2006, p. 120)
They were less predictable findings in the sense that they did not constitute goal settings in the same explicit way as did values inculcation per se. Nonetheless, granted the pedagogical research findings of Darling-Hammond and Newmann, and furthermore the neuroscientific findings of Immordino-Yang, Damasio and Narvaez, they were entirely predictable. The unpredictable findings concerned the many references to improved student attention to academic tasks, development of academic habits, and enhanced learning outcomes: . . . by creating an environment where these values were constantly shaping classroom activity, student learning was improving. (DEST, 2006, p. 120)
As noted, we initially referred to this finding as a surprise effect because it was even less explicit as a stated goal of the program. Again, however, the broader understanding of student achievement premised by the Carnegie Report, along with the pedagogical and neuroscientific perspectives already mentioned, rendered it no surprise at all. As Confucius and Ghazali understood, when learners are happy and secure in a caring environment, they learn well. As Newmann and Narvaez understood, when pedagogy focuses on “value beyond success in school” and stirs the imagination that impels the emotions that underpin sound reasoning, then learners learn well. The only surprise is how easily we forget the wisdom of the ages and systems ignore the insights of the most pertinent, updated scientific learning research available. We would come to call this attached learning factor “academic diligence” because the habits demonstrated fitted the way they are referred to in the literature (Galla et al., 2014). It was the factor that created the most interest in the wider educational
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
9
community and so the one demanding the most caution in making claims. As such, it became a special target in the evaluation study (Lovat et al., 2009). This mixed methods study, designed to test, measure, and endorse or not the many claims emanating from the program (Lovat & Dally, 2018), had the following to say about the academic diligence claims: There was substantial quantitative and qualitative evidence suggesting . . . observable and measurable improvements in students’ academic diligence, including increased attentiveness, a greater capacity to work independently as well as more cooperatively, greater care and effort being invested in schoolwork and students assuming more responsibility for their own learning . . . (Lovat et al., 2009, p. 6)
Confirming the Double Helix: Values Pedagogy As suggested above, Carnegie (1996) prefigured the nexus between values and pedagogy by illustrating that effective learning is inherently values-filled. The notion that all education is replete with values is as old as the ancient and medieval testimonies referred to above, as well as to be found in moral education literature in more recent times (Dewey, 1916, 1929; Peters, 1962; Carr & Steutel, 1999). There is a fundamental difference however between these earlier philosophical views and the era prefigured by Carnegie and followed by the pedagogical and neuroscientific research noted above, including the findings of the Australian Values Education Program. The difference is that the earlier perspectives proffered the values basis of education as a moral imperative, hence negotiable and subject to ideological debate. In contrast, the most recent findings denote a pedagogical imperative that incorporates the moral, but also the social, emotional, physical, spiritual, and intellectual aspects of human development. Herein, a values approach to learning is seen to be an indispensable artifact to any learning environment if student achievement, entailing and incorporating holistic development and well-being, is to be optimized. As such, it is neither negotiable nor dependent on personal or corporate ideology. The innovative and possibly revolutionary thought contained in this proposition is that, in a sense, student achievement is best understood as contained within a holistic approach to learning, ideally one replete with a values dimension (Lovat, 2013). This notion calls into question previous views of learning as a compartmentalized and linear process and calls for a reassessment of the traditional assumptions and allied approaches that Carnegie implied had led too often to student failure. As seen above, various pedagogical projects, along with neuroscientific insights, have demonstrated how a particular approach to pedagogy can break through these assumptions. Furthermore, to put a word to it, it is a values approach, a values pedagogy. It seems important therefore to tease out just what it was about this pedagogy that seemed to have the desired effect. What were the stand-out features of the values pedagogy, implicit and explicit, that established the optimal conditions for academic diligence to be brought to effect? The data suggest that the principal features are fourfold, headed, as below, calm, safe, relationships, and service.
10
T. Lovat
Calm Results from the pilot study for the Australian Values Education Program (DEST, 2003) spoke of greater “cohesion” and “peace” developing in the schools that engaged in the study, so flagging the calmness feature early on. In the first phase of the main project (DEST, 2006), the feature appeared often in reports, invariably linked to issues of improved student behavior, teacher and student well-being, and strengthened learning effects: . . . by creating an environment where these values were constantly shaping classroom activity, student learning was improving, teachers and students were happier, and school was calmer. (DEST, 2006, p. 120)
In the second phase of the main project (DEEWR, 2008), the link between calmness and effective learning environments was more prominent, as was the link with the inclusive, caring environment: We observed that those teachers whose classrooms were characterised by an inclusive culture of caring and respect and where character development played an important and quite often explicit role in the daily learning of students were those same teachers who also demonstrated a high level of personal development, self-awareness of, and commitment to their own values and beliefs. (DEEWR, 2008, p. 39)
In the evaluation study (Lovat et al., 2009), claims around the greater calming effect of values pedagogy were tested and confirmed. Links with other features, whether as apparent cause or effect, also became more explicit: . . . a calmer environment with less conflict and with a reduction in the number of referrals . . . (p. 8) much calmer . . . more ordered movement around the school, all of which helped to set a better tone. (p. 8) . . . a calmer, more peaceful ambience. (p. 12) . . . calmer and more peaceful classrooms . . . helped children to be more settled and attentive. (p. 34) . . . calmer, more caring and more cooperative environment than before the values program. (p. 44) . . . most staff are calmer in their approach to students. (p. 52) . . . the school assumes a calmer, more peaceful ambience, better student-teacher relationships are forged, student and teacher wellbeing improves and parents are more engaged with the school. (p. 68) Virtually all the case studies report that, since the schools’ involvement with values education, they have become significantly calmer and more peaceful places . . . Most put this down to the students knowing the meaning of things like respect and responsibility. (p. 80)
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
11
The positive effects on school ambience included teacher perceptions of the school being calmer and more peaceful, of conflict being managed more constructively and of students demonstrating improved social skills. (p. 86) The main outcomes of the school’s values program have been: 1. A focus on the explicit teaching of values; 2. The calming effect it has had on the school. (p. 99) The focus group was unequivocal about the impact the values education program has had on classroom life. Classrooms are calmer since its introduction. (p. 101) The group felt that there was a direct correlation between the success of the values education program and the increased calmness and respectfulness observed in classrooms. (p. 101) . . . contributed to the school becoming a calmer and more peaceful environment where mutual respect is taken seriously. (p. 102) . . . the school seems calmer and more focused than it was 1–2 years ago (ie. before the values program). (p. 123)
In conclusion, what we can say is that calmness is a regular feature of the learning environment to be found when values pedagogy is driving the learning. As we reported in summarizing this feature: Whether as cause or effect, or both, the calm classroom, characterized by a range of features including more positive and self-regulated behaviour among students, better organization of curriculum and teaching, learning activities more likely to stimulate the whole person (cognition, emotion, sociality, etc.), more explicit values discourse and ideally a component that involves social engagement, seems to be a persistent facet of the learning site where academic diligence is regularly reported. (Lovat et al., 2011, p. 216)
Safe Safety and a sense of security in their learning environment came through as crucial in the earliest phase of the program. There were routine comments about safety in the physical environment through to the kind of security implied in being surrounded by a more positive environment (DEST, 2003, pp. 18, 20, 58). The importance of physical safety was considered a given; clearly, no efficacious learning will be happening if students do not feel physically secure in their environment. One of the overt goals for some in developing a values pedagogy was as follows: . . .to re-engineer a school culture so the school could promote and nurture itself as a safe, compassionate, tolerant and inclusive school. (DEST, 2003, p. 96) The core school values contribute towards the desirable outcomes of safety, happiness, connectedness, emotional wellbeing. (DEST, 2003, p. 131)
In the later projects, the safety factor became even more pronounced and the connections with student well-being and their academic attention were more obvious. Moreover, the sense that students had agency over their own safety through
12
T. Lovat
taking responsibility for their own environment became a feature. In turn, this would influence the learning ambience: The atmosphere of care and safety generated in a community of inquiry provides a space in which less confident students can try out ideas with the guarantee that they will be listened to. (DEST, 2006, p. 121)
Moreover, the issue of the common language provided by values pedagogy came to be seen as instrumental and inherently related to safety and security: Virtually all projects recount the importance of developing a “shared language” for their values education programme – a language that is shared between all involved, teachers, parents and students. Sometimes the shared language is arrived at through good values education teaching and discussion with colleagues. At other times it comes from interrogating the National Framework so that it correlates with the language the school uses. (DEST, 2006, p. 15) . . .a shared school community language that could contribute to positive, safe and inclusive learning communities. (DEST, 2006, p. 181)
As with all the factors, the safety and security factor came to be seen in more sophisticated light as the projects moved to their later stages. By phase 2 of the main project (DEEWR, 2008), it was seen as being more enmeshed with other pedagogical factors, while the allied notion of possessing a common language persisted: The pedagogies engage students in real-life learning, offer opportunity for real practice, provide safe structures for taking risks, and encourage personal reflection and action. (p. 9) (Values pedagogy) . . . requires students to scrutinise questions that are difficult to resolve or answer, and focus on listening, thinking, challenging and changing viewpoints within a guided and safe environment. (p. 28) The structured discussion and agreed values that govern the engagement provide safety and support for students as well as an expectation that correction and revision are part of the debating process. It promotes critical thinking and encourages an obligation to respect one’s fellow inquirers. It attempts to produce better thinkers and more caring members of society, who accept differences and, at the same time, submit conflicts to reasonable scrutiny. All participants are expected to respect one another as thoughtful members of the group who communally seek to better understand the issue at hand. (p. 28) The pedagogy gives students responsibility but recognises the inherent risks of this and accordingly provides for student safety and support. (p. 32) Participation in values education projects can provide a safe learning environment for teachers to expand their repertoires of practice through the sharing of strategies and supportive debriefing. (p. 60)
The many claims around the centrality of safety and security as a feature of the learning environment where well-being and learning are intertwined were confirmed
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
13
when put to the test in the empirical project designed to test all the claims of the earlier projects: When values education was explicit, a common language was established among students, staff and families. This not only led to greater understanding of the targeted values but also provided a positive focus for redirecting children’s inappropriate behaviour. Teachers perceived that explicitly teaching values and developing empathy in students resulted in more responsible, focused and cooperative classrooms and equipped students to strive for better learning and social outcomes. (Lovat et al., 2009, p. 88)
Relationships The issue of improved and positive relationships resulting from values pedagogy, teacher–student, and student–student, was prominent from the beginning of the program: . . . the . . . projects . . . were underpinned by a clear focus on building more positive relationships within the school as a central consideration for implementing values education on a broader scale. (DEST, 2003, p. 3)
The theme of positive relationships persisted throughout and, as with so much of the evidence, became more sophisticated as teachers and researchers had time to reflect on its impact on the learning environment, including explicitly the ways teachers were teaching: It was . . . observed (within the school) that where teachers were seeing the importance of establishing relationships and of respecting their students – this was reflected in the behaviour of their students . . . Where teachers are embracing values education as something that is important and to be embedded in practice – their pedagogy is enhanced. (DEEWR, 2008, pp. 81–82)
At the heart of the relationships factor lay the issue of language and discourse. The “common language” around values was referred to constantly as offering a way of addressing behavioral issues, as well as utilizing them when dealing with curriculum content. By means of a shared language, issues could be discussed more easily between teachers and students, and students and students, so alleviating conflict, improving behavior, and ultimately strengthening understanding. Similarly, through a shared language, issues arising from curriculum content could be grappled with at a deeper level than was common in classroom discussions. These features, in turn, impacted positively on learning: . . . focussed classroom activity, calmer classrooms with students going about their work purposefully, and more respectful behaviour between students. Teachers and students also reported improved relationships between the two groups. Other reports included improved student attendance, fewer reportable behaviour incidents and the observation that students appeared happier. (DEEWR, 2008, p. 27)
14
T. Lovat
In the evaluation study (Lovat et al., 2009), these claims were further tested. Attendance and behavior management reports were easily able to be verified through school records. Less easily measurable claims were tested through a combination of surveys, interviews, and focus groups: Teachers’ and students’ comments also suggested that improved relationships between students contributed to a more cooperative and productive learning environment. (p. 6) Of student–teacher relationships, there was evidence of a ‘. . . rise in levels of politeness and courtesy, open friendliness, better manners, offers of help, and students being more kind and considerate . . . the main impact of values education on student-teacher relationships appeared to be a greater understanding of each other’s perspective or at least to have a greater respect for each other’s position. (p. 9) While previously, teachers might have been able to establish caring and positive relationships with “well-behaved” students, the explicit teaching of values meant that teachers now regarded instances of ‘misbehaviour’ as teaching opportunities whereby students could be assisted to identify their mistakes and practise the value that they hadn’t yet “learned”. (p. 10) The results of the current investigation provide . . . consistent findings that values education changes teacher-student relationships so that rather than enforcing minimum standards of behaviour or schoolwork, teachers are more likely to support and encourage students to strive for higher ideals. (p. 12) . . . as schools give increasing curriculum and teaching emphasis to values education, students become more academically diligent, the school assumes a calmer, more peaceful ambience, better student-teacher relationships are forged, student and teacher wellbeing improves and parents are more engaged with the school. (p. 12) . . . the effects of well-crafted values education programs extend to a transformation of student behaviour, teacher-student relationships . . . (p. 16) Teachers’ comments suggested that improved relationships between students contributed to a more cooperative and productive learning environment. (p. 37) Some parents were optimistic about changes in relationships between students and attributed this to the impact of values education. . . (p. 49) . . . the quantitative and qualitative survey data obtained from the students, teachers, and families in the Group A schools provided converging evidence about the positive impact of values education on student academic diligence, school ambience, student and teacher relationships and student and teacher wellbeing. (p. 58) As well as being the conduits for disseminating values, teachers also benefited from more mutually respectful relationships with students and from more collegial relationships with other staff. (p. 66) . . . the relationships between staff and students and between students have improved enormously since we introduced the values program. (p. 78)
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
15
. . . case studies that present data on student – teacher relationships mostly report improved and very positive patterns. (p. 81) The outcomes of this improved relationship are reflected in the School Survey data. (p. 84) Improvement in students’ interpersonal relationships was noted by students, staff and parents and these observed and measurable changes in student behaviour had important repercussions for the schools’ ambience. (p. 86) . . . the investigation of the impact on student-teacher relationships revealed that values education helped to develop “more trusting” relationships between staff and students. (p. 87) . . . more trusting student-teacher relationships and the more peaceful and harmonious school climate emanating from the values education programs appeared to have a positive impact on both student and teacher wellbeing. (p. 87) . . . the quantitative and qualitative evidence . . . has demonstrated that a well-crafted and well-managed values education intervention has potential to impact positively on . . . student-teacher relationships. . . (p. 88)
Service Among the various ways that schools and clusters implemented their intervention was one referred to variously as “community engagement,” “community visitations,” “community service,” “student action,” or simply “service.” These interventions were informed by the field of research known broadly as “service learning” (Billig, 2000; Furco & Norvell, 2019). Service learning entails the making of connections between the school and the community through a form of service (e.g., visitations, food drops, engagement with a benevolent organization, etc.), as might happen routinely in any school’s outreach program. The value-added component in the service-learning regimen, however, is in the attached reflectivity and learning that occurs in circular fashion in the form of outreach–reflectivity–outreach, etc., or merely service-learning–service-learning–service, etc. Service learning proved to be an especially effective way in which the implicit–explicit nexus germane to values pedagogy could be implemented. Habermas (1972, 1974) would refer to this as the praxis moment in the knowing and learning, when the cognitive interest is in engaging in practical action rather than mere reflection. In values pedagogy terms, one has gone from even the most critical and imaginative forms of learning to becoming a participant in the focus of learning (Lovat, 2012; Lovat & Clement, 2016). In the report on the first phase of the main program (DEST, 2006), servicelearning ventures included working in aged care centers, reading programs for people in hospitals, developing safe travel programs for students going to and from schools, environmental projects, and the development of Student Action Teams linked to the work of the Red Cross. The reflections of teachers and students indicated that these experiences resulted in learned empathy, enhanced
16
T. Lovat
communicative competence, a greater sense of student agency, and an intrinsic motivation to engage in meaningful action: The overall confidence of the students grew as they gained an understanding of the needs of the residents, and they came away feeling a sense of achievement and greater understanding. This then flowed into the conversation and written responses gained after the trip. The students showed compassion to the circumstances the residents lived in and wanted to discuss other ways they could help. (p. 157) From all of the people in the respite centre, I saw how they respected me and they tolerated how hopeless I was. They were so patient it was unbelievable. I really respect them, and I tried to do my best because it was so important to them – all of those values things. (p. 160)
In the report of the second phase of the main project (DEEWR, 2008), the potential of service learning as a means of achieving the holistic effects of values pedagogy became even more obvious. The Executive Summary of this project offered the following summary about enhanced student agency and the accompanying growth in student self-confidence: The Stage 2 cluster experiences speak convincingly of the critical importance of enabling and providing opportunities for student agency. Although present in many of the Stage 1 projects, the role of student empowerment and agency in values education practice has been significantly highlighted in Stage 2. Starting from the premise that schooling educates for the whole child and must necessarily engage a student’s heart, mind and actions, effective values education empowers student decision making, fosters student action and assigns real student responsibility. Effective values education is not an academic exercise; it needs to be deeply personal, deeply real and deeply engaging. In many of the Stage 2 projects students can be seen to move in stages from growing in knowledge and understanding of the values, to an increasing clarity and commitment to certain values, and then concerted action in living those values in their personal and community lives. (p. 11) Service learning is a pedagogy that aids the development of young people as they learn to engage in the worlds of others and then participate in civic service. It is a form of experiential learning which is integrally related to values education, and helps young people to empathise, engage and take their place as civic-minded, responsible, caring and empowered citizens in our community. (p. 34) . . . when students have opportunities to give to their community, to something beyond themselves, it changes their attitude to the learning tasks . . . Uniformly, teachers report that doing something with and for the community increases the students’ engagement in their learning. (p. 41) . . . experiences accord with research findings in the field of social-emotional learning and its relation to building academic success. (p. 41)
As with all other findings of the earlier projects, claims around service learning’s effects were subjected to empirical appraisal in the evaluation study (Lovat et al., 2009):
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
17
The notion of service learning was implicit in many of the activities which schools introduced to develop students’ responsibility and respect for others and the environment . . . Thus, students were able to put the values into practice in functional and purposeful ways while making a meaningful contribution to the school environment. (p. 34) Service learning . . . engages students in action-based activities where they can apply their curriculum learning in direct service to others or their community. It combines principles of constructivist learning with a very practical manifestation of empathy and social justice in the form of giving to others or contributing to worthwhile social change. (p. 183) . . . service learning allowed “head, hands and hearts” to be involved in a values-based partnership. (p. 208) . . . service learning (means) putting what has been learned about values into active practice. (p. 227) . . . when students have opportunities to give to their community, to something beyond themselves, it changes their attitude to the learning tasks. (p. 183)
Hence, the Australian research illustrates the need for good practice pedagogy to be values driven and shows that action-oriented pedagogies such as those surrounding service learning provide educational experiences that enhance student agency and autonomy in learning, reflected in evidence of students’ increased motivation and engagement, as well as enhanced academic performance. From the above extracts of the various reports, it seems that involvement in service learning provides students with rich experiences that, when coupled with reflection and values discourse, will impel the development of empathic consciousness characteristic of engaged citizenship. Again, it was Carnegie (1996) who proffered the link between these facets of development and academic achievement. Evidence from the Australian projects indicates that holistic values pedagogies include an element that motivates students to apply and extend their existing knowledge to effect meaningful changes in the world beyond the classroom (cf. Newmann et al., 1995). It is this holistic learning experience that seems then to impact positively on their disposition toward learning more generally and, as the evidence suggested, strengthened academic diligence is the result.
Conclusion The chapter has attempted to draw together recent pedagogical and neuroscientific evidence pointing to the inextricable nature of a values component in good practice pedagogy. Central to the evidence is the large data set from the Australian Values Education Program that served to confirm the earlier research to the point that a double helix relationship between values education and good practice pedagogy became apparent. The strength and persistence of the relationship prompted the use of the term, values pedagogy.
18
T. Lovat
References Al-Ghazali, H. (1991). The book of religious learnings. Islamic Book Services. Billig, S. (2000). The effects of service learning. Service Learning, General, 42. https:// digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/slceslgen/42. Accessed 22 Apr 2022. Brooks, E., & Brooks, A. (1998). The original analects. Columbia University Press. Carnegie. (1996). Years of promise: A comprehensive learning strategy for America’s children. Carnegie Corporation of New York. http://eric.ed.gov. Accessed 19 Apr 2022. Carr, D., & Steutel, J. (Eds.). (1999). Virtue ethics and moral education. Routledge. Clement, N., & Lovat, T. (2012). Neuroscience and education: Issues and challenges for curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(4), 534–557. Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). What matters most: A competent teacher for every child. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 193–200. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Redlining our schools: Why is Congress writing off poor children?. The Nation, 294(5). https://profiles.stanford.edu/linda-darling-hammond?tab¼publications. Accessed 19 Apr 2022. Darling-Hammond, L. (2016). Research on teaching and teacher education and its influence on policy and practice. Educational Researcher, 45(2), 83–91. DEEWR. (2008). At the heart of what we do: Values education at the centre of schooling. Report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project – Stage 2. Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/ verve/_resources/VEGPSP-2_final_3_execsummary.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. DEST. (2003). Values education study (executive summary final report). Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_ resources/VES_Final_Report14Nov.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. DEST. (2005). National framework for values education in Australian schools. Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_ resources/Framework_PDF_version_for_the_web.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. DEST. (2006). Implementing the national framework for values education in Australian schools. Report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project – Stage 1: Final report, September 2006. Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum. edu.au/verve/_resources/VEGPS1_FINAL_REPORT_081106.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. The Free Press. Dewey, J. (1929). The sources of a science of education. Horace Liveright. Furco, A., & Norvell, K. (2019). What is service learning? Making sense of the pedagogy and practice. Routledge. Galla, B., Plummer, B., White, R., Meketon, D., D’Mello, S., & Duckworth, A. (2014). The Academic Diligence Task (ADT): Assessing individual differences in effort on tedious but important schoolwork. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(4), 314–325. Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests (J. Shapiro, Trans.). Heinemann. Habermas, J. (1974). Theory and practice (J. Viertal, Trans.). Heinemann. Immordino-Yang, M., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affect and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1, 3–10. Jencks, C. (1972). Inequality: A reassessment of the effect of family and schooling in America. Basic Books. Lovat, T. (2010). Synergies and balance between values education and quality teaching. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 42, 489–500. Lovat, T. (2012). Service learning in the Australian values education program. In T. Murphy & J. Tan (Eds.), Service learning and educating in challenging contexts: International perspectives (pp. 199–215). Continuum.
1
Values Education and Good Practice Pedagogy
19
Lovat, T. (2013). Values education programs. In J. Hattie & E. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to student achievement (pp. 279–281). Routledge. Lovat, T. (2017a). Values education as good practice pedagogy: Evidence from Australian empirical research. Journal of Moral Education, 46(1), 88–96. Lovat, T. (2017b). No surprise in the “surprise effect” of values pedagogy: An edusemiotic analysis. In I. Semetsky (Ed.), Edusemiotics: A handbook (pp. 93–106). Springer. Lovat, T. (2019). The art and heart of good teaching: Values as the pedagogy. Springer. Lovat, T. (2020a). Values as the pedagogy: Countering instrumentalism. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Pedagogy and pedagogical challenges. IntechOpen. https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/values-asthe-pedagogy-countering-instrumentalism. Accessed 11 Apr 2022. Lovat, T. (2020b). Holistic learning versus instrumentalism in teacher education: Lessons from values pedagogy and related research. Education Sciences, 10(0341), 1–12. Lovat, T. (2021). The ambience of values pedagogy. In E. Kuusisto, M. Ubani, P. Nokalainen, & A. Toom (Eds.), Good teachers for tomorrow’s schools (pp. 148–165). Brill. Lovat, T. (2022). Jurgen Habermas: Education’s increasingly recognized hero. In M. Murphy (Ed.), Social theory and education research: Understanding Foucault, Habermas, Bourdieu and Derrida (pp. 107–125). Routledge. Lovat, T., & Clement, N. (2016). Service learning as holistic values pedagogy. Journal of Experimental Education, 39(2), 115–129. Lovat, T., & Dally, K. (2018). Testing and measuring the impact of character education on the learning environment and its outcomes. Journal of Character Education, 14(2), 1–22. Lovat, T., & Toomey, R. (Eds.). (2009). Values education and quality teaching: The double helix effect. Springer. Lovat, T., Toomey, R., Dally, K., & Clement, N. (2009). Project to test and measure the impact of values education on student effects and school ambience. Report for the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) by The University of Newcastle. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/Project_to_Test_and_Measure_ the_Impact_of_Values_Education.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011). Values pedagogy and student achievement: Contemporary research evidence. Springer. Narvaez, D. (2010). Building a sustaining classroom climate for purposeful ethical citizenship. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook of values education and student wellbeing (pp. 659–674). Springer. Narvaez, D., Panksepp, J., Schore, A., & Gleason, T. (2013). The value of using an evolutionary framework for gauging children’s well-being. In D. Narvaez, J. Panksepp, A. Schore & T. Gleason (Eds.), Evolution, early experience and human development: From research to practice and policy (pp. 3–30). Oxford University Press. Narvaez, D. (2014). Neurobiology and the development of human morality: Evolution, culture, and wisdom. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. Narvaez, D. (2016). Kohlberg Memorial Lecture 2015: Revitalizing human virtue by restoring organic morality. Journal of Moral Education, 45(3), 223–238. Newmann, F., Marks, H., & Gamoren, A. (1995). Authentic pedagogy: Standards that boost student performance. Issues in Restructuring Schools, 8, 1–12. Newmann, F., et al. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Noddings, N. (1995). Philosophy of education. Westview Press. Noddings, N. (2002). Educating moral people: A caring alternative to character education. Teachers College Press. Parsons, T., & Bales, R. (1955). Family, socialization and interaction process. Free Press. Peters, R. S. (1962). Moral education and the psychology of character. Philosophy, 37(139), 37–56. Rowe, K. J. (2004). In good hands? The importance of teacher quality. Educare News, 149, 4–14.
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World Ron Toomey
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenges and Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Values-Based Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Neuroscience of Body, Mind, and Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Emerging Neuroscience of Spirituality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Developing a “We” Mindset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Education Practice Redefined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22 22 24 26 30 31 33 36 37
Abstract
Over a decade ago, in a previous edition of the International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, we wrote about the effects of implementing what we then dubbed the “new” Values Education: the symbiotic effects between the explicit teaching of a school’s values and the enhancement of the quality of student learning and the effectiveness of teaching. As such, the “new” Values Education, more recently called Values-based Education (VbE), was essentially a novel conception of the craft of teaching and the processes of learning. At times, we also expressed the view, without much real elaboration, that VbE presented an approach to learning and teaching better suited to the times in which we were then living. We also suggested that it had the capacity to enhance students’ cognitive, social, emotional, and spiritual well-being without fleshing out details of the enhancement of spiritual growth. This chapter seeks to bolster those two claims in ways that suggest how VbE might help humankind address the life-or-death challenges it presently confronts around environmental R. Toomey (*) Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_2
21
22
R. Toomey
degradation, widespread social and cultural disharmony, the escalation of youth suicide, domestic violence, child abuse, and neglect, to name just a few. Keywords
Values education · Student well-being · Student learning · Cognitive · Social · Emotional · Spiritual
Introduction Over a decade ago, in a previous edition of the International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, we wrote about the effects of implementing what we then dubbed the “new” Values Education: the symbiotic effects between the explicit teaching of a school’s values and the enhancement of the quality of student learning and the effectiveness of teaching. As such, the “new” Values Education, more recently called Values-based Education (VbE), was essentially a novel conception of the craft of teaching and the processes of learning. At times, we also expressed the view, without much real elaboration, that VbE presented an approach to learning and teaching better suited to the times in which we were then living. We also suggested that it had the capacity to enhance students’ cognitive, social, emotional, and spiritual wellbeing without fleshing out details of the enhancement of spiritual growth. A decade on, while many schools worldwide have embraced the pedagogy in one form or another, the need for its wider adoption has become more urgent. By revisiting the work of the Australian Government’s Values Education Good Practice Schools’ Project (VEGPSP) that gave rise to the “new” Values Education, and related subsequent work, this chapter seeks to bolster that conception of teaching and learning by way of suggesting how it might enable young people to become their very best cognitive, social, emotional, and especially their very best spiritual selves capable of helping rescue humanity from self-destruction. By situating the discussion within the framework of the challenges presently confronting humankind, together with recent neuroscience research related to the “new” Values Education, we argue that as schools increasingly embrace such an orientation, education can play a role in helping redress the near-fatal life-or-death challenges presently confronting humankind: challenges such as “the re-emergence of feudalism through ever increasing social, cultural and religious conflict; human rights infringement; ecological degradation; politics without principles; business without morality and the like” (Farmer & Farmer, 2015). A further hope is that it will nurture a generation that sees these challenges as opportunities to make the world a better place for all.
Challenges and Opportunities Over the last decade, the world has become an even darker place than it was when the International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing was first published. Now, humankind finds itself facing literally a set of life-or-death
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
23
challenges. We are on course for unprecedented environmental destruction through global warming and natural resource depletion. Population and consumption trends predict that we shall overshoot the earth’s carrying capacity within the century. Humanity is at war with itself in escalating numbers of regional, ethnic, and religious conflicts. The global economy and many institutions have fallen prey to the shortsightedness of a mostly economic agenda. Domestic violence, youth suicide, as well as child abuse and neglect are of such epidemic proportions that schools now find themselves having to develop “trauma informed practices” (Narvaez, this handbook). Fifty-four percent of the human race now lives under autocratic rule. Humankind, it seems, is presently intent on tearing itself apart. This is a dangerous road we tread. Because, as Barack Obama prophetically wrote in his recent book in reference to today’s world “of global supply chains, instantaneous capital transfers, social media, transnational terrorist networks, climate change, mass migration, and everincreasing complexity”: We will learn to live together, cooperate with one another, and recognize the dignity of others, or we will perish. (Obama, 2020 p. XVI)
The most predominant approaches to education are exacerbating the problem rather than alleviating it. At a time when one would expect schools to be trying to get more people pulling in the one direction so as to create more authentic, self and socially aware people, and thus socially responsible people, prepared to redress the above situation, we find that mostly they are sending their students quite the opposite message. Rather than sending messages about the need for more cooperation, more effort for sustainability, equity, conflict resolution, as well as personal and spiritual well-being, the typical school curriculum reflects and reinforces the notion of competition and a survival of the fittest mentality. Specifically, with regard to present approaches to schooling, teachers have been distracted from their work of shaping knowledgeable, ethical, and productive members of a democratic society by a variety of extraneous forces. The instrumentalist orientation toward education so common today, together with the way it is increasingly being commodified, adds to the pressure on teachers to largely ignore those unquantifiable aspects of education like the creative, social, emotional, reflective, and spiritual development of young people. They have become key distractions from the task of educating the whole person and an improved humanity. Similarly, these days any teacher working hard at developing in young people a sense of greater shared social responsibility has serious competition from the sociopathological pressures of the Internet, the neurobiological effects of its use (Firth et al., 2019), and the growing cultural support for narcissism. There is much “push back” from the Internet and social media to efforts at sustainability, equity, conflict resolution, and personal and spiritual well-being in the form of cyber bullying, cyber pornography, cyber racism, and the social isolation that often accompanies Internet and social media usage. Moreover, with social media increasingly becoming a tool for young people’s identity development, psychologists are concerned that individuals can become “stuck” in the identity exploration process, finding the plethora of options
24
R. Toomey
debilitating, making it difficult for a person to arrive at an identity commitment let alone an identity commitment in tune with personal integrity, sustainability, equity, conflict resolution, and the like. Also, the emergence of the culture of narcissism that is being fuelled by a cult of the self and the pursuit of wealth in a hypercompetitive consumer society is stunting commitment to values like empathy, humility, caring, and integrity that are central to the development of a more harmonious, ecologically sustainable, and socially just world (Manne, 2015). These twin pressures on schools of instrumentalism and the negative socioemotional–cultural developments with the Internet and social media, together with the clamor for high “standards” and higher test scores, have all combined to make schools focus primarily on external forms of knowing and being while students’ inner dimensions are often ignored. There is increasingly less talk about schools’ role in nurturing self-awareness, spiritual well-being, imagination, exploration, emotion, joy, or self-actualization. We are by no means alone in declaring that the life-or-death turning point that humankind presently faces requires transformation not only to the educational systems that we establish and enact, but the underlying premises we hold about whom we are educating, how we educate, and why we educate in the first place. This is a great opportunity. To answer such questions, we must reconceptualize and reframe our educational endeavors so that we are not just educating students for their future lives but also educating them for the betterment of humanity: developing the cognitive, social, emotional, and spiritual well-being of all students.
Values-Based Education Between 2005 and 2008, my colleagues and I were intimately involved in the Australian Government’s Values Education Good Practice Schools Project (VEGPSP) (Toomey, 2006). The project was a two-stage, nearly A$30 million, effort designed to enable Australian schools to demonstrate, in a “ground up” sense, good practice Values Education. During the project’s lifetime, some 400 schools and thousands of teachers and students toiled away identifying, implementing, and refining their conception of good practice Values Education. The details of the schools’ efforts and their effects on students regarding the development of prosocial values and behaviors are well documented, as are the transformational effects on staff (Lovat & Toomey, 2009; Lovat et al., 2009; Lovat et al., 2010). VbE schools were calmer schools, with a more positive ethos and school culture, had happier, more motivated staff and pupils, and high levels of wellbeing and resilience. By drawing on the values-based educational practices within the VEGPSP, we were able to propose a “new” Values Education paradigm. Initially, we described it as the double helix effect between the explicit teaching of values and quality teaching (Newmann et al., 1996). That is, the explicit teaching of values and quality teaching are the two sides of the same coin. When one explicitly teaches the collectively identified and firmly held values of a school community as part of that
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
25
school’s overall program, you change the school’s ambience. It becomes calmer. Interpersonal relationships between teachers and students and between the students themselves become more deep-going and trusting. All of this is very well documented (DEEWR, 2008; DEST, 2006; Lovat, 2007; Lovat & Toomey, 2007; Lovat et al., 2009). Moreover, such an environment is a natural crucible within which to engage quality teaching practices. Quality teaching (Newmann et al., 1996) is a values-based craft that, among other things, includes teachers and students engaging in substantive conversation. This requires trusting relationships between teachers and students: the very type of relationships that develop in classrooms that explicitly teach a school’s values. According to Newmann et al. (1996), quality teaching also involves providing social support for student achievement. This means engendering practices whereby students and teachers help each other to create a sense that “we are all in this together” regardless of background or levels of perceived competence. This requires students caring for each other, sharing, trusting, and other values. Quality teaching also involves nurturing in students higher-order thinking skills and depth of knowledge through the deep conversations involving caring and trust. The double helix metaphor was subsequently elaborated to a “troika” (borrowed from the three-horsed Russian snow cart) designed to capture the way this approach to teaching and learning draws together, and produces synergies between, the research about quality teaching, socioemotional learning, and service learning (Lovat & Toomey, 2009; Lovat et al., 2009). Specifically, it drew upon ideas within the quality teaching research about the roles of caring, high expectations, mutual respect, and the inclusion of, and support for, all students in the learning process. It also drew on ideas about the role of emotion that were found in the neuroscience research at the time. The work of neuroscientists like Damasio (2003) and Immordino-Yang (2007) suggested that the aspects of cognition treated most heavily in schools, namely learning, attention, memory, and the like, draw heavily upon the processes of emotion. Similarly, around the same time Goleman was developing his theory about “emotional intelligence” that, if Damasio (2003) and others were correct about the role of emotion in learning, would have a major impact on education. His theory about our “two minds” – the rational and the emotional – and his views about “emotional intelligence” further supported the idea that emotion was central to learning. Emotional intelligence, according to Goleman (1996), comprises five “inner” qualities: self-awareness (the ability to recognize and understand personal moods and emotions and drives, as well as their effect on others); self-regulation (the ability to control or redirect disruptive impulses and moods, and the propensity to suspend judgment and to think before acting); internal motivation (a passion to work for internal reasons such as an inner vision of what is important in life, a joy in doing something, curiosity in learning); empathy (the ability to understand the emotional makeup of other people); and social skills (proficiency in managing relationships and building networks, and an ability to find common ground and build rapport). All five qualities are heavily values laden and thus provide another dimension to the symbiotic effects between values and teaching. Finally, Bryk’s (2002) work on relational
26
R. Toomey
trust was also making neuroscientific connections between the social, emotional, and cognitive processes involved in learning. Essentially then, the “troika” proposed a new paradigm for values-based, holistic learning that simultaneously engaged a range of social, emotional, and cognitive functions. It also included a service learning dimension in which students could apply the prosocial values they had been taught, and had modeled for them by teachers and other adults, and which were transacted within the curriculum to practical situations of need in their surrounding communities such as, for example, aged care, ecological degradation, and worker exploitation, thereby developing their social responsibility and hopefully their capacity for transcendent thinking and altruism. In our view then, this conception of a student well-being pedagogy holds one of the keys to enabling young people to better understand their “selves” and develop the type of prosocial behavior and responsible citizenry that can contribute to a better world. We still think that to be the case. However, with the passage of time further research, particularly in the neurosciences, has increased our confidence in that regard.
The Neuroscience of Body, Mind, and Spirit The ink was barely dry (so to speak) on the pages of the first edition of the International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing when significant developments within the neurosciences began to emerge, many of which were pertinent to our thinking about the troika and its transformational potential. Such work now demonstrates that 1. The nexus between sociality, emotion, and cognition is more complex than we thought 10 years ago. 2. For those of us in the Western world, our “emotional selves” require nourishment – the way right-brain functioning is neglected in that world needs rectification. 3. The way the brain and the outside world interact is possibly a major contributor to the life-or-death challenges we currently face. 4. While the essential elements of the troika hold up under scrutiny today, there are additional things we can do as educators to fortify it and repurpose it so that it becomes an effective antidote to the life-or-death challenges we currently face. For example, the cognition/emotionality nexus in learning to which Damasio (2003) first drew our attention has now been further elaborated. We now know that within the bilateral brain both hemispheres play a role in how the mind works: neuronal “energy” “flows,” or weaves, through both hemispheres with one or the other hemisphere being more dominant than the other depending on the context (Siegel et al., 2016). The left hemisphere plays a dominant role when the mind is tasked with meaning-making about narrow, decontextualized, theoretical, technical inputs to the brain. The right hemisphere is more at home with our emotional and social selves. Moreover, Siegel’s (2016) work becomes especially important
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
27
regarding the troika metaphor for VbE in that he has shown not only are there neural interconnects between cognition, emotion, and sociality in the neuronal electrical “firing” patterns in the brain but those patterns can be stimulated and grown through processes he calls neurogenesis and synaptogenesis. This is especially important for education when taken together with the work of McGilchrist (2009), which argues that the nature of today’s Western society in its interactions with the brain has made us left brain-dominant and thus “soul-less,” dispirited and incapable of emotionally addressing the life-or-death challenges we currently face. Furthermore, Porges (2011) and Siegel (2012) have both further advanced our knowledge about what McGilchrist (2009) calls “our embodied mind.” Porges’ (2011) work focuses on the interactions of the nervous system and the brain. His polyvagal theory suggests that there is a two-way information exchange between the vagus nerve, which is attached to the brain stem, and which passes through all the major organs, including the heart and the brain, thereby shaping our embodied mind and giving new meaning to phrases such as “gut feeling,” “heart felt,” “intuition,” “laughing my insides out,” and such. Both McGilchrist (2009) and Siegel et al. (2016) are concerned about the state of today’s world and how we can better “integrate” the right and left hemispheres of the brain: move people from a mindset of “I” (the left hemisphere) to “We” (the right hemisphere), thereby potentially enabling us to see the challenges we face as opportunities for making the world a better place. Siegel’s (Siegel et al. 2016) brain scanning work has had a profound impact on our understanding of the interconnection between body, mind, and spirit and its potential applications to education in terms of our interpersonal connectedness and its potential to enable people to develop a “We” mindset. Such a mindset has, in part at least, a spiritual dimension derived from a sense that we are all part of a greater whole. In his book The Developing Mind: How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We Are, he describes the concepts of “energy” and “information flow.” Energy and information flow, put simply, is the movement across time of the physics’ property of energy, the capacity to “do stuff” such as carry out work. Sometimes that energy has symbolic value, it stands for something other than itself and thus has meaning, and thus this energy pattern is called “information.” Through sophisticated brain scanning procedures, Siegel and others (2016) have shown us that the brain has a bilateral functionality with both hemispheres contributing to how the mind (as distinct from the brain) works but with one or other hemispheres dominating depending on the context. Moreover, he argues that the functionality of the brain has effects on our spiritual well-being. Metaphorically, he sees the mind, body, spirit relationship in terms of an embodied system. One component of the system he refers to as “domains” all of which ideally need to be functioning in harmony for the system to function optimally. There are nine domains that are important areas for energy and information to flow in an integrated way to create overall well-being for a person including spiritual wellbeing. The nine domains are integration of consciousness (the capacity to sense the activities of the mind with more clarity, as well as alter them and strengthen them);
28
R. Toomey
bilateral integration (where one links the very different functions of the left and right sides of the brain); vertical integration (where one enables the consciousness experience of the cortex at the top of the brain to be linked to areas below like the limbic area, the brain stem, and the body itself); memory integration (explore how one remembers); narrative integration (how one makes sense of one’s life); state integration (realizing that we have different ways of being: relational and alone, for example, and managing those needs); interpersonal integration (how we relate to each other with compassion and support each other); and temporal integration (one’s need to balance our wish for immortality with knowledge that nothing is permanent in life). These domains provide for Siegel a comprehendible way to describe the terrain of “differentiation” and “linkage” within the brain. He suggests we should envisage the brain as a system comprised of different component parts (“differentiation”) that when they are functioning optimally (“linkage”) the system has “integration.” Given the earlier point about interconnectedness, such a system might comprise, say, the two sides of the brain, two people in a relationship, or even a whole classroom. His conception of a “system” is synonymous with that of the Troika outlined earlier as a metaphor for VbE where the triadic relationship between the explicit and implicit teaching of a school’s values, quality teaching, and service learning is drawn into a harmonious relationship when the three horses work as one. Finally, Siegel (Siegel et al., 2016) proposes that when these nine domains are integrated by a form of focussed attention typically, but not solely, accompanied by open monitored meditation, a further domain emerges: transpirational integration where one begins to have an expanded sense of self, feeling part of a much larger whole. With Bergemann and others (2011), he defines such transpirational integration as spirituality: a knowing or awareness of the interconnectedness of all things in nature. By way of explanation about this sense of oneness, he offers the image of a mother holding a daughter while they each stare into the others’ eyes. When we allow the mind, or the process that regulates the flow of energy and information that occurs within the body and our relationships with one another, to embrace the reality that this flow embraces us all, we expand our constrained sense of a separate self to an awakened sense of an interdependent whole self. When a mother uses her neural circuits to resonate with her baby, she no longer feels like a separate entity, but rather deeply interconnected with her child. And let’s say for a moment that that same mother also allowed her body and mind to resonate with everyone else around her, including her friends and even strangers. She would then find herself feeling deeply interconnected with the world around her, and thus part of something much larger than a single body limited to her skin. This is both the nature of mother and mother nature. (Bergemann et al., 2011, p. 94)
However, feeling such interconnectedness can in no way be accomplished robotically or ineluctably: it is way of “being” in the world. Einstein (1972) makes the point this way: A human being is part of the whole called by us Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few people nearest to us. Our task
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
29
must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in all its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely but the striving for such achievement is in itself a part of the liberation, and a foundation for inner security. (Einstein, 1972, p. 1)
McGilchrist (2009), in similar vein, makes three important related points, broadly speaking, that are of particular relevance to the argument being made in this chapter about how, potentially at least, the original conception of the new VbE might be reinforced, perhaps even strengthened, to help make the world a better place. This might be accomplished by including learning and teaching strategies within VbE’s repertoire specifically intended to strengthen right-brain activity, nurture spiritual development, and enable young people to better understand their “selves” and develop the type of prosocial behavior and responsible citizenry that can contribute to a better world. First, McGilchrist (2009) extends our knowledge of brain lateralization by showing how the mind’s activity is shaped by inter-neuronal “firings” comprising “flow” across both cerebral hemispheres of the brain not solely within one or the other. Second, he introduces us to the importance of “attending” as part of the brain’s functionality which, as he shows, is primarily a right hemispheric function. Consistent with the work of Siegel et al. (2016) and Porges (2011), but somewhat more nuanced, he demonstrates the difference in functionality of the hemispheres: the left being a narrow, sharply focussed functionality and the right exercising a more open, broader alertness. Third, he is able to show how the frontal lobe exercises an inhibiting or dampening influence during the inter-neuronal “flow” during the synaptic “firing” within the brain so that, depending on the context, one hemisphere’s role in shaping the mind’s activity is dampened, allowing the other more effect. Thus, McGilchrist (2009) has made a very comprehensive case for a specifically hemispheric difference, and it is subtly different from both Siegel et al. (2016) and Porges (2011), as well as the one that entered the general culture in the 1970s. Importantly, he argues that in the biological evolution of the brain the left hemisphere has developed a greater capacity for dampening activity than the right, and that the world in which we now live continues to nurture that capacity in the left hemisphere. Our present world, he argues, prioritizes what he calls “the outwitting of others,” that which can be grasped, deconstructed, measured, and thereby decontextualized. It is a worldview that resonates strongly with the section above on challenges and opportunities: a world that has lost its soul so to speak. In this way, left-brain dominance over right-brain function has led our world to drift toward a reliance on abstract, de-contextualized thinking over more fluid and reflexive thought processes. As a contemporary example, we could say that our reliance on, and false belief in, algorithms to predict human behavior in, say, industries that use them to target likely customers stunts capacities for trust and connectedness. Similarly, as we argued above, the tendency for education systems to reduce student learning to measurable outcomes through standardized SAT tests (in the United States and the United Kingdom) or NAPLAN (in Australia) comes at the expense of such human values as intuition, cooperation, creativity, and empathy. Perhaps
30
R. Toomey
even more tellingly, the way education systems have now even co-opted the quality teaching regime into a standardized format contributes to left-brain dominance (AITSL, 2011). This pattern even extends to the way we have institutionalized metrics to assess things like accountability and quality assurance with KPI management tools. From a different perspective and given the importance attention plays in relationship building, Hart (2014) attributes present-day left hemisphere dominance to what he calls Continuous Partial Attention: The demanding quality of the internet and constant virtual stimulation distorts life into rapidly changing sound bites, image bytes and data bytes. This steady pull on our attention can inhibit us from giving anything or anyone our complete undivided attention. (Hart, 2014, p. XI)
Thus, chillingly Rowson and McGilchrist (2013) warn: If I am right, the story of the Western world (as described in terms of challenges and opportunities above) is one of increasing left brain hemisphere domination, we would not expect insight to be the keynote. Instead, we would expect a sort of insouciant optimism, the sleepwalker whistling a happy tune as he ambles toward the abyss. (Rowson & McGilchrist, 2013, p. 1)
The Emerging Neuroscience of Spirituality In the context of the life-or-death challenges facing the world today, and the aspiration we had a decade ago that a key effect of VbE might be the spiritual development of the young people undertaking it, so that they became an effective antidote for the antisocial behavior that is at the root cause of those challenges, an emerging neuroscience of spirituality now suggests possibilities in that regard. That is, neuroscience is gradually shedding light on both how we might become more “We” oriented and what role education might play in that process. In doing so, it conceives spirituality in a secular (nonreligious), neuroscientific and developmental sense. Neuroscience is increasingly attending to the way the brain enables, and is enabled by, capacities for transcendent thoughts and emotions (Riveros & Immordino-Yang, 2021) or “achieving a degree of spirituality that creates a sense that we are part of a greater whole” (Bergemann et al., 2011). This mutually interdependent relationship between brain functionality and spiritual development has the potential, it seems, to shed neuropsychological light on how young people gradually form their dispositions to ethical issues. In essence, the fundamental issue here is how can people be enabled to shift from an “I” mindset to a “We” mindset? Said another way, can our now decade-old notion of VbE be further elaborated in ways that enable it to play a role in reshaping the destructive trajectory on which we currently find ourselves?
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
31
From a neuroscientific standpoint, a key point to bear in mind in addressing such questions is that the mind is both embodied – a part of bodily processes including those of the brain – and it is relational – a property of how we communicate and connect with one another (Porges, 2011). That is, the patterns of energy and information in one’s brain activity described above are also shared between people, through a process of mirror neuronal interconnectivity, and thus the mind uses both the brain and relationships to create the self. There is plenty of evidence supporting this view. Louis Cozolino, who has studied the neuroscience within human relationships and its impact on education for over 20 years, writes that “the brain is an organ of adaptation that builds its structures through interactions with others” (Cozolino, 2006). Moreover, this interconnectedness means we should see the mind as emerging over time with changes in the energy and flow processes and the patterns of interconnectedness. Thus, defining “self” as a singular noun is limiting. Rather, “self” is better conceived as a plural verb. When we reflect on the notion of mind as an emergent process of energy and information flow in our bodies and in our relationships, we come to sense that our personal experience is a “node” in which energy flows through us, connects us to other nodes of flow, and makes part of a larger “mindweb” (Siegel et al., 2016) of interconnected individuals now and across time. This “mindweb” is the product of the synchronistic firing of neurons and linkages formed within our social networks.
Developing a “We” Mindset Neuroscience continues to identify ways of enabling our spiritual selves to flourish: both by what might be called self-managed ways as well as through education practices. The first of these (the self-managed) involve mindfulness practices. There is now a vast literature, much of it neuroscientific, suggesting that the practice of meditation is capable of countering our dominant left-brain propensity. Culliford (2011, 2014, and this handbook), for instance, draws on this literature and suggests that meditation fosters the kind of clear thinking that gives spontaneous access to wisdom. This kind of thinking is holistic, intuitive, creative, empathic, compassionate, and wise because it is not focused separately and energetically on sense perceptions, thoughts, emotions, or impulses. According to Culliford (2011), this involves introducing wisdom training exercises like reflection and meditation. Hart (2014) elaborates such exercises and provides practical advice about their implementation, including among many others, mindful walking; body scanning; inner listening; journaling; inner criticism; and living kindness. From a specifically neuroscientific perspective, Nataraja (2008) is able to show how meditation leads to an enhanced ability to switch between left- and rightbrained modes of experiencing. Activity in the “left brain” gives rise to a personalized sense of “self”: I am a husband, a son, a writer. Activity in the right gives rise to our sense of orientation in space and thus the space we occupy. The modification of the meditator’s sense of “self” can therefore be understood in terms of the shift from
32
R. Toomey
purely left brain (ego centered) to a mix of left and right. Her research suggests that the way meditation sharply focuses one’s attention is an important aspect of this shift. Attention is primarily a right-brain function; therefore, meditation precipitates a shift to right-brain thinking and in doing so allows one to escape from “the confines of an ego centric existence and the possibility of an expanded awareness beyond mere ‘self’” (Nataraja, 2008). From a neuropsychological perspective, Newberg and d’Aquili (2008) suggest that it is the decrease in activity in both orientation association areas that gives rise to dissolving the self/non-self-boundary, and the development of a sense of connectedness with all things. Notwithstanding the different explanations from these two perspectives, both support the possibility, by including regular meditation practice in a VbE program, of moving one from an “I” position to a “We” position. That is, regular meditation as part of a VbE program, arguably, has the potential to create mindsets that are more holistic, intuitive, creative, empathic, compassionate, and wise and thus find the root causes of our life-or-death challenge anathema. Finally, Siegel et al. (2016), a psychiatrist, shows by way of case studies about his patients, how from an interpersonal neurobiological perspective there are additional “mental disciplines” to Mindfulness that can be cultivated to assist one to move from “I” to “We.” The three pillars of such mind training practices include • Strengthening focused attention • Open awareness • Kind intention Research reveals that when these three aspects of mind are trained, many positive changes occur, including the stabilizing of attention, the increase in our receptivity to the experience of being aware, and the enhancement of our care for our inner selves and for the well-being of others. His hugely popular “Wheel of Awareness” approach (https://drdansiegel.com/wheel-of-awareness/) to what he calls Mindsight (a mindfulness on steroids approach to meditation) has been shown to have a dramatic effect on retrieving lapsed right-brain function. According to him, Mindfulness can be considered as more than simply focusing attention on the present moment or even regulating one’s emotions. In the Mindsight sense, mindfulness involves an internal stance of positive regard and openness to things as they are. It is a way of being in the world: it is both a quality of focusing attention on the here and now, as well as on another person, with a stance of positive regard. It is a way of repurposing the brain so that patterns of “energy” and “information” “fire” and “rewire” right-brain functioning. Mindsight is the way we can focus attention on the nature of the internal world. It’s how we focus our awareness on ourselves, so our own thoughts and feelings, and it’s how we’re able to actually focus on the internal world of someone else. So, at a very minimum, it’s how we have insight into ourselves, and empathy for others. But Mindsight is more than just an understanding. Mindsight gives us the tools to monitor the internal world with more clarity and depth, and also to modify that internal world with more power and strength. So, in all these ways, Mindsight is a construct that’s a bit larger than insight. It’s even larger than
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
33
mindfulness, because it’s really not just about being present moment to moment, but it’s about being present so you monitor what’s going on, but then modify what’s happening. (Siegel, 2022, https://www.psychalive.org/what-is-mindsight-an-interview-with-dr-dansiegel/)
This resonates strongly with the metaphor previously offered about “self” being better conceived as a plural verb emerging over time. It also resonates strongly with the spiritual idea of interconnectedness. But it also begs the question about what needs to happen to enable one to nourish the spiritual self: what are the relevant selfmanagement techniques? The list now provided by the experts, Siegel et al. (2016) and Culliford (2011) among them, is lengthy: • Play a nonverbal communication game of copying someone else’s facial expression and guessing the emotion. • Play the nonverbal communication game of watching TV with the sound off and letting your brain “fill-in the blank.” • Journal about your day in pictures/smells/sounds to help activate the senses. • Try drawing using different sides of the brain (he recommends some books on the topic). • Journaling emotions. • Find words that depict your internal world. • Make “mindmaps” of our self and our relationship with others – how we see ourselves and our relations with others. • Tense and release certain muscle groups to become aware of them. • Have someone say “no” in a harsh tone and then a nice “yes” several times and discussing how it feels when both words are said to you. And as Culliford (this handbook) reminds us, “benefits accrue incrementally over time, devolving also onto teachers, parents, families and communities” because of our interconnectedness.
Education Practice Redefined The second way neuroscience is suggesting that we can nourish spiritual development is by changing education practice: emphasize activities that promote ways of thinking rather than what one should know. For instance, Hart (2014), drawing on neuroscience research, suggests broadening what is meant by, and needed for, education by projecting a view of the mind that is broader than that assumed by the predominant model of education described earlier, which is largely based on an education that emphasizes facts, measurement, control, predictability, reduction, and the like. This approach, he argues, is particularly short-sighted and dangerous in a world desperately in need of an integrated education for the creative and mindful thought required to meet the challenges we face today. From his standpoint, it is not a case of us needing less reason or information or skills but rather that we need more
34
R. Toomey
depth. He proposes that there are two fundamental ways of knowing the world: categorical knowledge – knowing through abstraction, separating the known from us, and knowing through contact – a direct and relational way of knowing that recognizes wholeness and connections. His view is that the latter better positions us to manage the challenges presently facing humankind. This latter form of knowledge is very similar to the way McGilchrist (2009) speaks about the ways of knowing with regard to literature and art. When one looks at, say, a piece of art, then reads the panel beside it that tells one about the artist and other details, he suggests that one is engaging in that form of categorical knowledge. However, if one ignores the panel and just takes the work in, so to speak, one engages a different kind of knowing: knowledge through contact, a direct form of knowing that is relational, embodied, and a form that recognizes wholes and connections. It has a sense of the spiritual about it: a sense of oneness that others have noted in an educational context. Knowing my students and my subject depends heavily on self- knowledge. When I do not know myself I cannot know who my students are. I will see them through a glass darkly, in the shadows of my unexamined life- and when I cannot see them clearly I cannot teach them well. When I do not know myself I cannot know my subject – not at the deepest levels of embodied personal meaning. I will know it only abstractly, from a distance, a congeries of concepts as far removed from the world as I am from personal truth. (Palmer, 2007, p.103)
Immordino-Yang (2020, 2021), a former high school science teacher-turned neuroscientist, and her colleagues at the University of Southern California’s Centre for Affective Neuroscience, Development, Learning and Education are currently inching us forward toward a better understanding of what is going on in the brain with regard to acquiring knowledge that is relational, embodied, and a form that recognizes wholes and connections. She goes beyond this to point out that it also vitally involves an emotional dimension. As a way of advancing her now well-established neurobiological work on the intersection of learning and emotion, Immordino-Yang’s (2016) recent longitudinal study seeks to reveal how the neural systems involved in forging that intersection get repurposed into systems that give rise to, and create dispositions toward, moral and ethical issues. She calls this “transcendent thinking.” The work had a fundamental premise that human beings, especially adolescents, construct internal narratives about the world and their experiences in it. Narrative identity has substantial literature and comprises an evolving representation of oneself through time. It is developed as an individual integrates the recollection of past life experiences with imagined future experiences, and this narrative identity provides an individual with a sense of self-continuity and purpose (McAdams, 2008). Her recent study uses data drawn from conversations with teenagers that revolved around matters important to them like how they choose their friends, thought about their parents, and how they saw their current schooling as contributing to their future; what academic subjects they enjoyed most and why; why gang violence
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
35
exists in their neighborhood and what could improve the situation; and how they feel when learning about true stories about selfless and heroic efforts of people. Such data over time proved to have the capacity to reveal insight into adolescent meaningmaking about the substance of the conversations. The study revealed two subtly distinct types of narrative: concrete narratives and abstract narratives. By way of illustration, Immordino-Yang and Knecht (2021) reiterate the comments from two adolescents in answer to the question about why gang violence exists in their neighborhood and what could improve the situation. Comment 1: “Why does it happen? Because they take actions or do things that don’t benefit them. They just get caught up in the moment . . .” Comment 2: “ . . . [Violence] is a cycle. Like if you really look at it . . . it happens probably because their family is in a gang and they just follow it ‘cause that’s their role models, where they came from . . .” (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020, p. 11)
The subtle distinction between comment 1 (a “concrete” narrative in Immordino-Yang’s terms, which addresses the “here-and-now” or “there-andthen”), and comment 2 (an “abstract” narrative) is that the latter incorporates reflections that transcend what is directly observable in a situation. Her term for the latter is transcendent thinking: somewhat synonymous with spiritual and “We” mindset mentioned earlier. Moreover, the brain scans also revealed that of all the adolescents in the longitudinal study, those who were ultimately “high flyers” in terms of academic achievement and self-actualization toward the end of the study showed a capacity to move from a “concrete” to “abstract” pattern of meaning-making. The researchers were able to track the coordinated activation across networks in the brain to show that getting from “concrete” to “abstract” involves whole-brain neural “cross-talk” that is at once both cognitive and emotional as well as tuned into “basic survival processes, in essence making the thinker feel more alive, like their work is personal, and like what they think and do matters.” Immordino-Yang and her collaborators (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2021) subsequently speculate about how education practice might be redefined to enable such transcendent thinking in all adolescents. They argue that any appropriate program’s structure should empower adolescents to build strong relationships with peers, staff, and the content they are exploring together in-depth. It should provide opportunities for students to choose and pursue open-ended, project-based coursework, and then leverage student interest to broaden exposure to new knowledge, concepts, skills, and questions. Ultimately, it should expect and support students “to make sense of all that they are discovering through writing, problem solving, dialogue, and reflection, culminating in presentations and defences of extended performance-based assessments in front of panels of teachers, external evaluators, and other students.” They argue that this kind of approach-rather than a predominant focus on testing-creates the conditions for adolescents to connect their emotional selves to their burgeoning intellects. Concrete and
36
R. Toomey abstract narrative construction occurs in demanding yet pro-social school wide and classspecific cultures. (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2021, p. 11)
Such practices are more likely to produce the “depth of knowing” advocated by Hart (2014) than the “categorical knowledge” that is gained in more predominant educational approaches. Moreover, they closely resemble some of the practices adopted by the best practice schools in VEGPSP. In the earlier edition of the International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, we called these instructional scaffolding techniques. See, for example, Devine (this handbook), Tooth (2010), and Toomey (2010).
Conclusion We set out with the intention of attempting to bolster support for claims made over a decade ago about how VbE might first contribute to enhancing students’ spiritual development and second comprise a pedagogy better suited to our times. While the “new” values pedagogy has proved to be enormously durable over the past 10 or so years, in light of the above discussion, its effects would be enhanced if regular openmonitored meditation practices, and right-brain development exercises along the lines of those outlined above, accompanied its implementation. From the standpoint of VbE being a pedagogy better suited to our times, we have situated that issue within the context of the need for education to address, and play some role in helping to redress the life-or-death challenges we presently face. In that regard, we shall have to find ways to raise, teach, and educate (in its broadest sense of to draw out of) young people who are capable of thinking about complex critical problems along with their social implications. We shall need to develop in young people skills for thinking together with people who are different from themselves and for appreciating diverse perspectives. They will need skills that enable them to think in morally responsible ways, creative ways, about how to see the life-or-death challenges as opportunities for collaborative problem-solving. If Immordino-Yang and her colleagues are correct, VbE might usefully repurpose its instructional scaffolding techniques as we called them a decade ago (Toomey, 2010). Reframe them so that they become more open-ended, project-based tasks specifically focussed on those ethical dilemmas mentioned at the outset: the re-emergence of feudalism through ever-increasing social, cultural, and religious conflict; human rights infringement; ecological degradation; politics without principles; and business without morality. In the process, by incorporating guided discovery techniques (Bruner, 1961), teachers could leverage student interest to broaden exposure to new knowledge, concepts, skills, and questions in ways Dewey (1938) recommended: making learning experiences centered around student interests and developing socially responsible citizens. So, it seems VbE has great potential to help redress the life-or-death challenges we presently face. The vital issue now becomes how to increase uptake.
2
Values-Based Education for a Better World
37
References Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2011). Australian professional standards for teachers. AITSL. Bergemann, E., Siwegel, D., Eichenstein, D., & Streit, E. (2011). Neuroscience and spirituality. In J. Wentzel van Huyssten & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Search of self – Interdisciplinary perspectives on personhood. William Erdmans Publishing. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32. Bryk, A. (2002). Trust in schools. Russel Sage Foundation. Culliford, L. (2011). The psychology of spirituality: An introduction. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Culliford, L. (2014). The meaning of life diagram: A framework for a developmental path from birth to spiritual maturity. Journal of the Study of Spirituality, 4(1), 31–44. Damasio, A. (2003). Finding Spinoza, joy, sorrow and the feeling brain. Harcourt. DEST. (2003). Values education study (Executive summary final report). Curriculum Corporation. DEST. (2006). Implementing the national framework for values education in Australian schools (Report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project – Stage 1: Final report, September 2006). Curriculum Corporation. DEST. (2008). Implementing the national framework for values education in Australian schools (Report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project – Stage 2: Final report). Curriculum Corporation. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan. Einstein, A. (1972). As cited in the New York Times, March 29, p. 1. Farmer, R., & Farmer, S. (2015). Handbook for teachers in human values education. Australian Business Printers. Firth, J., et al. (2019). The “online brain”: How the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry, 18(2), 117–224. Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. Bantam Books. Hart, T. (2014). The integrative mind. Rowman and Littlefield. https://www.monash.edu/education/teachspace/articles/five-approaches-for-creating-traumainformed-classrooms Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016). Emotions learning and the brain. W.W. Norton. Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Knecht, D. R. (2020). Building meaning builds teens’ brains. Educational Leadership, 77(8), 36–43. Lovat, T., & Toomey, R. (2009). Values education and quality teaching: The double helix effect. Springer. Lovat, T., Toomey, R., Clement, N., Crotty, R., & Nielsen, T. (2009). Values education, quality teaching and service learning. David Barlow Publishing. Manne, A. (2015). The life of I. Melbourne University Press. McAdams, D. P. (2008). Personal narratives and the life story. Guilford Press. McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary. Yale University Press. Nataraja, S. (2008). The blissful brain: Neuroscience and proof of the power of meditation. Gaia Books Ltd. Newberg, A., & d’Aquili, D. G. (2008). Why god won’t go away. Ballantine books. Newmann, F. M., et al. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass. Obama, B. (2020). A promised land. Viking. Palmer, P. (2007). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. Jossey Bass. Porges, S. (2011). The polyvagal theory – Neurophysiological foundations of emotions, attachment, communication and self-regulation. W.W. Norton. Riveros, R., & Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2021). Toward a neuropsychology of spiritual development in adolescence. Adolescent Research Review, 6, 323–332.
38
R. Toomey
Rowson, J., & McGilchrist, I. (2013) Divided brain: Divided world. Action Research Centre. https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/blogs/rsa-divided-brain-divided-world.pdf Siegel, D. (2022). Attachment, mindfulness, neuroscience and self-development. PsychAlive. https://www.psychalive.org/what-is-mindsight-an-interview-with-dr-dan-siegel/ Siegel, D., Siegel, M., & Parker, S. (2016). Internal education and the roots of resilience: Relationships and reflection as the new R’s of education. In K. A. Schonert-Reichl & R. Roeser (Eds.), Handbook on mindfulness in education. Springer. Toomey, R. (2006). Values as the centrepiece of the school’s work. Curriculum Corporation. Toomey, R. (2010). Values education, instructional scaffolding and student wellbeing. In T. Lovat et al. (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 19–36). Springer. Tooth, R. (2010). Using a new body/mind place-based narrative to teach values education in an age of sustainability. In T. Lovat et al. (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing. Springer.
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values Neville Clement
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Impact of Schools on Student Wellbeing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher Support and Caring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . School Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . School Connectedness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Synthesis of Influences and the Relationship of Student Wellbeing to Academic Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Values Education and Student Wellbeing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Why Neurobiology? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brain Lateralization: One Brain or Two? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Emotion and Cognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attachment, Resilience, Safety, and Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Epigenetics, Brain Plasticity, and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40 41 41 42 43 44 45 47 48 49 50 51 53 54 57 59 59 60
Abstract
The actualization of values at school contributes to student wellbeing as evidenced by their flourishing cognitively, affectively, socially, physically, and spiritually. This chapter is in two sections: the first reviews literature on student wellbeing at school, and the second reviews literature from neuroscience relevant to issues raised in the first section. The first section, “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values”, begins with a summary of an earlier examination by the N. Clement (*) The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_3
39
40
N. Clement
author of characteristics related to student wellbeing at school. These characteristics included the impact of schools on student wellbeing at school, teacher support and caring, school climate, and school connectedness. A synthesis of these characteristics examined motivation and the relation between student wellbeing and academic achievement. Additionally, the relationship between values education and student wellbeing was examined. These findings are updated from later literature and the centrality of the socioemotional wellbeing of students emerged as a dominant consideration in regard to student wellbeing at school. The second section, “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School”, explores literature from neuroscience in relation to the nature of student wellbeing at school as it relates to the coaction of cognitive, affective, physiological, and social aspects. This includes topics like the incorporation of insights from neuroscience into educational theory; brain lateralization; emotion and cognition; attachment, resilience, safety, and trust; and epigenetics, brain plasticity, and development. These insights contribute to an enriched understanding of a values pedagogy that promotes student wellbeing at school through the values that are actualized. Keywords
Student wellbeing · Values education · Educational neuroscience · Socioemotional learning · Safety at school · Dynamic development
Introduction Student wellbeing at school is an expansive topic embracing personal, interpersonal, wider social and environmental aspects. Basically, it relates to the sense of security that a student has and the quality and capacity of the school environment to provide an appropriate and supportive space for the experience-dependent development of its students affectively, academically, spiritually, socially, culturally, and environmentally. The creation of such a space is impelled and actualized by the dynamic coaction of the character, values, and behaviors of all the stakeholders that comprise and animate the social relationships and the organizational structures that make a school. Numerous studies indicate that student wellbeing at school is enhanced by values education, whatever its mode or form, that creates the learning and social ambience that it envisages. In other words, student wellbeing at school is enriched by a values education practice where students are immersed in a school experience that implicitly reflects and aligns with the values that are explicitly practiced, espoused, and taught. Examples of this manner of learning regime are ably illustrated and described in the chapters of this volume and the previous edition of this volume (Lovat et al., 2010), and in “values-based education” as elucidated by Lovat et al. (2010, 2011). An underlying premise is that values are endemic to schools, education, and learning: “schools are not values-free or values-neutral zones of social and educational engagement” (DEST, 2003). Hence, the values that are actualized and the way
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
41
they are actualized are of extreme importance for student wellbeing at school. Furthermore, wellbeing in this chapter is understood as an embracive term encompassing the mental, social, and physical welfare of students (Amholt et al., 2020), their interplay with the biosphere (Narvaez, 2015), and their flourishing, which includes the spiritual dimension (Clement, 2010). Although this chapter does not explicitly address spirituality, it assumes that spirituality is implicit in the values professed and enacted, existential questions (Gardner, 2000) associated with learning, and issues relating to the sense of safety and security felt by students and staff.
Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values Student wellbeing at school is reflected in the emotional–social development and the interpersonal transactions that occur at school as well as their engagement in learning as supported by broad school characteristics addressed in the literature: the impact of schools on student wellbeing; teacher support and caring; school climate and student wellbeing; and school connectedness (Clement, 2010). Additionally, there is the question of an association between student wellbeing and academic achievement, as well as the influence of values education on student wellbeing. This section, “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values”, will summarize the content of the 2010 chapter in relation to these topics and supplement the summary with reference to subsequent literature.
The Impact of Schools on Student Wellbeing The impact of schools on student wellbeing is well described by the extensive research in secondary schools in Flanders, Belgium (e.g., Engels et al., 2004; Opdenakker & Van Damme, 2000; Van Petegem, 2008). Schools were found to have an impact on student academic achievement, wellbeing, and motivation (Opdenakker & Van Damme, 2000). Engels et al. (2004) found that attributes such as positive behavior, “atmosphere at school,” student agency (or intrinsic motivation), teacher instructional support and encouragement, “the infrastructure and facilities” are all variables impacting on student wellbeing. Furthermore, the importance of positive values is evidenced in student–teacher relationships, student friendships, and expectations being clearly communicated. Again, Van Petegem (2008) found that aspects like teacher relationships, classroom characteristics, student motivation, and liking for school impact on student wellbeing. Interestingly, Opdenakker and Van Damme (2000) found that school and class contributed 19.6% and 23.2%, respectively, to student achievement in Maths and 32.5% and 23.2% for the Dutch language (Table 1, p. 174), whereas the wellbeing factors indicated that only 5–11% of variance could be attributed to school and class (p. 175). Later research by Govorova et al. (2020) analyzed 2015 data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) across OECD countries to assess the influence of schools on student subjective wellbeing across cognitive, psychological, material, and social dimensions. The study identified those aspects of
42
N. Clement
wellbeing that affected student science achievement and the magnitude of school effect on student wellbeing. The cognitive, psychological, and social aspects have an affective component given the inclusion of constructs like “enjoyment of science” and “interest in science” in the cognitive wellbeing scale; “achievement motivation” and “test and learning anxiety” in the psychological wellbeing scale; and “enjoy cooperation” in the social wellbeing scale. Also, schools did not have a large part in reduction in test anxiety. At the OECD level, girls experienced more test anxiety than boys, but had higher scores on cooperation and achievement motivation. Gross school effect on science achievement across OECD schools was 39% (ranging between 5% and 62.1% [Govorova et al. 2020, Table 7, p. 10]). School effects explained only 9% of perceived wellbeing, with the highest of 9% for “cognitive wellbeing and with “test anxiety” being at 8% (p. 7). Also, they observed that test anxiety reduced science performance by as much as 12 points. Govorova et al. (2020) point to the need for schools to integrate socioemotional development within “a comprehensive approach to education” (p. 12). The association between student wellbeing and academic achievement is discussed below.
Teacher Support and Caring Teacher support and caring impacts on student wellbeing at school, thus influencing the social and personal development of students and their academic progress and achievement. Teacher support affects emotional security, especially for young students (e.g., Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Thijs & Koomen, 2008). Lee (2007) found that the teacher–student trust relationship has an indirect impact on academic performance as mediated by school adjustment and academic motivation. Osterman (2000) provides insight into the importance of teacher caring and support: “teacher support has the most direct impact on student engagement” (p. 344, also Osterman, 2010). Furthermore, teacher support and caring includes the pedagogical competence of teachers (Gläser-Zikuda & Fuß, 2008; Osterman, 2010) and the pedagogical strategies they employ (Osterman, 2010). Teachers matter for student wellbeing through relationships of attunement and synchrony, and support across areas like behavior, self-regulation, and learning, to name a few (for a more comprehensive list, see Osher et al., 2020). Osher et al. (2020) also note the importance of teacher wellbeing. A literature review by Wentzel (2016) summarizes the multiple aspects of the student–teacher relationship thus: [Teacher] relationship qualities are believed to support the development of students’ emotional well-being and positive sense of self, motivational orientations for social and academic outcomes, and actual social and academic skills. (p. 301)
Other studies emphasize the importance of student–teacher attachment. The modeling of Govorova et al. (2020) on the 2015 PISA data found that teacher support is the school-level variable most strongly related to student wellbeing, and
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
43
reduced test anxiety in 7 of the 10 countries where it was significant. Furthermore, the PISA data showed that instructional approaches impact on science performance and student wellbeing. Teacher-directed learning was associated with higher science performance, enjoyment of science, and being positively disposed to cooperation. On the other hand, predominantly inquiry-based learning was associated with student self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, with a reduction in exam anxiety and a raising of achievement motivation. Teacher-directed learning was positively associated with cognitive wellbeing and cooperation in 19 of the OECD countries, and inquiry-based learning with cognitive wellbeing in 17 countries (Govorova et al., 2020 , p. 10). Additionally, Cantor et al. (2019) and Darling-Hammond et al. (2020) emphasize the importance of secure attachment for the social-emotional development and academic progress of students. Bergin and Bergin (2009) understand attachment as being foundational to socioemotional wellbeing. It influences success at school “indirectly through attachment to parents, and directly through attachment to teachers and school” (Bergin & Bergin, 2009, p. 141). Teacher emotional support or caring has been associated with student self-concept, emotional wellbeing, the buffering of anxiety and stress, the pursuit of classroom goals, academic achievement, and the way students function socially; whereas perceived lack of support or negative relationships have been associated with distress or anxiety (Wentzel, 2016). Besides teaching subject content, teachers can have a role in student socialization (Dally, 2010; Lovat & Dally, 2018). In their cross-lagged study of student–teacher relatedness in relation to the reading achievement of at-risk secondary students in Singapore, Caleon and Wui (2019) found that teacher trust predicted reading achievement. Nevertheless, there were reciprocal negative correlations between reading achievement and student–teacher communication possibly indicating reluctance of students with low achievement to share difficulties and ideas with teachers. The authors conclude that the study supports the importance of positive teacher–student relationships for student achievement. This study makes a similar observation to those of Opdenakker and Van Damme (2000) and Wentzel (2016) that students of different ability levels respond to different kinds of support given by teachers, thereby indicating the need for teachers to be attuned to their students and to vary their pedagogical strategy accordingly. Trust and the associated sense of safety and security are foundational to student wellbeing and have importance for school climate.
School Climate Fundamental to a school climate that promotes student wellbeing is a culture that cultivates and facilitates trust (see Bryk & Schneider, 2002). Opdenakker and Van Damme (2000) found that positive effects of “communitarian climate” can have positive effects on student motivation and interest in learning. In short, the juxtaposition between academic interest and the communal spirit is a false dichotomy, with both being necessary for student wellbeing (e.g., Lee & Smith, 1999; Opdenakker &
44
N. Clement
Van Damme, 2000; Phillips, 1997; Newmann et al., 1996). A survey of literature on the association between a supportive school community and student academic achievement concludes: In short, the literature establishes that indicators like relational trust, supportive relationships and networks, social capital, school climate, collective teacher efficacy, and academic emphasis impact on student wellbeing and even their academic achievement. (Clement, 2010, p. 47)
These items together indicate that student growth and maturation are nurtured by “a socially and academically positive and supportive climate” (Clement, 2010, p. 47). Aldridge and McChesney (2018), using a mixed methods literature review of 48 articles published between 2000 and 2017, found that 46 of these indicated a relationship between school climate and adolescent mental health. They concluded that there was strong evidence that school climate influenced student mental health as evidenced by “positive relationships with teachers and peers,” “positive perceptions of school safety,” “positive perceptions of school connectedness,” along with a highly demanding academic environment (p. 131). Furthermore, two of the studies included in the review indicated that the relationship between adolescent perception of the school climate and their psychosocial wellbeing was mediated by their resilience (Aldridge & McChesney, 2018). The effect of school climate is related to socioemotional development, resilience, safety and security at school, and the social and cultural factors that are among the influences on student development considered in the section “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School.”
School Connectedness School connectedness, the perception by students that they feel as if they belong to and find support at school, is important because positive relationships at school affect student wellbeing in diverse ways: it is protective of at-risk behaviors and conduct problems including substance abuse (Resnick et al., 1997; Bond et al., 2007); it has mental and physical health repercussions (Rowe et al., 2007); and it contributes to student prosocial engagement and personal development, academic achievement, motivation and agency at school, and more positive estimates of self and others (Osterman, 2000, 2010). For students from high-poverty schools, academic achievement, positive motives, and attitude were associated with higher levels of school connectedness (Anderman, 2002). The research of Battistich et al. (1995) of the multilevel analysis of the relationship between student sense of school community (school connectedness), poverty level, and student characteristics indicated that student sense of community influences a wide range of student inclinations, and social and personal attitudes including whether or not they like school, their academic motivation, altruistic behavior, prosocial motivation, and conflict resolution skill. The meta-analysis by Allen et al. (2018) of 51 studies between 1993 and 2013 involving 67,378 students analyzed 10 different themes relating to school belonging,
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
45
with studies from the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. They found that teacher support (r ¼ 0.46) and personal characteristics (conscientiousness, optimism, and self-esteem, r ¼ 0.44) were the strongest predictors of a sense of school belonging on the part of students. These were stronger than emotional stability (r ¼ 0.35), parental support (r ¼ 0.33), peer support (r ¼ 0.32), environmental/school safety (r ¼ 0.32), or academic motivation (r ¼ 0.31). A weak association between gender and school belonging was found (r ¼ 0.18). Race/ethnicity and extracurricular activities were found not to be significant (Allen et al., 2018, Table 3). Another meta-analysis by Korpershoek et al. (2020) of 82 quantitative studies published between 2000 and 2018 of “the relationships between school belonging and students’ motivational, social-emotional, behavioural and academic outcomes” confirms the importance of school belonging for students (p. 641). The correlation between school belonging and student characteristics was small for academic achievement (r ¼ 0.18) and absence/dropout rates (r ¼ 0.16), but moderate for “motivational outcomes” (r ¼ 0.30), “perceived learning environment” (r ¼ 0.39), “behavioral engagement” (r ¼ 0.36), “educational aspirations/attitudes” (r ¼ 0.29), and self-perception (r ¼ 0.37 [Korpershoek et al., 2020, Table 2]). An Australian study by Parker et al. (2021) using data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Youth (LSAY) of 49,232 participants between 2003 and 2015 found that low levels of school belonging was a predictor of an emerging adult not participating in education, employment, or training after leaving school. Along with the previously mentioned aspects of school life, the connection that students feel they have with school affects their socioemotional development. In turn, this affects their attitude to being at school as well as their engagement with learning, not only at school, but their engagement in post-school formal learning as well (Parker et al., 2021).
Synthesis of Influences and the Relationship of Student Wellbeing to Academic Achievement What emerges from the analysis of the impact of schools on student wellbeing, teacher support and caring, school climate and wellbeing, and school connectedness is the importance of student motivation in student wellbeing and academic achievement. Student motivation was found to be variously impacted by student–teacher trust, moral and social education, teacher caring, connectedness to school, and classroom climate. Student motivation even emerged as being a mediator of various factors relating to student wellbeing and academic achievement (see Clement, 2010 for references). Govorova et al. (2020) confirm that “achievement motivation,” an indicator in the psychological dimension, was a good predictor of science performance. Furthermore, along with “enjoy cooperation,” “achievement motivation” has a positive relationship with the cognitive dimension in most of the OECD countries; however, with a weaker impact (Govorova et al., 2020). Given that motivation featured as both a predictor and mediator of both student wellbeing and academic achievement in a range of studies, the question of a link between student wellbeing and academic achievement will be considered.
46
N. Clement
A systematic literature review by Amholt et al. (2020) proposes that selfdetermination theory (STD; Deci & Ryan, 2012) is a metatheory that provides the link between social and contextual wellbeing factors that facilitate student motivation for academic achievement (cf. Kaya & Erdem, 2021). Amholt et al. (2020) examined 22 journal articles published between January 1, 2007, and June 1, 2017, and concluded that the research yielded ambiguous results. Nonetheless, prospects for investigating such an association are provided by aspects like social relationships; contextual factors; the vitality of the learning environment created by teachers, including the relationships of students with their teachers and peers; and student positive emotions (Amholt et al., 2020). Furthermore, Amholt et al. (2020) suggest that the association between student wellbeing and academic achievement appears to be more so for younger students and might suggest diverging developmental paths for academic achievement and student wellbeing during secondary schooling and further education. Herke et al. (2019) noted a decline in student wellbeing between grades 5 and 12. Furthermore, Kaya & Erdem, 2021 reported that as students progressed from elementary schooling to postgraduate education the effect of student wellbeing on academic achievement also declined from ES ¼ 0.19 for elementary students to ES ¼ 0.09 for graduate students. Also, Kaya and Erdem (2021) observed that reported effect sizes of the association between student wellbeing and academic achievement decreased with the increase in publication year. The two groundbreaking meta-analyses of the association of student wellbeing and academic achievement, by Bücker et al. (2018), and Kaya and Erdem (2021) have been published since the collection period of the Amholt et al. (2020) sample. Both studies report small-to-moderate effect sizes, and that differences between the components of subjective wellbeing (Bücker et al., 2018) or the wellbeing domains as operationalized by Kaya and Erdem (2021) did not reach statistical significance. Bücker et al. (2018) point out that the low correlations between student wellbeing and academic achievement indicate that the level of achievement is not necessarily correlated with the level of perceived subjective wellbeing. Bücker et al. (2018) speculate as to the way that any association between student wellbeing and academic achievement might be theorized: a causal effect of academic achievement on student wellbeing; a causal effect of student wellbeing on academic achievement; or both student wellbeing and academic achievement are influenced by a common variable. Kaya and Erdem (2021) purport that their results support SDT as the theoretical basis for the association of student wellbeing and academic achievement, which is the second possibility. They refer to Adler (2017), who provides evidence that teaching wellbeing raised both student wellbeing and their academic achievement. Support for the third alternative is suggested by the reporting of metaanalyses of highly heterogeneous distribution of effect sizes (Bücker et al., 2018; Kaya & Erdem, 2021). Bücker et al. (2018) suggest that this could indicate the possibility of a common third variable moderating the relation between student wellbeing and academic achievement. Steinmayr et al. (2018) found that after controlling for other variables, school climate, the worry component of test anxiety and self-efficacy predicted subjective wellbeing and/or academic achievement. Furthermore, Steinmayr et al. (2018) assert that the phenomenon of student wellbeing is
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
47
multicausal and not limited to one factor. A fourth possibility is a bidirectional interplay between student wellbeing and academic achievement, and this is an area for further investigation (see Bortes et al., 2021). One Australian study by Cárdenas et al. (2022), which takes into account issues listed by Amholt et al. (2020), tested the effect of student subjective wellbeing (depression, anxiety, and positive affect) on high school students’ (Grade 9, N ~ 3400) results on standardized tests of the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). After controlling for 40 confounding variables, measures of subjective wellbeing taken 7–8 months before the test were predictive of higher scores on Numeracy and those who indicated greater depression had lower test scores on Numeracy and Reading. Each of the studies cited in relation to the association between student wellbeing and academic achievement attests to an effect of student wellbeing on academic achievement; however, there is considerable variation the way in which wellbeing is conceptualized and measured and that makes comparison of the different studies difficult. Nevertheless, Bücker et al. (2018), Cárdenas et al. (2022), and Kaya and Erdem (2021) identify a positive association between student wellbeing and academic achievement, but the nature of that association is open to further investigation. Apart from its association with academic achievement, student wellbeing is important in its own right because of its influence on life beyond school (Adler, 2017).
Values Education and Student Wellbeing An overlap in research in the fields of values education and student wellbeing is evidenced by the use by researchers in both groups of “indicators such as student motivation and engagement, student self-concept/esteem, teacher-student relationships, and student sense of belonging to school” (Clement, 2010, p. 51; e.g., Benninga et al., 2003, 2006; Engels et al., 2004). Benninga et al. (2003) found a small correlation between certain indicators of the implementation of character education and academic achievement in elementary schools in California between 1991 and 2002. In their analysis of the pedagogical potency of service learning, Lovat and Clement (2016) cited evidence, which indicated that service learning had beneficial effects on academic achievement, cognitive development, and social development. The latter was evidenced by the breaking down of cultural barriers as well as on moral awareness, attitudes toward civic engagement and social responsibilities. The integration of best practice pedagogy with values education has positive benefits for both student wellbeing and their academic progress (e.g., Lovat & Clement, 2008; Lovat & Toomey, 2009; Lovat & Hawkes, 2013). Positive outcomes for student wellbeing resulting from the implementation of values-based approach were observed in an evaluation of the Australian Government’s Values Education Good Practice Schools Project (VEGPSP; Lovat et al., 2009; Lovat & Dally, 2018). Indicators of student wellbeing as a result of values education included responsible and inclusive behavior, student engagement, improved self-regulation and selfappraisal, enhanced self-esteem, and school climate. These reports indicate that
48
N. Clement
values education had effects for students and teachers at individual, classroom, and the whole school (Dally, 2010; Lovat et al., 2009; Lovat & Dally, 2018). Furthermore, Lovat and Dally (2018) note the effect of values education on the capacity of students to reflect on their moral choices and so align their behavior with the values being learnt. Additionally, Lovat and Dally cite evidence of student growth in selfregulation in making moral choices. Moreover, Toomey (2010) reports that the instructional scaffolding of student action teams (SATs), where students were involved in making decisions and taking action in regard to community issues that they consider to be important, produced improvement in wellbeing indicators such as resilience, engagement with school, realization of full potential, academic diligence, more peaceful classrooms, more trusting students, and improved playground behavior. Toomey’s assessment is that the SATs contributed to students’ ability to engage in more complex thinking, higher order thinking, and thinking more deeply. Furthermore, in order for student voices to develop, teachers found that they needed to allow the freedom of self-expression to students. Thus, Toomey (2010) observes that teacher change facilitates student change and “promotes student agency and wellbeing” (p. 28). Also, the VEGPSP Stage 1 Report (DEST, 2006) makes reference to the “ripple down effect” of changes in teacher classroom management strategies on student behavior, with this increased repertoire of classroom management options being gained from professional development (see Lovat, 2010; Toomey, 2010). Classrooms and schools were calmer through the implementation of a values-based pedagogy, with a policy of a whole school approach (DEST, 2006). Sankey (2006) maintains that student experience is not affected only explicitly (consciously) but also implicitly (subconsciously) in the shaping of the brain and the unconscious initiation of behavior and action. The importance of this will become more evident in the discussion of the neurobiological substrates provided below. More recent publications headed by Marvin Berkowitz have produced a framework of six foundational principles incorporating 42 different practices to character education. The analysis furnished affirms an overlap between effective character education and academic education in contributing to the positive development of students (cf. Davidson et al., 2010). Although the framework does not formally reference student wellbeing, there are practices listed that serve as indicators of student wellbeing, including “Trust in teachers,” “Caring classrooms,” and “Safe environment,” among others (Berkowitz & Bier, 2014; Berkowitz et al., 2017; also Berkowitz et al., Chapter 5, this Handbook; Bier et al., Chapter 26, this Handbook). Values-education is an influence that shapes the environment in which students learn and develop and so is among epigenetic influences on their development as discussed below.
Summary Student wellbeing at school arises from those values that are embedded in the various characteristics of school life and experience, including school policy;
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
49
curriculum explicit and implicit; pedagogical practices; and the quality of the relationships between all stakeholders associated with the school. Diverse valuesimbued characteristics in school education underpin student wellbeing: Student wellbeing cannot be attained or maintained apart from attention to values and their actualization in the educational setting, beginning with the valuing of students. (Clement, 2010, p. 55)
The various school characteristics discussed in this analysis relating to the impact of schools on student wellbeing at school all underscore that emotional and social factors are an influential part of student school experience and the way they approach learning. It is hard to disentangle “hard core” academic content from the socialemotional features. This is especially demonstrated in the analysis of the 2015 PISA data by Govorova et al. (2020), where the data indicate associations between student wellbeing and school-based aspects like pedagogical approach and teacher caring, and science performance. It demonstrates that what has been traditionally considered cognitive learning cannot be dissociated from socioemotional learning. Furthermore, an existential element is suggested in the scales related to motivation and enjoyment, which indicate emotional engagement or lack thereof. Socioemotional learning and increased academic diligence are outcomes of values education (Dally, 2010; Lovat & Dally, 2018; Lovat et al., 2011). As established in the section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values,” teaching and learning is a social transactional process in which students and teachers together learn to communicate in an environment that is safe and not stressful (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Felner et al., 2007; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Understanding the neurobiological dynamics that enable learning, which animate the observed behavior within the teaching–learning context, provides a perspective that extends beyond behavioral observations alone (Fischer, 2009; Immordino-Yang, 2016a, b; Immordino-Yang & Gotlieb, 2017; Thomas et al., 2019). Findings from neuroscience point to those biological resources that are operational in the actualization of student wellbeing and furnish a deeper understanding of the dynamic interplay between the spiritual, social, personal, and physical that together frame the environment in which student wellbeing at school is realized.
Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School The section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values” identified a range of material, social, and personal characteristics that combine dynamically to affect student wellbeing at school, with the social and emotional aspects of teaching and learning coming to the fore. This section, “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School”, will identify certain pertinent neurobiological substrates that further elucidate the phenomena identified in the section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values.” For the sake of clarity, these are grouped under four headings, with each topic being of equal importance and intertwined with the others. These topics
50
N. Clement
are: brain lateralization; emotion and cognition; attachment, resilience, safety, and trust; and epigenetics and neural plasticity. A companion chapter explores similar questions in relation to six salient themes in values education (Clement, 2023). First, however, the relevance of neurobiology (or neuroscience) to this endeavor will be argued.
Why Neurobiology? Neurobiology informs educational practice via the conduit of educational theory (Clement & Lovat, 2012; Immordino-Yang, 2016b). There are several reasons why neuroscience is important to education, in general, and the current chapter, in particular. First, neuroscience supplies direct knowledge of brain functioning rather than relying on inferences in the absence of direct knowledge of brain functioning. This extends knowledge beyond observable behavior to include the identification of underlying neural functions and, thus, provides further insight into effective educational practice (Immordino-Yang & Gotlieb, 2017; Thomas, 2019). Second, the section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values” identified the importance of socioemotional learning for student wellbeing, neuroscience furnishes insight into the social and emotional dynamics engaged in learning (ImmordinoYang, 2016b; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Third, not only does neuroscience give awareness into what is happening in the brain of a single person, the development of two-person neuroscanning techniques allows the observation of two-person interpersonal transactions and the right brain to right brain nonverbal communication between them (Dumas, 2011; Schore, 2019b). This is relevant both to socioemotional learning and understanding the role of the nonverbal in interpersonal communication. Fourth, there is the growing emphasis in neuroscience, psychology, and psychiatry on “‘the primacy of affect’ – that right brain affective processes” operate below consciousness and increasing attention is being given to the role of affect in human development within a social environment (Schore, 2019a, p. 157; cf. McGilchrist, 2009/2019). As a result, the model of psychological wellbeing is being grounded in emotional wellbeing rather than cognitive wellbeing (Schore, 2019a). Coinciding with the attention on affect is an “interest in a theoretical organizing principle” of self-regulation, which is essential to “emotional processes” (Schore, 2019a, p. 158). The implications of the changing conceptions impelled by neuroscience, especially in relation to the primacy of affect, were flagged in the journal article by neuroeducationalist (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007) entitled “We Feel Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education.” Although this was by no means the first publication to propose that knowledge of brain function made possible by neuroscience was relevant to education, it encompassed a range of implications of neuroscience for educational theory. In effect it indicates a change of emphasis from one that majored in formal cognitive stages (see Rose & Fischer, 2009), to one that builds on the socioemotional development of students so as to better understand the dynamics of those biological capacities co-opted in learning. Its contribution in calling for such a
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
51
reconceptualization was to explain that the dynamic coaction of the neural processes relating to sociality, cognition, affect, and the regulation of the body could not be assigned to discrete and unrelated neural processes. Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007) explain that without a realistic understanding of the emotional (affective) and social processes that combine in the brain as a foreground to learning, then there would, most likely, be a misconception of the priority and interplay of the various processes that were regulated by the brain in fulfilling its central function in optimizing survival and facilitating our flourishing: [T]hose of us in the field of education often fail to consider that the high-level cognitive skills taught in schools, including reasoning, decision making and processes related to language, reading, and mathematics, do not function as rational, disembodied systems, somehow influenced by but detached from emotion and the body. (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007, p. 3)
The substance of what Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007) are saying is that although we might think about emotion, cognition, and the body as being different aspects of our personhood, there is, in fact, a fundamental biological relationship between them in regard to neural processes that are employed in learning and include rational thought, high reason, creativity, decision-making, and memory. The central function of the brain is the management of physiology, the optimization of survival, and allowing our flourishing (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007, p. 4; cf. Barrett, 2017b). Additionally, Immordino-Yang and Damasio indicate that moral reasoning and creativity are embedded within the affective processes that underpin cognition and social behavior. Hence, the perspective neuroscience offers is unique in identifying those processes that contribute to the wellbeing of students at school and the way that values are interwoven through the context in which learning occurs. The interplay of the personal and interpersonal, together with the social, cultural, spiritual, and physical aspects outlined by Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007), serves to create the sense of what it is like to be at school for all stakeholders, particularly the students. As psychologist-psychoanalyst Allan Schore (2012) observes, in a dynamic system like the one just outlined, regulation becomes a touch point for an integrative approach. This opens the door to an educational theory that is instantiated in integrative educational practice that accommodates the multifaceted experiencedependent nature of student development and learning.
Brain Lateralization: One Brain or Two? The nature and structure of the brain provides insight into the actualization of values. Philosopher-psychiatrist McGilchrist’s (2009/2019) thought-provoking and extensive study of the two different natures of the right hemisphere (RH) and left hemisphere (LH) of the brain concludes that they are asymmetrical, have decidedly different ontologies and sets of values, and deliver two different “versions” of the world both of which are credible. Importantly, although both hemispheres are “involved in everything we do,” there are differences in how each hemisphere
52
N. Clement
functions (p. x, cf. p. 93). Some differences relevant to the substance of this chapter are the RH is associated with the body and emotion prioritizing “what is close, what is ‘mine’” (p. 91), whereas the LH has “the peaceful detachment from the material realm” and “emptying out” associated with mystical experience (p. 92); the RH is the locus of nonverbal communication and the LH with more explicit forms of communication; the RH processes the implicit and the LH the explicit, and it is the task of the LH to render the implicit as an object of “clarity and fixity” (p. 181); the RH is immersed in the relationship between itself and the experience of the world, while the LH abstracts and re-presents experience and therefore is “explicit, abstracted, compartmentalized, fragmented, static . . . essentially lifeless” (p. 93); the RH has an affinity for metaphor, which “underlies all forms of understanding whatsoever,” whereas the LH has an incapacity for it (p. 71, author italics); the RH is quick to detect deceit because of its affinity with the nonverbal; and the RH gives the feeling of connectedness to experience, whereas the LH provides the feeling of detachment from the world but power in relation to it. Furthermore, moral values, which like color are irreducible to another kind of experience, moral judgment, and sense of justice, are the domain of the RH (with the inclusion of the left amygdala). Also the RH mediates social behavior. Additionally, the RH has superior emotional perception, and as the specialist in nonverbal communication it “picks up subtle clues and meanings” to understand the thinking and feelings of others (McGilchrist, 2009/2019, p. 71). Bowlby (1969, cited in Schore, 2019a, p. 161), Schore (2019a, p. 161), and neurophysiologist Stephen Porges (2011, 2015, 2017) attribute the nonverbal facial expressions, prosodic voice and touch and gestures as nonverbal cues of safety, which are operative in the formation of the attachment bond, and, particularly for Porges, in the establishment and maintenance of social relationship central to our sense of safety, thus calming our “neural defence systems” (2015, p. 115). Another important feature of the brain is the capacity of “necessary distance” from immediate experience that is double edged in that it is capable of either exploitation or empathy (McGilchrist, 2009/2019). Also, this distancing enables the recognition of patterns and allows us to see ourselves as others do (McGilchrist, 2009/2019). To be able to distance ourselves from the world and even our own thoughts, actions, feelings, and emotions, and to reflect is fundamental to the learning associated with values education, as in the instances of reflection on experience or on impulse to act referenced in the section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values” (Lovat et al., 2011; Lovat & Clement, 2016; Lovat & Dally, 2018). Of importance in the consideration of the actualization of values is that moral values, moral judgment, the mediation of social behavior, and the expression and interpretation of nonverbal behavior all have their locus in the RH (McGilchrist 2009/2019). Thus, when it comes to the actualization of values we should not be surprised at the alignment of moral values and judgment, as mediated through social (interpersonal) behavior and finding expression through implicit, nonverbal behavior. There needs to be congruence between the explicit and implicit enactment and communication of values because the RH will intuitively pick up on discrepancies between them (McGilchrist 2009/2019, pp. 70–72). The foregoing depiction of the differing functions of the right and left hemispheres of the brain deepens the
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
53
understanding of the different roles of the explicit and implicit in the actualization of values in promoting student wellbeing at school. Also, it has relevance for the discussion of attachment and resilience, safety (security), and trust below.
Emotion and Cognition The language around emotion can be confusing because the word “emotion” can be used to denote conscious emotional feelings as well as underlying affect. In the interest of being explicit, a distinction will be made between “feelings of emotion,” which are usually conscious, and “emotion,” which is an underlying process (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007), otherwise referred to as “core affect” by psychologists Seth Duncan and Lisa Feldman Barrett (2007). “[C]ore affect makes external information from the world personally relevant to people . . .” (Duncan & Barrett, 2007, p. 1196). Also, the brain gives meaning to sensations from the body that can result in an instance of an emotional feeling (Barrett, 2017a, p. 67). Furthermore, “emotions recruit survival-related neural mechanisms and shift cognitive processing,” whereas “emotional feelings are, in essence cognitive interpretations of changes in body and mental states” (Immordino-Yang & Gotlieb, 2017, p. 349s). McGilchrist (2009/2019) observes that affect (emotion) is implicit and does not come from explicit (conscious) cognitive process but rather reason emerges from emotion, hence “the primacy of affect” (pp. 184–186; cf. Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007; Schore, 2012, 2019a). Duncan and Barrett (2007) explain that in times past it was assumed that cognition was the domain of the cortex and affect the domain of the subcortical area of the brain and impenetrable by the cognitive. In other words, the conception was that cognition and emotion were different neural circuits with emotion being the province of the subcortical to be inhibited by prefrontal cognition upon the emotional response of the subcortex to sensory input. On the contrary, recent neuroscience has shown this not to be the case, but, rather, the cognitive and the affective interact throughout various networks of the brain (Duncan & Barrett, 2007, pp. 1187–1188). The frontal regions of the brain, traditionally associated with cognition, are also involved in processing sensory information both from within and outside the body and guide responses to external objects (Duncan & Barrett, 2007, p. 1190). Although thinking and feeling might be experienced differently, they are not different kinds of phenomena, and, therefore, they are not ontologically distinct, “but they are actually two sides of the same coin” (Duncan & Barrett, 2007, p. 1202). When it comes to brain functioning, “thinking and feeling are not distinct in the brain” (Barrett, 2017a, p. 223). Even though they might be experienced in different ways, a distinction in experience does not equate to a difference in brain structure or the psychological processes producing the experience (Duncan & Barrett, 2007, p. 1201). Thinking and feeling are inseparably intertwined: There is no such thing as “non-affective thought”. Affect plays a role in perception and cognition, even when people cannot feel its influence. (Duncan & Barrett, 2007, p. 1185)
54
N. Clement
Our range of behaviors and patterns of thinking are tied to and exist “in the service of emotional goals,” and creativity provides the means of surviving and flourishing in sociocultural complexities (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007, p. 7). Furthermore, Immordino-Yang and Damasio point out logical reasoning and rational thought are not devoid of emotion and that minimizing the emotional component in education could result in the diminution of the capacity of students to apply their knowledge in novel real-world situation because emotion gives sense and meaning to real-world experience (cf. Duncan & Barrett, 2007; Immordino-Yang, 2008, 2016b). Nevertheless, our emotional assessments do not occur in a vacuum but are guided by one’s “conceptual system” forged from the experience of the everyday; however, one has the capacity to modify and shape one’s conceptual system (Barrett, 2017a). Learning, both explicit and implicit, is a highly emotional experience (Schore, 2019a, p. 256; Immordino-Yang, 2008, 2016b), and there is interplay between learning, emotion, and body state (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007). Of importance to values education is that emotion, cognition (high reason), creativity, and social functioning together are involved in ethical decisions (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007). Teachers induce the power of emotions in learning when they assist students to find meaning and purpose in the subject studied and in applying it to real-world situations (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007). While every subject matter is abstract and emotionally sterile, students will find it hard to find it meaningful and difficult to creatively apply in real-world situations (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007; Immordino-Yang, 2008, 2016b). This would suggest there is an existential dimension of meaning-making on the part of the student that is inherent in their engagement in learning. Moreover, Immordino-Yang (2008) maintains that learning involves students internalizing a teacher’s actions, including emotions, and then playing them out as if they were their own. Furthermore, intuitive feelings generated from experience become stepping stones to explicit knowledge (Immordino-Yang & Faeth, 2016; cf. McGilchrist, 2009/2019). Reason apart from emotion is flawed; reason works in conjunction with emotion whether advantageous or nefarious (Damasio, 1994/2006). The engagement of emotions in learning also applies to values education and the actualization of values because values are “taught” through the emotional valencies that accompany the everyday interpersonal transactions that occur in the classroom and school life, as well as in the practice of explicit values education. Student wellbeing is promoted when the values that students experience and actualize in their everyday school life are the “curriculum” for values education, where students are given the opportunity to discuss and reflect on their actual behaviors (Lovat et al., 2011; Lovat & Dally, 2018).
Attachment, Resilience, Safety, and Trust Attachment, resilience, safety, and trust are aspects of wellbeing mentioned in the literature cited in the section “Student wellbeing and the Actualization of Values,” and are the groundwork of student wellbeing at school. The importance of these aspects of wellbeing is emphasized in neurobiological literature. Psychiatrist and ethologist John Bowlby (1988/2005), who is associated with the origin of attachment theory,
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
55
emphasized the need for the provision by parents of “a secure base” from which children and adolescents can explore the world and one which would welcome, nourish, comfort, and reassure them, and as a child proceeds through life new attachment figures are likely to be sought. A secure base is foundational for secure attachment. His work has been interpreted and extended in the light of interpersonal neurobiology with two of those being Allan Schore (2009, 2012, 2019a, b), in his work on the development and function of the right brain; and Porges (2011, 2015, 2017), in the Polyvagal Theory, which, in turn, has been applied to child development by pediatrician-neonatologist (Sanders & Thompson, 2021). According to Schore (2019a, b), secure attachment arises from an intimate relationship between an infant and the primary caregiver (usually the mother). The security of this relationship is the genesis of: a sense of security; emotional selfregulation; the development of the emotional brain (the right brain); resilience to stress and novelty; flexibility in coping with the stress and novelty in human relationships; creativity; trust; safety and positive curiosity to explore “novel socioemotional and physical environments”; internal models of relationships that can be lifelong; and emotional wellbeing. Through right brain to right brain, nonverbal communication of the primary caregiver and the infant the emotion circuits of an infant are shaped in early critical periods of brain development, and generate internal working models used by the subjective self in navigating the social world. Moreover, socioemotional development is indelibly affected by attachment coactions during the critical periods of development (Schore, 2019a, b). Secure attachment predisposes emotional wellbeing in later life, whereas attachment trauma is “growth inhibiting” and has enduring effects on the development of the right brain and future mental health (Schore, 2019a). Attachment extends beyond the provision of a secure base: “it is the essential matrix for creating a right brain self that can regulate its own internal states and external relationships” (Schore, 2012, p. 44, italics added). The attachment style, forged in the early years of life, continues throughout life unconsciously mediating interpersonal events (Schore, 2019a). The emotional brain is structured by early relationships with long-term consequences for a person’s emotional wellbeing (Schore, 2019b). It is through the nurturance of caregivers that one develops emotionally so as to feel comfortable with one’s own emotions and respond in a healthful way to social situations, making the most of joyful times and implicitly trusting that one can cope in tough times (Schore, 2019b). Furthermore, a sense of security involves knowing that one has the emotional and physical resources to cope with stress from life (Schore, 2019b). Thus, affective self-regulation, knowing how to feel secure and resilience, has a common source in a secure relationship between an infant and the primary caregiver. It is within the attachment relationship that the beginnings of self-regulation are learnt (Schore, 2019a, b), and, in turn, engagement in learning at school is dependent upon self-regulation (e.g., Cantor et al., 2019; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019; Osher et al., 2020). Also, attachment, an unconscious right brain dynamic, mediates interpersonal and personal aspects of regulation of relationships, particularly intimate relationships (Schore 2019a). The importance of attachment style for teacher–student relationships was indicated in the discussion of teacher caring and support in the section “Student wellbeing and the Actualization of Values.”
56
N. Clement
For Porges (2015), safety is more than removing the threat of danger; it is actively providing those “features of safety that our nervous system craves” (p. 115). Also, a student’s sense of safety is critical for “optimal social behavior” and their accessing those brain regions associated with creativity and generativity (p. 115). Rather than being “a structural model of the environment,” safety is defined dynamically as “a visceral sensitivity model evaluating shifts in the neural regulation of autonomic state” and, thus, provides a different conception for evaluating behavior (2017, p. 44). Hence, the provision of a secure base at school, where those features of safety are actualized, provides opportunity for students to advance in emotional selfregulation and resilience, and it is essential for students to feel safe and be able to develop socially, emotionally, academically, and spiritually (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019; Porges, 2015). Emotional resilience is foundational to feelings of trust and security and is “the capacity to transition from positive emotions to negative emotions and back to positive emotions” (Schore, 2019b, p. 226). Cantor et al. (2019, citing Masten & Cicchetti, 2016) point out that resilience is not a permanent property of an individual, but rather is dynamic and “emerges through coaction with contextual, supportive, and relational factors” (p. 325). For children facing adversity, resilience is nurtured through a supportive, responsive, and stable relationship with an adult (Cantor et al., 2019). Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007) draw attention to the interwoven relationship between the body state (its health and welfare), emotion, and learning. The physiological state of the body varies with the sense of safety because cues of safety or danger unconsciously elicit attendant physiological and emotional states as described by Porges (2011, 2015, 2017) in the Polyvagal Theory. Pivotal to this theory is the notion of neuroception, which refers to an unconscious process in the brain that detects threat or safety and, accordingly, triggers changes in the body’s physiology (Porges, 2011, 2015, 2017; cf. Duncan & Barrett, 2007, above). According to Porges, detection of safety or danger elicits one of three neurobiological responses: a prosocial disposition in the case of neuroception of safety; or in the instance of neuroception of life threat, either one of two defense responses. These defense responses are either the arousal response of the fight/flight state or the response of the freeze state typified by immobilization and dissociation. If the neuroception is of safety, then warmth in nonverbal communication associated with social engagement will result in downregulation of defensiveness and evoke a sense of safety. Neuroception can be faulty, leading to attribution of safety where there is risk or of risk where there is safety. Trauma can distort neuroception negatively by changing response thresholds by disrupting the sense of safety. Spontaneous behavior is understood to be adaptive and contextual but can be maladaptive or inappropriate in the case of faulty neuroception. Porges (2017) explains that changing maladaptive behaviors involves a reflective process and developing neural structures needed for resilience and safety. (NB: this process could need therapeutic intervention and support by a professional.) Outcomes reflect aspirational values like being compassionate and loving or being self-oriented (Porges, 2017; cf. Porges & Dana, 2018). Seeking novelty is indicative of an inner security and knowing how to return to feeling safe and usually having strong networks of social support (Porges, 2017).
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
57
Porges (2017) points out that the same classroom can be a safe place for some students, yet others are in a hypervigilant state alert to triggers of threat. This means that the cues of safety need to replace triggers of threat. Examples of cues of safety are being close to safe people, reducing low-frequency noise, and reducing unpredictability (cf. van der Kolk, 2015). Behaviors of students lacking a sense of safety can be mistaken for those of attention-deficit disorder and so understanding the neurophysiology of behavior can assist teachers in interpreting student behavior (Sanders & Thompson, 2021). As Sanders and Thompson (2021) explain, feeling safe serves two educational goals: “move them [students] towards learning” and “move them towards emotional wellbeing” (p. 178). Students who are dysregulated are unlikely to engage in learning or have a sense of wellbeing, and Sanders and Thompson (2021) observe that teachers who are aware of the relationship between behavior and physiological states are able to make more appropriate responses for the benefit of their students. Moderate levels of emotional arousal align with a sense of safety and are optimal for learning since they dispose of the engaging of left brain analytical and logical cognitive processes that are otherwise unavailable in emotionally dysregulated states (Ogden, 2018; Porges, 2017; Sanders & Thompson, 2021; Schore, 2012). Furthermore, Porges (2017) explains that “specific neural exercises . . . provide opportunities to optimize the regulation of physiological state” (p. 19). Neural exercises are instances of social engagement like choral singing, being in an orchestra, or playing with another at recess, providing opportunity for co-regulation, and developing student self-regulation. Conversely, Porges suggests that any reduction in opportunities for neural exercises in favor of more seatwork may disrupt efficient processing of information and the rise in oppositional behaviors (2017, pp. 119–121). Ideally schools are an environment where students can flourish as they develop and learn and for this to occur schools need to be a secure base where students feel safe. Various aspects of neurobiology support the identification and deepen the understanding of school characteristics that together support a sense of safety at school: attachment styles of students and teachers; the proactive enactment of cues of safety, as well as the removal of all threats of physical, psychological, spiritual, and environmental danger; and the cultivation of stable relationships to further the development of resilience in the presence of stress or novelty as students actively explore and encounter the world around them. Any activity associated with the enactment of each of these aspects involves the actualization of values. Safety of the learning environment, social engagement, improved interpersonal relationships, and self-management of behavior are promoted through values education and the actualization of values (see Lovat & Dally, 2018).
Epigenetics, Brain Plasticity, and Development Learning and development are only possible because of the plasticity and malleability of the brain (e.g., Cantor et al., 2019; Doige, 2008; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Brain malleability and plasticity is activated by social interplay and emotional drivers, and the school years are among the heightened periods in life of brain
58
N. Clement
change (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Because of the plasticity and malleability of the brain, the quality of relationships and the learning environment shape student development and learning (Osher et al., 2020). This represents a changed perception from the nature–nurture antithesis to a nature–nurture synthesis. Former conceptualizations have been challenged in the light of evidence from the social and biological sciences regarding epigenesis with an understanding of the importance of the qualitative nature of development (Fischer & Biddle, 2006). What is supplied by nature is shaped and nurtured primarily by the social environment, but also by the physical environment. Hence, the valency of dominant values instantiated and the demeanor in which they are actualized in interpersonal and wider social interplay are of extreme importance because they have an epigenetic influence, particularly of the experience-dependent development of students and their wellbeing aspects (e.g., Diamond, 2009; Fischer & Biddle, 2006; Immordino-Yang, 2016b; Schore, 2012). Epigenetics refers to those environmental triggers that turn gene expression on or off that are not the result of changes in the gene itself: “epi” refer to those influences “over” or “above” the gene that affect the way that the gene is expressed through cell function, without changing the actual DNA (Lester et al., 2016). Our genetic endowment alone is insufficient to account for the development of our physical, behavioral, psychological, cognitive, emotional, and social development, and the apparent deficit in genetic information gives rise to need and capacity for “socially mediated learning” (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019, p. 187), that is, through family, school, and community otherwise known as epigenetic “forces” or “processes” (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019; cf. Cantor et al., 2019). This means that to become fully functional humans need adequate social interplay and learning across family, school, and community (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Thus, genes are not the “prime movers” of development but rather followers (Lerner & Overton, 2017), and so present challenges to traditional step-wise conceptions of child development (e.g., Cantor et al., 2019; Lerner & Overton, 2017; Osher et al., 2020). Rather, development is perceived as a dynamic interplay between gene and environment and, therefore, not reducible to genetic endowment alone (Cantor et al., 2019; Diamond, 2009; Fischer & Biddle, 2006; Lerner & Overton, 2017; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019; Osher et al., 2020). Epigenetic influences include all that comprises the ecology, the biosphere with all its diversity, and the human ideologies that influence human development (Narvaez, 2015); one’s conceptual system (Barrett, 2017a); the school and learning environment including the pedagogy (Cantor et al., 2019; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Immordino-Yang et al., 2019; Osher et al., 2020; Rose & Fischer, 2009); warm human emotions, the challenge of cognitive engagement, and socioemotional interplay in general (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019); the influence of parenting on an infant (Matas et al., 2016; Schore, 2019a, b); emotional synchrony and attunement, and right brain to right brain communications (Schore, 2019a, b); history and culture (Lester et al., 2016); socioeconomic status (Bates et al., 2013; Loft & Waldfogel, 2021; Tooley et al., 2021); the valency of experience (Tooley et al., 2021); and, very importantly, the brain itself (Doige, 2008). If the necessary epigenetic resources for healthy development are not in place, then the development and wellbeing of the
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
59
young is impaired by isolation and deprivations, such as social disadvantage in its multiple forms, or a deficit in the essential emotional support that underpins development (e.g., Bates et al., 2013; Loft & Waldfogel, 2021; Rijk et al., 2010). Evidence from the biological sciences regarding the role of the environment, especially the social environment, heavily underscores the importance of the socioemotional dimension of student wellbeing discussed in the section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values.” The science of epigenetics demonstrates that the nature of the learning environment has a decided influence on the experience-dependent development of students and so influences their brain development. As part of the learning environment, the values enacted in the school matter in terms of student wellbeing at school.
Summary The section “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School” has proposed that the incorporation of relevant findings of neurobiology enriches educational theory and contributes to the understanding of the importance of the actualization of values in order to promote student wellbeing. The information provided in the section “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School” is in relation to the reconceptualization of educational theory and should not be regarded as being adequate information for the implementation of therapeutic or specialist interventions that need appropriate professional involvement or support. Deployment of robust educational theory into educational practice requires honed skills and practices that are proper to their task and supported through appropriate teacher professional development and ongoing support.
Conclusion This chapter has explored the nature of student wellbeing at school, incorporating both behavioral and neurobiological aspects. Central to the argument of the chapter is that values become observable and experienced in the everyday enactments that constitute students’ experience of learning. Socioemotional dynamics are embedded in those experiences both explicitly and implicitly. The revisiting of school characteristics pertinent to student wellbeing at school in the section “Student Wellbeing and the Actualization of Values” exposed the common thread of the importance of socioemotional factors in shaping the experience of school for students and in contributing to their academic achievement. Furthermore, the difficulty in disentangling “hard core” academic content from socioemotional development was noted, and, in fact, characteristics of student subjective wellbeing are predictors of academic achievement (e.g., Cárdenas et al., 2022). The section “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School” explored neurobiological substrates that animate and support student wellbeing at the school with a view to informing educational theory and practice. Several points of note emerge from this
60
N. Clement
exploration. One relates to the recognition of the pervading role and function of emotion (affect) in regulating the neural processes engaged by teaching and learning, like judgment, creativity, memory, reason and moral reasoning, and also behavior (Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007). Furthermore, the work of Schore (2019a, b) demonstrates the role of positive role of emotional synchrony and attunement in nonverbal right brain to right brain communication in the development of the brain and self-regulation. Rather than typifying emotion as a disruptor of conscious cognition, it needs to be understood that emotion musters the body’s resources necessary to engage in conscious cognition, and requires the appropriate body state and emotional state for that to happen (Barrett, 2017a; Immordino-Yang & Damasio, 2007; McGilchrist, 2009/2019; Schore, 2012). Students need to be able to talk to teachers and others about what they learn as well as negotiate the help or clarification they need. Socioemotional learning and learning subject content are intertwined. Another point covered in the section “Neurobiology and Student Wellbeing at School” relates to the superseding of the nature–nurture dichotomy with the realization that development is driven by gene–environment interplay. This forefronts the role of the social environment and the values enacted within it, on student development. Consequently, there is little within the educational environment that does not impact the development of students and their wellbeing at school in some way. Additionally, knowledge of brain lateralization reinforces the need for alignment between the implicit and the explicit communication of values because it is most likely that the implicit will trump the explicit in any instance of incongruence. Student wellbeing is served when students are socially engaged and feel safe enough to explore the novel, face challenges as they learn new and novel content, and adapt to the rhythms of emotional regulation that are characteristic of resilience. There is no such thing as a “values-free zone”: values are actualized in the everyday experience of students at school, and these values will have a positive or negative valency. Values are enacted in all areas of the curriculum, including the hidden curriculum, and are operative in creating school and classroom environments. Therefore, the quality of student wellbeing at school will be affected by the quality of the values that are actualized in school life. Values-based pedagogies have shown this to be the case.
References Adler, A. (2017). Well-being and academic achievement: Towards a new evidence-based educational paradigm. In M. A. White, G. R. Slemp, & A. S. Murray (Eds.), Future directions in wellbeing: Education, organizations and policy (pp. 203–208). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-319-56889-8_35 Aldridge, J. M., & McChesney, K. (2018). The relationships between school climate and adolescent mental health and wellbeing: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Research, 88, 121–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.01.012 Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2018). What schools need to know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9389-8
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
61
Amholt, T. T., Dammeyer, J., Carter, R., & Niclasen, J. (2020). Psychological well-being and academic achievement among school-aged children: A systematic review. Child Indicators Research, 13(5), 1523–1548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-020-09725-9 Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 795–809. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.795 Barrett, L. F. (2017a). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Barrett, L. F. (2017b). The theory of constructed emotion: An active inference account of interoception and categorization. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsw154 Bates, T. C., Lewis, G. J., & Weiss, A. (2013). Childhood socioeconomic status amplifies genetic effects on adult intelligence. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2111–2116. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0956797613488394 Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Kim, D., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1995). Schools as communities, poverty levels of student populations, and students’ attitudes, motives, and performance: A multilevel analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 627–658. https://doi.org/ 10.3102/00028312032003627 Benninga, J. S., Berkowitz, M. W., Kuehn, P., & Smith, K. (2003). The relationship of character education implementation and academic achievement in elementary schools. Journal of Research in Character Education, 1(1), 19–31. https://www.proquest.com/ Benninga, J. S., Berkowitz, M. W., Kuehn, P., & Smith, K. (2006). Character and academics: What good schools do. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(6), 448–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 003172170608700610 Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. (2009). Attachment in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 21(2), 141–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9104-0 Berkowitz, M. W., & Bier, M. C. (2014). Research-based fundamentals of the effective promotion of character development in schools. In L. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (2nd ed., pp. 248–260). Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203114896 Berkowitz, M. W., Bier, M. C., & McCauley, B. (2017). Toward a science of character education. Journal of Character Education, 13(1), 33–51. https://www.proquest.com Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., & Patton, G. (2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcomes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(4), 357.e9–357.e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013 Bortes, C., Ragnarsson, S., Strandh, M., & Petersen, S. (2021). The bidirectional relationship between subjective well-being and academic achievement in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50(5), 992–1002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01413-3 Bowlby, J. (2005). A secure base. Routledge. (Original work published 1988). Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation. Bücker, S., Nuraydin, S., Simonsmeier, B. A., Schneider, M., & Luhmann, M. (2018). Subjective well-being and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 74, 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.02.007 Caleon, I. S., & Wui, M. G. L. (2019). The cross-lagged relations between teacher-student relatedness and reading achievement of academically at-risk students. Journal of Early Adolescence, 39(5), 717–744. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431618797016 Cantor, P., Osher, D., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2019). Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context. Applied Developmental Science, 23(4), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649 Cárdenas, D., Lattimore, F., Steinberg, D., & Reynolds, K. J. (2022). Youth well-being predicts later academic success. Scientific Reports, 12, 2134. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05780-0 Clement, N. (2010). Student wellbeing at school: The actualization of values in education. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values
62
N. Clement
education and student wellbeing (pp. 37–62). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-4818675-4_3 Clement, N. (2023). Reimagining values education: Six salient concepts. In D. Rayson (Ed.), Education, religion, and ethics – a scholarly collection. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-031-24719-4_4 Clement, N. D., & Lovat, T. (2012). Neuroscience and education: Issues and challenges for curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(4), 534–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012. 00602.x Dally, K. (2010). A teacher’s duty: An examination of the short-term impact of values education on Australian primary school teachers and students. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 503–520). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_29 Damasio, A. (2006). Descartes’ error. Vintage. (Original publication 1994). Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791 Davidson, M. L., Khmelkov, V., & Lickona, T. (2010). The power of character: Needed for, and developed from, teaching and learning. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 427–454). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_26 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. In Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 416–436). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n21 DEST. (2003). Values education study: Executive summary final report. [Electronic resource] Prepared by Curriculum Corporation Australia for The Australian Government Department of Education Science and Training] (1863665781). PANDORA electronic collection. Issue. http:// nla.gov.au/nla.arc-49201 DEST. (2006). Implementing the national framework for values education in Australian schools [electronic resource]. Report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project [prepared by Vic Zbar, Curriculum Corporation Australia and The Austratian Government Department of Education Science and Training] (0642776393). PANDORA electronic collection. Issue. http:// nla.gov.au/nla.arc-75153 Diamond, A. (2009). The interplay of biology and the environment broadly defined. Developmental Psychology, 45(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014601 Doige, N. (2008). The brain that changes itself: Stories of personal triumph from the frontiers of brain science. Scribe. Dumas, G. (2011). Towards a two-body neuroscience. Communicative and Integrative Biology, 4(3), 349–352. https://doi.org/10.4161/cib.4.3.15110 Duncan, S., & Barrett, L. F. (2007). Affect is a form of cognition: A neurobiological analysis. Cognition and Emotion, 21(6), 1184–1211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930701437931 Engels, N., Aelterman, A., Van Petegem, K., & Schepens, A. (2004). Factors which influence the well-being of pupils in Flemish secondary schools. Educational Studies, 30(2), 127–143. https:// doi.org/10.1080/0305569032000159787 Felner, R. D., Seitsinger, A. M., Brand, S., Burns, A. M. Y., & Bolton, N. (2007). Creating small learning communities: Lessons from the project on high-performing learning communities about “what works” in creating productive, developmentally enhancing, learning contexts. Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 209–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701621061 Fischer, K. W. (2009). Mind, brain, and education: Building a scientific groundwork for learning and teaching. Mind, Brain, and Education, 3(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X. 2008.01048.x Fischer, K. W., & Biddle, B. J. (2006). Dynamic development of thought and action. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Theoretical models of human developmet) (Vol. 1, 6th ed., pp. 313–399). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658. chpsy0107
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
63
Gardner, H. (2000). A case against spiritual intelligence. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 10(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327582IJPR1001_3 Gläser-Zikuda, M., & Fuß, S. (2008). Impact of teacher competencies on student emotions: A multimethod approach. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 136–147. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijer.2007.11.013 Govorova, E., Benítez, I., & Muñiz, J. (2020). How schools affect student well-being: A crosscultural approach in 35 OECD countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 431. https://doi.org/10. 3389/fpsyg.2020.00431 Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00301 Herke, M., Rathmann, K., & Richter, M. (2019). Trajectories of students’ well-being in secondary education in Germany and differences by social background. European Journal of Public Health, 29(5), 960–965. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckz049 Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2008). Emotions, social relationships, and the brain: Implications for the classroom. ASCD Express, 3, 20–22. http://www1.ascd.org/ascd_express/vol3/320_immordinoyang.aspx Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016a). Emotion, sociality, and the brain’s default mode network: Insights for educational practice and policy. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216656869 Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016b). Emotions, learning, and the brain: Exploring the educational implications of affective neuroscience. W.W. Norton. Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. R. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3–10. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Faeth, M. (2016). The role of emotion and skilled intuition in learning. In M. H. Immordino-Yang (Ed.), Emotions learning and the brain: Exploring the implications of affective neuroscience (pp. 93–105). W.W. Norton & Company. (Reprinted from D. A. Sousa, (Ed.), Mind, brain and education: Neuroscience implications for the classroom (pp. 66–81). Solution Tree.) Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Gotlieb, R. (2017). Embodied brains, social minds, cultural meaning: Integrating neuroscientific and educational research on social-affective development. American Educational Research Journal, 54(Suppl 1), 344S–367S. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 0002831216669780 Immordino-Yang, M. H., Darling-Hammond, L., & Krone, C. R. (2019). Nurturing nature: How brain development is inherently social and emotional, and what this means for education. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1633924 Kaya, M., & Erdem, C. (2021). Students’ well-being and academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. Child Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-021-09821-4 Korpershoek, H., Canrinus, E. T., Fokkens-Bruinsma, M., & de Boer, H. (2020). The relationships between school belonging and students’ motivational, social-emotional, behavioural, and academic outcomes in secondary education: A meta-analytic review. Research Papers in Education, 35(6), 641–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1615116 Lee, S. J. (2007). The relations between the student–teacher trust relationship and school success in the case of Korean middle schools. Educational Studies, 33(2), 209–216. https://doi.org/10. 1080/03055690601068477 Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1999). Social support and achievement for young adolescents in Chicago: The role of school academic press. American Educational Research Journal, 36(4), 907–945. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312036004907 Lerner, R. M., & Overton, W. F. (2017). Reduction to absurdity: Why epigenetics invalidates all models involving genetic reduction. Human Development, 60(2–3), 107–123. https://doi.org/ 10.1159/000477995
64
N. Clement
Lester, B. M., Conradt, E., & Marsit, C. (2016). Introduction to the special section on epigenetics. Child Development, 87(1), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12489 Loft, L., & Waldfogel, J. (2021). Socioeconomic status gradients in young children’s well-being at school. Child Development, 92(1), e91–e105. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13453 Lovat, T. (2010). The new values education: A pedagogical imperative for student wellbeing. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 3–18). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_1 Lovat, T., & Clement, N. (2008). Quality teaching and values education: Coalescing for effective learning. Journal of Moral Education, 37(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03057240701803643 Lovat, T., & Clement, N. (2016). Service learning as holistic values pedagogy. Journal of Experiential Education, 38(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825916628548 Lovat, T., & Dally, K. (2018). Testing and measuring the impact of character education on the learning environment and its outcomes. Journal of Character Education, 14(2), 1–22. Lovat, T., & Hawkes, N. (2013). Values education: A pedagogical imperative for student wellbeing. Educational Research International, 2(2), 1–6. http://www.savap.org.pk Lovat, T., & Toomey, R. (Eds.). (2009). Values education and quality teaching: The double helix effect. Springer. Lovat, T., Toomey, R., Dally, K., & Clement, N. (2009). Project to test and measure the impact of values education on student effects and school ambience. Final report for the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) by The University of Newcastle. http://www.valueseducation.edu.au/values/val_articles,8884.html Lovat, T., Toomey, R., & Clement, N. (Eds.). (2010). International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing. Springer. Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011). Values pedagogy and student achievement: Contemporary research evidence. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1563-9 Matas, E., Bock, J., & Braun, K. (2016). The impact of parent-infant interaction on epigenetic plasticity mediating synaptic adaptations in the infant brain. Psychopathology, 49(4), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1159/000448055 McGilchrist, I. (2019). The master and his emmisary: The divided brain and the making of the Western world (new expanded ed.). Yale University Press. (Original work published 2009). Narvaez, D. (2015). Understanding flourishing: Evolutionary baselines and morality. Journal of Moral Education, 44(3), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2015.1054619 Newmann, F. M., et al. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass Publishers. Ogden, P. (2018). Polyvagal theory and sensorimotor psychotherapy. In S. W. Porges & D. Dana (Eds.), Clinical applications of the polyvagal theory (pp. 34–49). W.W. Norton. Opdenakker, M. C., & Van Damme, J. (2000). Effects of schools, teaching staff and classes on achievement and well-being in secondary education: Similarities and differences between school outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(2), 165–196. https://doi. org/10.1076/0924-3453(200006)11:2;1-Q;FT165 Osher, D., Cantor, P., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2020). Drivers of human development: How relationships and context shape learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1398650 Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 323–367. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070003323 Osterman, K. F. (2010). Teacher practice and students’ sense of belonging. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 239–260). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_15 Parker, P., Allen, K, Parker, R., Guo, J., Marsh, H., Basarkod, G., & Dicke, T. (2021). School belonging predicts whether an emerging adult will be Not in Education, Employment, or Training (NEET) after school. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.31234/ osf.io/cbwph
3
Student Wellbeing at School, Neurobiology, and the Actualization of Values
65
Phillips, M. (1997). What makes schools effective? A comparison of the relationships of communitarian climate and academic climate to mathematics achievement and attendance during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 34(4), 633–662. https://doi.org/10. 3102/00028312034004633 Porges, S. W. (2011). Polyvagal theory: Neurophysiogical foundations of emotions, attachment, communication, self-regulation. W.W. Norton. Porges, S. W. (2015). Making the world safe for our children: Down-regulating defence and up-regulating social engagement to “optimise” the human experience. Children Australia, 40(2), 114–123. https://doi.org/10.1017/cha.2015.12 Porges, S. W. (2017). The pocket guide to the polyvagal theory: The transformative power of feeling safe. W.W. Norton. Porges, S. W., & Dana, D. (Eds.). (2018). Clinical applications of the polyvagal theory. W.W. Norton. Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., Tabor, J., Beuhring, T., Sieving, R. E., Shew, M., Ireland, M., Bearinger, L. H., & Udry, J. R. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm. Findings from the national longitudinal study on adolescent health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 823–832. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jama.1997.03550100049038 Rijk, C. H. A. M., Hoksbergen, R. A. C., & ter Laak, J. (2010). Development of behavioural problems in children adopted from Romania to the Netherlands, after a period of deprivation. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 7(2), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17405620802063339 Rose, T. L., & Fischer, K. W. (2009). Dynamic development: A Piagetian approach. In U. Müller, J. I. M. Carpendale, & L. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Piaget (pp. 400–421). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521898584.018 Rowe, F., Stewart, D., & Patterson, C. (2007). Promoting school connectedness through whole school approaches. Health Education, 107(6), 524–542. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 09654280710827920 Sanders, M. R., & Thompson, G. S. (2021). Polyvagal theory and the developing child. W.W. Norton. Sankey, D. (2006). The neuronal, synaptic self: Having values and making choices. Journal of Moral Education, 35(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240600681702 Schore, A. N. (2009). Right-brain affect regulation: An essential mechanism of development, trauma, dissociation and psychotherapy. In D. Foaha, D. J. Siegel, & M. F. Solomon (Eds.), The healing power of emotion: Affective neuroscience, development and clinical practice (pp. 112–144). W.W. Norton. Schore, A. N. (2012). The science of the art of psychotherapy. W.W. Norton. Schore, A. N. (2019a). The development of the unconscious mind. W.W. Norton. Schore, A. N. (2019b). Right brain psychotherapy. W.W. Norton. Steinmayr, R., Heyder, A., Naumburg, C., Michels, J., & Wirthwein, L. (2018). School-related and individual predictors of subjective well-being and academic achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2631. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02631 Thijs, J. T., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2008). Task-related interactions between kindergarten children and their teachers: The role of emotional security. Infant and Child Development, 17(2), 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.552 Thomas, M. S. C. (2019). Response to Dougherty and Robey (2018) on neuroscience and education: Enough bridge metaphors – Interdisciplinary research offers the best hope for progress. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(4), 337–340. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0963721419838252 Thomas, M. S. C., Ansari, D., & Knowland, V. C. P. (2019). Annual Research Review: Educational neuroscience: Progress and prospects. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 60(4), 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12973
66
N. Clement
Tooley, U. A., Bassett, D. S., & Mackey, A. P. (2021). Environmental influences on the pace of brain development. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 22(6), 372–384. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583021-00457-5 Toomey, R. (2010). Values education, instructional scaffolding and student wellbeing. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 19–36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_2 van der Kolk, B. (2015). The body keeps the score: Mind, brain and body in the transformation of trauma. Penguin Books. Van Petegem, K. (2008). Relationship between student, teacher and classroom characteristics and students’ school wellbeing (van Doctor in Pedagogische Wentenschappen). Universitiet Gent. https://biblio.ugent.be/input?func¼publicRecord&recordOId¼000467993 Wentzel, K. R. (2016). Teachers’ relationship with students as motivational contexts. In K. R. Wentzel & D. B. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 301–322). Springer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315773384
4
From Surviving to Thriving The Transformative Effects of Values Pedagogy Kerry Dally
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Values Education in the Australian Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cluster Context and Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cluster-Level Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . School-Level Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Program Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acquisition of Values Language and Growth in Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Changes in School Climate and Student Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parent Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Generalizing Values in the Home Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Classroom-Specific Values Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
68 70 71 71 72 72 73 73 77 79 80 81 82 83 83
Abstract
The chapter will examine the role schools play in the twenty-first century in developing more than student intellect. In order to prepare students for an increasingly interconnected world facing an uncertain future, schools are acknowledging the importance of student well-being as a prerequisite for learning and achievement. Terms such as character education, social and emotional learning, positive education, and values pedagogy have been used to describe educational frameworks that focus on developing students’ character strengths and values alongside academic outcomes. The common philosophy underlying these approaches is that optimal learning occurs in a safe, caring, and responsive school K. Dally (*) The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_4
67
68
K. Dally
environment that actively fosters individual resiliency and strengthens interpersonal relations. In Australia, the Values in Actions Schools Project (VASP) was one such approach that aimed to enhance student resilience, well-being, and learning. This chapter describes the transformative effects that occurred when a cluster of catholic schools extended their existing implicit values-based educational ethos to include more explicit strategies for teaching and modeling values. Teacher, parent, and student reflections indicated that the initiative helped to create an environment in which children could grow and flourish, not just socially, emotionally and academically, but also morally and spiritually. Keywords
Values pedagogy · Positive education · Character education · Social and emotional learning
Introduction At the start of the twenty-first century, an increasing awareness of the skills and capabilities needed to function in a rapidly changing and interconnected world precipitated an interrogation of the purpose of school education. In Australia and internationally, the goals of schooling started to shift from an instrumental and narrow focus on the teaching and acquisition of specific skills and knowledge to a conceptualization of learning as a more holistic enterprise that encompasses individual well-being and prepares students to be innovative, collaborative, and adaptable citizens of a global community (Howard, 2018). The role of the teacher in concert with the broader school environment is now understood to be crucial to students attaining successful social and academic outcomes. According to Howard (2018), “Children are on the path of human ‘becoming.’ They are in need of pedagogical relationships with teachers entrusted to lead them in search of meaningful lives and the beauty of their full potential as flourishing individuals” (p. 9). As described in the National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools (DEST, 2005), values pedagogy aims to develop students’ individual awareness and understanding of values and how to enact them. In common with approaches such as positive education (Seligman, 2018), character education (Benninga et al., 2003), and social–emotional learning (SEL) (Elias et al., 2007), values pedagogy relies on a safe and supportive school environment that provides ongoing opportunities for students to practice using values in intra- and interpersonal situations with support from strong moral role models (Lovat et al., 2011). This dual focus on the individual and the social context in which the individual functions has its origins in Aristotle’s notion of flourishing, or eudaimonia. As discussed by Gunawardena et al. (2020), Aristotle claimed that in order to live a flourishing life an individual needs to acquire an internal capacity to function well, and this capability is best fostered by favorable external circumstances under the guidance of trusted adults.
4
From Surviving to Thriving
69
The personal internalization of values and the creation of caring and responsive school environments have become the foci of twenty-first-century educational approaches and have replaced the reliance on rules and external regulation of behavior that dominated school education in the twentieth century (Flay & Allred, 2010). For values to become internalized, students need both implicit and explicit learning experiences. Thus, values pedagogy relies on implicit learning through interactions with teachers who model behaviors such as caring and respect, as well as explicit learning through values being talked about in classrooms and embedded in the curriculum (Lovat et al., 2011). In the Australian context, the nine principles that underlie the implementation of values education include the “consistent, congruent modelling of values,” “developing a shared language about values,” “being explicit about the values,” “attending to the total teaching and learning environment,” and using “a student-centred, inquiry based learning model” (DEEWR, 2008, pp. 8–9). The importance of the latter two principles and “democratic” practices such as allowing students to co-design learning activities and make choices about what and how they learn have also been recognized as crucial to the creation of a “sustaining climate” (Narvaez, 2010) and an optimal learning environment (Osterman, 2010). Recent evidence from the neurosciences has also emphasized that providing choice in autonomous learning environments helps develop the brain regions related to evaluation and decision-making (Kim, 2013). Assisting children to refine their reasoning processes and problem-solving skills is essential in the internalization and expression of values as children need to learn how to make “wise decisions” in regard to the way they act and respond, rather than following a set of externally prescribed school rules. However, although both implicit and explicit learning is crucial to students’ awareness and understanding of values and acquisition of values-inspired behavior, it is not enough to merely “know” about values. Aristotle argues that it is only through “doing the good” that values eventually can be internalized and integrated as “habitual” dispositions. By giving children opportunities to practice values and engage in discourse and reflection on their own and others’ behavior, values education helps promote the capacity of students to employ “phronesis,” that is, the practical moral wisdom required to make informed decisions based on deliberate and reasoned choices rather than acting or reacting impulsively without consideration of the consequences for oneself or others. In the Australian context, it was the salience of Guiding Principle Number 3 from the National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools (DEST, 2005) – “provision of opportunities to practice and enact the values” (p. 8) – that prompted the emergence of the Values in Action Schools Project (VASP). VASP was premised on the notion that it is through putting values into action and the ensuing reflection and discussions that both successful and unsuccessful attempts engendered that the most enduring and transformational effects of values education occurred. The remainder of this chapter describes the implementation and effects of the Values in Action Schools Project in a cluster of catholic schools. The origins and intentions of VASP are first explored, followed by the background contexts of the schools and the cluster aims and objectives. The implementation strategies employed
70
K. Dally
at both the cluster and school levels and the impact of these on teacher efficacy, school climate, parent–school relationships, and students’ social behavior and learning opportunities are then explored. Finally, implications from the results are discussed.
Values Education in the Australian Context In the Australian context, Values Education came to prominence in 2003 after the federal government initiated the Values Education Study (DEST, 2003) and the subsequent development of the National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools (DEST, 2005). The framework defined nine values and provided guidance for schools from all sectors in fostering these values as part of students’ social and moral development as well as academic achievement. In 2004, the federal government implemented the first stage of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project (VEGPSP-1). The aim of VEGPSP-1 (DEST, 2006) was to identify good practices characterizing effective implementation of values education across a range of diverse contexts. In 2006, the project was extended to encompass a second stage (VEGPSP-2), with an emphasis on the explicit teaching of values, wholeschool approaches and parent/family involvement (DEEWR, 2008). A third phase, the Values in Action Schools Project (VASP), was a national project in which clusters of schools were funded by the Australian government to design, implement, and evaluate the outcomes of high-quality values education projects. VASP was designed to further develop the evidence base for informing improved school policy and practice in values education. The implementation of the projects was guided by 10 principles of good practice that emerged from Stages 1 and 2. As outlined in the Final Report of the Values in Action Schools Project (Commonwealth of Australia, 2010, p. 5), these 10 principles were 1. Establish and consistently use a common and shared values language across the school. 2. Use pedagogies that are values-focused and student-centered within all curriculum. 3. Develop values education as an integrated curriculum concept, rather than as a program, an event or an addition to the curriculum. 4. Explicitly teach values so that students know what the values mean and how the values are lived. 5. Implicitly model values and explicitly foster the modeling of values. 6. Develop relevant and engaging values approaches connected to local and global contexts, which offer real opportunity for student agency. 7. Use values education to consciously foster intercultural understanding, social cohesion, and social inclusion. 8. Provide teachers with informed, sustained, and targeted professional learning and foster their professional collaborations.
4
From Surviving to Thriving
71
9. Encourage teachers to take risks in their approaches to values education. 10. Gather and monitor data for continuous improvement in values education.
Cluster Context and Program Implementation The VASP cluster was comprised of 10 Catholic primary schools. All schools in the cluster had a high proportion of students from low SES backgrounds, and one school had a predominantly indigenous student population. New initiatives in values education and quality teaching were combined to address the significant academic and social needs of these students. The aim of the cluster was to enhance student resilience, well-being, and learning. The VASP project sought to build on the implicit values focus underlying the philosophy and practice in catholic schools as well as existing programs and strategies already in place in many of the schools. In line with the guiding principles, the cluster adopted a dual approach of improving pedagogy and extending the schools’ current implicit values base to include more explicit strategies for teaching values. A range of effective cluster-level and schoollevel strategies were employed in the implementation of the VASP project. Though the schools in the cluster were geographically dispersed over 200 km, the cluster had already established partnerships between the schools. This existing base of shared goals and professional collaboration provided a strong foundation for the cooperative VASP activities.
Cluster-Level Strategies The cluster-level strategies included professional development in values education and pedagogical approaches for all 200 staff in the schools, the establishment of school teams and lead teachers in values education and quality pedagogy, the involvement of parents and in some cases the local community, and the networking and sharing of resources and ideas among the 10 schools via both face-to-face forums and a special Wiki site on the Diocesan Education Services Website. The success of the project was also due to the enthusiastic leadership and effective management across the entire cluster provided by the two Cluster Coordinators and Deputy Coordinator, as well as the commitment and leadership provided by the school principals and assistant principals and lead teachers. A combined staff development day resulted in the establishment of collaborative writing teams, identification of lead teachers, and the adoption of an explicit focus on the teaching of values as either a whole-school or class-level initiative. Subsequent collaborative cluster activities involving the school pedagogy and values teams included a “Residential Writing Weekend” where units of work at different grade levels were revised to embed values language and concepts through cooperative learning and problem-solving activities, and the development of specific values focusedclassroom and homework activities using resources from the VEGPSP website (DEEWR, 2005).
72
K. Dally
School-Level Strategies While the cluster shared common goals and objectives and utilized the resources and outputs produced during the collaborative staff development activities, the actual implementation of the VASP project varied in each school because of the differences in school populations, community contexts, and existing programs and activities. A number of schools adopted a whole-school approach to explicitly teaching all or some of the nine values from the National Framework (DEST, 2005), while other schools focused more intensively on specific classrooms on the values-related classroom behaviors that were essential for the implementation of the new pedagogical approaches such as cooperative learning activities and flexible teaching arrangements. The schools employed a range of strategies to make the teaching of values more explicit, including defining and describing each of the values using Y charts (what does the value look like, sound like, feel like); displaying the values in pictures, text, and photos around the school and in newsletters to parents; reinforcing the values in spontaneous interactions with students (“catch them being good”); having a “value of the week”; formal and public acknowledgment of values-related behaviors at school assemblies by the use of “values awards”; classroom reflections and discussions about student interactions and behaviors both at home and at school; developing student role plays to demonstrate the values; and dedicating specific class and homework activities to values education, such that students were required to either define, illustrate, or enact and then document a particular value. Time was allocated during staff meetings for discussion of the project, while in some of the schools, the values lead teachers also provided a “Values Pack” for their colleagues that included useful resources and visuals for teaching specific values.
Program Effects A Developmental Evaluation approach was employed to both support and evaluate the program implementation. Developmental Evaluation allows the evaluator to work collaboratively with the people implementing an innovation and provides a mechanism by which to give and gain feedback on the program and discuss how it can be improved while the project is underway (Patton, 2011). The strategies included on-site visits and face-to-face discussions with key participants; documentation and artifacts produced by individual schools; a cluster-wide survey of student and parent perspectives prior to and during the project; and student, teacher, and parent stories from the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique (Davies & Dart, 2005). MSC was chosen as the key qualitative datagathering tool for all of the VASP projects because it allowed the school communities a means of engaging in effective dialogue with the researchers and project funders in order to identify common themes across clusters in terms of program intent, impact, and possibilities for improvements (Commonwealth of Australia, 2010, p. 3).
4
From Surviving to Thriving
73
Student Surveys The schools administered surveys to students in the classes involved in the VASP initiative. The surveys were first administered in June and again in October 2009. Complete matched pre–post survey data were available for 250 Stage 2 and 3 students (Years 3–6) and 75 Early Stage 1 and Stage 1 students (Kindergarten to Year 2). The Stage 2 and 3 surveys captured five elements of student perceptions regarding Classroom Ambience (e.g., have fun learning), How I Treat Others (e.g., treat others the way you would like to be treated), Personal Responsibility (e.g., try to do the best you can), and mostly negative perceptions of Peer behavior (e.g., other kids pick on you) and Peer impact on school (e.g., other kids break school rules). Students were also asked to describe a value and give an example of when they or others had shown this value. A simplified format was used to capture three elements of Early Stage 1 and Stage 1 student perceptions regarding School Ambience (e.g., Do you like school?), My Behavior (e.g., Do you try to be nice to others?), and sense of Belonging (e.g., Do you have friends at school?). Paired samples t-tests were conducted on the student data to compare student perceptions of their own and their peers’ behavior, as well as classroom and school ambience. The results from the pre–post analysis of student surveys revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in the student responses. The lack of statistically significant differences is not surprising, given the short period of implementation and the small samples of matched data. Although the surveys were administered 4 months apart, in some schools, the VASP initiatives were only fully being realized 5–6 weeks before the follow-up data collection. The results from the quantitative survey data need to be understood and interpreted in light of the student survey comments and teacher reflections as indicated in the Most Significant Change stories.
Acquisition of Values Language and Growth in Understanding Although there were no statistically significant changes in student perceptions, there was a trend for a slight increase in scores on most of the factors with the exception of “Peer Impact on School” in the Year 3–6 surveys and “My Behavior” for students in Early Stage 1 and Stage 1. Rather than indicting an actual decline in student behavior, this downward trend in “My Behavior” may indicate that the students have become more reflective and self-critical and have “progressed” to the stage of “Conscious Incompetence” as defined by Howell (1982). Howell suggested that when new competencies are being developed individuals go through stages starting with “Unconscious Incompetence.” In this stage, individuals are unaware of the existence of a particular skill and therefore also unaware that they are not proficient in the skill, “happily naïve,” according to Howell. In terms of values acquisition, prior to the explicit teaching and clarification of the values, students may have had only a superficial or limited understanding of what it means to be kind, respectful, inclusive, etc., and therefore rated themselves highly in regard to these “naïve” understandings of the values. An advance on this stage is to progress to “Conscious
74
K. Dally
Incompetence” where individuals are now aware of the existence and importance of the undeveloped skill and also aware that they are not yet competent in enacting the skill. This stage is evidenced by teachers noting that after only a short period of explicit values education students were able to reflect on their behavior and analyze and articulate their “deficiencies” in values-related terms. As one teacher noted: “Students are discussing values that they are not yet displaying.” For example, what value are you not showing? Students respond “I wasn’t using respect.” After the explicit teaching, students had a more specific and deeper understanding of the multi-faceted nature of each value and perhaps were judging themselves against a more accurate and realistic standard. Evidence of a more sophisticated understanding was also provided by comparing the length and complexity of the descriptions of values that students wrote in the pre- and post-surveys. The average length of each example in the pre-survey was 17 words compared to 22 words per example in the post-survey. Some pre–post contrasts of the same student’s descriptions of “respect” are shown in Table 4.1. Table 4.1 Contrast between examples of “respect” from student’s pre- and post-surveys ID 106
Example of respect – pre-survey To treat people kind and loving (Year 3)
118
It is good (Year 3)
134
Listening and being kind using my manners (Year 4)
609
Most of the time treat others the way I would won’t [want] to be treated (Year 5)
711
What I think of is when you have to Respect another person and people like your parents and teachers (Year 5)
206
You should respect everyone all the time (Year 3)
Example of respect – post-survey Play nice with them, care for them and don’t call them names. Respect and people use it by calling people their real name and not calling them idiots and stuff. We been (sic) learning about respect and intergrity (sic). Intergrity (sic) as may be seen as quality of having a sense of honesty and truthfulness in regard to the motivations for ones action. Respect is being a kind person to others. Being not being mean (sic) or calling people names. That’s what respect means. Respect – When everyone respects everyone else for who they are and gets on with what they are doing. Also when people don’t tease other people. I’ve seen respect in action at school when people respect other peoples property and give there (sic) stuff back in good condition. We have to respect other people and give Respect to people [who] have there (sic) hand up and the teacher picks them and they start talking and another person is talking behind them and we have to listen to the teacher and give respect to the teacher when their (sic) talking to the class. Give the teacher respect and saying thankyou to your bus driver and lisening (sic) to the princabl [principal]
4
From Surviving to Thriving
75
These examples illustrate some of the progressions in students’ conceptualizations of what the values mean. Prior to the explicit teaching, most of the students tended to have vague notions about the values and, as indicated by the first two examples in Table 4.1, often perceived that the values meant “being good.” In the pre-surveys, generic terms such as “good,” “kind,” “nice,” “happy,” and “manners” accounted for almost half (45%) of the definitions that students provided. Similar to the last two examples in Table 4.1, 14% of students in the pre-surveys defined a value merely by restating the name of the value, while, like student 609 in Table 4.1, 9% of students recited a canon, typically “treat others as you would like to be treated.” This student’s post-survey example, where he indicates he can now see “respect in action at school” and describes how respect is evident, encapsulates the major change in the post-survey examples. After the explicit focus students were able to provide more concrete examples of how the values could be enacted and were also more “conscious” of the values around them. The student responses to the question in the post-survey that asked them to “name and give an example of a value” also revealed a larger and broader values vocabulary after the explicit teaching. As well as nominating all of the 9 National Values (examples provided below), 19 additional terms, each with a relevant example, were used to describe a range of related behaviors, including actions toward others, for example, kindness, support, and friendship/friendliness; personal attributes, such as truthfulness, effort, patience, courage, and [being] reliable; interactions with others, for example, cooperation, forgiveness, helping/helpfulness, [being] generous and sharing; and an awareness of concepts and qualities that promote social cohesion, such as equality, inclusion, empathy, and understanding. Thus, with the exception of a minority of students, the explicit teaching appeared to enable the majority of students to move beyond “unconscious incompetence” or superficial and rote definitions of values, to a stage where they could at least envisage and articulate a more elaborate understanding of specific ways in which the nine values could be “put into action.” These examples included Respect – When I wanted to tell a joke and Riley said “I don’t want to hear your stupid joke!” And then Oscar said: “Show some Respect for Jamsey I want to hear his joke!” And I told my Joke. And everyone laughed. (603) Integrity – When our teacher is out of the room we still do a lot of good things and do what we’re told even when he is not there. (154) Responsibility – Wene we do sumthingrone we are the wons to blame. [when we do something wrong we are the ones to blame] (403) Fair Go – Because at home when my borther [brother] took out the trash and the next time the trash had to be taken out again my mum told jack to do it but I said it is my tearn [turn] because jack did it last time. (415) Honesty – When I was playing 44 homes with my friends I was beening [being] honest when I didn’t get to the tree before they tipped me but they thought I did so I told them the truth. (607) Care and Considerations – I have worked with someone who I thought would get chosen last. (764) Freedom – We give each other freedom When we help each other. (604) Doing Your Best – when I do hard math challengers [challenges] and I never give up and neither do my friends. (613)
76
K. Dally Tolerance – I saw children being tolerent (sic) when others had ideas and Inclusion – I have let anyone sit with me at lunchtime. (541)
According to Howell (1982), the stage after “Conscious Incompetence” is “Conscious Competence.” Becoming consciously competent often takes considerable time, and progress can be erratic as an individual may have an incomplete grasp of the skill, may learn and then forget, or may demonstrate the skill in some situations but not in others. As one student said, “I do not understand values and if I know it I fgetit [forget it]” (166). Mastery of the new skill is gradually attained either through experience or formal learning and some may need the assistance of extra tuition, extra practice, or even extrinsic rewards. In this stage, the skill is not yet “second nature” and conscious effort as well as the support and encouragement of an “expert” may be required. The staff at one school noted that the students appeared to be in the stage of conscious competence since the students were now demonstrating the values more consistently, although the decision to do so often required conscious deliberation as well as teacher scaffolding and support. The student responses to the questions in the post-survey regarding aspects of student behavior and school climate also support the notion that students were more conscious of their “inadequacies” and were “trying harder” to operationalize the values, with 98% of students indicating that since they had been learning about values, they “tried to be a better person” some, most, or all of the time. The importance of the teacher’s role in maintaining a consistent focus on explicating the values was also evident in the student responses with 97% of students perceiving that the teachers “talk to students about values” some, most, or all of the time. As well as talking about values, the importance of teachers modeling values was also noted by students. Aaahhh ... Respect!! Just that Mrs T showed respct (sic) by putting a word for Ryan so he could know how to spell it, but she wrote it on the board for anyone else who wanted it. (546) My teacher shows care and compasion (sic) because when we are upset, He makes us happy again by making us laugh. (417)
Teachers modeling, discussing, noticing, and rewarding values-related actions appeared to be a powerful combination as evidenced by the frequent reference to these modes of “instruction” in student responses to the survey question asking how students had learned about values. Other commonly stated activities were assembly, role plays, circle time, peer support, writing about values, homework, quotes from the bible, newspaper articles, stories about saints, posters and signs on school walls and windows, class or school rules, value of the week, poems and songs, prayer flags, Y-charts and mind-maps, and learning about values in specific lessons such as Religion, Personal Development Health and Physical Education, and even spelling. Obviously, teachers were actively embedding discussion and promotion of the values into a broad range of lessons and activities. This explicit teaching also incorporated opportunities for practical applications since many students also
4
From Surviving to Thriving
77
referred to the need to “show” the values, for example, “by trying to do it to others” and “by talking and whatching (sic) if it happens.” One teacher described how the simple explanations of the values at the weekly assemblies impacted on both the students and the teachers. The succinct description of each value has facilitated teachers talking the talk of values education and highlighting children who are walking the walk in using those values much better than before. Children have been noticeably attentive during Monday morning exclamations of each value and during awards ceremonies for children being rewarded for utilising the values. They appear to show genuine interest in what value is going to be delineated next and related to what were otherwise confusing concepts because they have been put into the context of the school.
Not only were teachers now “talking the talk,” their own behavior, in regard to how well they did, or did not, model the values was also under scrutiny from a more informed and “values conscious” student body. Some students commented on the mismatch between teacher talk and teacher practice: “Well My Teacher yells at me . . . My teacher is teaching that he doesn’t have paitanes [patience] (539) and “we have been doing ‘Understanding’ and the teachers expect us to have this value but most of the teachers don’t have the value in a lot of ways” (540). Though such criticisms were relatively rare, they indicate that the explicit teaching was making students not only more self-reflective, but also more analytical, thus exercising their “higher order thinking” skills.
Changes in School Climate and Student Well-Being The post-survey responses indicated that the majority of students believed that school was now a “happier place to be” (89%), other children were more friendly (93%), and the classroom was more peaceful (88%). The post-survey student comments supported these views with students noting many improvements in the playground, for example, sharing sports equipment and putting it away, giving others a turn, allowing others into games, picking up rubbish, older students helping younger students, doing kind things for others, and speaking respectfully to each other (i.e., not teasing or calling each other names). Changes in the classroom included listening when the teacher or other students are talking, boys working with girls, putting in effort to do your best, helping others with their work, and “being more mature finishing work and being more responsible” (778). Although there was less evidence collected from teachers about their perceptions of change, some teachers noted that the students had fairly quickly absorbed and acquired the “language of values” even though they were not yet proficient at putting the values into practice. The majority of the older students can discuss what each of the values mean although we are yet to see change in the way the students interact with each other using the values in the playground. (Teacher, School 8)
78
K. Dally
At other schools, however, teachers noted that classroom and playground behavior was starting to improve, with “less hitting” and more students complimenting each other, greeting teachers, and using the language of values to resolve minor disputes. A common understanding of the values words and what they meant improved students’ capacity to communicate and conciliate in times of conflict. One student comment reflected how a common values language assisted this process: We’ve been learning about integrity and I see it in the playground when we’re playing games for example when we’re playing handball and someone gets out and does not take it out and someone says “you are not showing much integrity” and the person thinks to themself and says “no I’m not showing much integrity” and takes it out, then the game is play on and there is no more fighting anymore. (128)
Similarly, another principal described how the explicit teaching of just two values, respect and responsibility, in their school’s predominantly indigenous student population “equipped the children with a vocab[ulary] that they never had before.” Explaining to the students the “myriad of definitions of each of those values” and helping the students to understand that trust lies at the heart of responsibility and to reflect on and “own” their behavior assisted students to independently “sort out” playground problems and even to prevent problems. And what we’re finding is the children have a much greater awareness of where they may have gone wrong or where their mate might have gone wrong and they can verbalise it now which is great because before they would have just got angry and hit each other.
The principal noted that a common understanding of the values words and the kinds of actions that the words represented “shortened the conversation” when students were resolving disputes and in situations where teachers were assisting students to reflect on instances of inappropriate behavior. The power of the values vocabulary relied upon the whole school “speaking the same language” and on linking discussions to authentic experiences: “All the staff are using this language, the kids are using the language, and we have plenty of real life predicaments where we can refer to them.” Across other schools in the cluster, the students made frequent reference to how values such as “fair go,” “inclusion,” and “integrity” were applied in their games and interactions with the effect of creating a more socially harmonious environment. Fair Go Fair Go is where you give others more of ago (sic) if you’ve had more goes, and you share things instead of doing it all yourself. (430) incluetion [inclusion]¼ if someone has nothing or noone to play with let them in your game. (525) Fair go - I have showed fair go when there was a girl with a disability and [she] got out straight away but I said she wasn’t out. (764)
4
From Surviving to Thriving
79
In handball people do integrity in handball or as well people do sportsmanship and say great job or better luck next time and instead of going you’re so bad, or I got you out hahaha but when you’re nice it makes people really feel good. (127)
These quotes suggest that learning about values had heightened students’ awareness of the impact of their behavior on others. One of the pedagogical approaches employed by the catholic schools cluster to encourage and support student selfreflection was the use of the “awareness examen.” The awareness examen was a prayer that was conducted at the end of each day and provided a scaffold for students to remember their experiences throughout the day, give thanks for positive events, and see ways in which they could change or address any negative aspects. One kindergarten teacher focused her Most Significant Change (MSC) story around the impact of the awareness examen on her 5- to 6-year-old students. Despite some initial reservations about how effectively such young children could reflect on and articulate their thoughts, the teacher was surprised by the “depth” of their responses and felt that the process of reflecting on past and future events was developing both higher order thinking and a greater sense of optimism in her students. The other good thing about the awareness examen is it looks toward tomorrowand so the kids are, at the end of the day, thinking about what’s something they can do tomorrow to make it a good day. (MSC story – Teacher 2)
This teacher described how incidents of “dobbing” had decreased as the children were now giving each other compliments and striving to create positive interactions so that they could be part of another child’s remembrance of their “best thing from today.” Knowing in advance that they would have to reflect on their daily experiences, children were also approaching each day with greater optimism as they were looking to identify the “best thing” that happened to them. The examen helped the children to become not only more aware of how their behavior affected other children, but also made them conscious of the connection between their own thoughts and feelings. Students themselves noted a connection between their actions and feelings, identifying that “doing good deeds” often lead to enhanced feelings of well-being. Honesty- I have showed honesty by finding money on school grounds. Instead of keeping it I gave it to the teacher. I gave it to the teacher because it was the right thing to do. Being honest makes me feel good. (720). I fell [feel] heaps better when evryone (sic) dose [does] the right thing. (521)
Parent Surveys The parent surveys were designed to provide a measure of parent perceptions of their children’s behavior in the home context (Social behavior, Personal responsibility, and Attitude to school), as well as parent attitudes toward values education and their perception of the school environment (Beliefs about behavior and learning and
80
K. Dally
School climate). Open-ended questions were also employed to gauge parent beliefs about values, their relationships with school staff, and any changes in their child’s behavior. The majority of the parent data were unmatched in order to provide anonymity, and independent-samples t-tests were conducted on responses from 200 parents in the pre-survey and 80 parents in the post-survey. Of the 80 parents who completed the post-survey, less than half (36) provided responses to the openended questions. The results from the pre–post analysis of parent surveys revealed that, although there was a trend for scores to increase across all of the scales, the only aspect in which there was a statistically significant difference was in parent perceptions of school climate (t ¼ 2.71, P < 0.05). Prior to the VASP initiative, parents already had positive perceptions of the schools as caring and supportive environments; however, the introduction of an explicit approach to teaching values was welcomed enthusiastically by the parents. As evidenced by the mean score of 3.7 (maximum of 4) on the pre-survey scale measuring parent beliefs about behavior and learning, parents strongly believed in the importance of teaching children values at school and also had strong beliefs about the link between children’s social and emotional skills and their academic learning. The parent comments also belied this enthusiasm for the values initiative, with parents nominating the 9 national values, as well as an additional 38 different “skills” and “qualities” they felt schools should help to develop in children. These included a range of “resiliency” skills such as being self-sufficient, tenacious, confident, courageous, imaginative, motivated, and creative, as well as interpersonal behaviors underlying effective social relationships, for example, courteous, helpful considerate, understanding, caring, compassionate, patient, generous, loving, and kind.
Generalizing Values in the Home Context The inability to detect a statistically significant difference in parent perceptions of change in their children’s behavior is not surprising, given the reduced number of parents who completed the post-survey and the short period of implementation. However, one parent noted that the program was in accord with “Catholic teaching” and was “amazed” that it had created such an impact in her child’s school “because our children have been taught respect, caring, giving. I mean they were taught giving in bucket loads at our school, you know . . . and for a program to still make a change, I think is enormous!” (MSC Parent story 2). While the majority of parent comments indicated that there was “no change” in their child’s behavior at home, a number of parents added “yet” and several suggested that the time frame was not long enough to “gather information of a reliable nature” (P071). Many parents reported that their children could now “verbalize values” but had “trouble putting them into action” (e.g., P111). Several parents acknowledged that this was still “an improvement” and that “even though outcomes may not be immediately obvious, these are life-long lessons to learn” (P115). These comments further support the notion that, for many children, just learning the language of
4
From Surviving to Thriving
81
values was a “progression” to the stage of conscious incompetence. One parent expressed appreciation for the school’s support in equipping his children with a better understanding of the values since this provided a “short-cut” to addressing disputes at home. What I have noticed is that both my kids are now using words like ‘respect’ to tell each other how they want to be treated. Before we would have had to explain the ‘value’ in more words. (511)
At another school, the value of the week was displayed in the parent newsletter as well as the local newspaper so that eventually the values language would filter through the school to the community. A peer support program involved students from Year 6 teaching the value of the week to small groups of students from Kindergarten to Year 5. A teacher at this school identified that this kind of “saturation” assisted in helping students to generalize the applicability of the values: “Using the nine core values in a wide variety of circumstances has allowed the students the ability to find the usability of these values embedded into all areas of their lives.” While a school-wide and at times community-wide approach was adopted by some schools to promote this kind of generalization, other schools implemented more focused class-level initiatives.
Classroom-Specific Values Pedagogy Rather than attempting a “blanket” school-wide coverage of all nine values, some of the schools adopted a “class-level” approach and focused on the values that were most conducive to the new learning paradigms that were being established. At one of the larger schools, two Year 5/6 classes were targeted for the project, owing to significant social difficulties and academic disengagement within this group. Flexible furniture arrangements, cooperative learning activities, and choices in social groupings supported the teaching of key values such as respect, integrity, and responsibility. In order to function in an ever-changing learning environment, students were confronted on a daily basis with the need to demonstrate these values. The survey responses from students in these classes indicated a predominance of examples of values, based on the “twenty-first-century learning tables” and the need to work cooperatively with others. “The new tables that we got have taught me to work with different people” (772). One of the teachers described how the new learning arrangements meant that everyday class activities now involved “choices” such as who to sit with and where to sit, and these choices required the students to interrogate and exercise their values. “You’re giving children the opportunity to make decisions, to work with others, to accept differences, to show compassion.” The teacher noted that the basis of children’s decision-making had changed during the year, and instead of just working with their friends, children were now electing to be in mixed-gender groups and selecting as peer tutors students who previously had been isolated, such as those with lower abilities and children from different cultural and racial backgrounds. The two class teachers felt the structural and pedagogical
82
K. Dally
changes had created a classroom culture in which values were “naturally embedded” and provided opportunities for the children to go beyond “lip-service” to a “deeper lived practice.” The requirement for each group member to contribute to a combined learning process and product had created a “learning community” where collaboration was critical to success. Thus, students were recognizing the benefits of demonstrating integrity and responsibility and were helping to build these qualities in others by reminders such as “you’re not doing your bit, this is our work, come on we’re here to work together.” Although the students’ academic engagement and classroom conduct had improved noticeably, it was not evident that these behavioral changes had transferred to the playground or permeated through the rest of the school. One teacher reported that there was an increase in “awareness of inappropriate behaviour in the playground” and students were making “value judgements” about these incidents, while another teacher commented on the difficulties of instigating change in a “big and traditional school.”
Discussion Despite some variations in the way the VASP project was implemented across the cluster, there appeared to be some common impacts of the explicit teaching of values and the collaborative learning approaches, on the students and teachers within these schools. The student comments indicated an increased capacity to define and explain the values, and there was considerable evidence that student behavior was starting to change in response to the explicit teaching, with students acquiring both the words to express the values as well as a clearer conceptualization of how the values could be put into action. The advantages of the whole school approach seemed to be that all members of the school community shared the same language and the same understandings. Both teachers and parents noticed that this provided a “short-cut” for students to resolve their own disputes as well as for teachers and parents in situations where inappropriate behavior needed to be analyzed and addressed. The important role of “more expert others” such as teachers, parents, and peers in supporting and scaffolding children’s progression from ignorance to awareness to competence was evident. Class discussions, authentic problem-solving, integration of values into units of work across key learning areas, the awareness examen, and the daily choices and decisions attached to cooperative learning environments provided opportunities for students to reflect on their own behavior and the behavior of others and to practice and plan how they could act or respond differently “tomorrow.” While the values awards at assemblies may be regarded as a type of “extrinsic reinforcement,” the awards were also a public acknowledgment of what the schools “valued” in terms of student outcomes, that is, “prowess” in enacting values was given the same status as sporting, academic, or artistic accomplishments. Because humans tend to emulate significant others and adopt the values and practices in their immediate social context (Ryan et al., 2013), a school environment where values are modeled and incorporated into every facet of school life assists students to eventually integrate the
4
From Surviving to Thriving
83
school’s values as their own and reach Howell’s stage of unconscious competence by acting spontaneously and autonomously in accordance with those values. Overall, a focus on values in Catholic schools was “nothing new” and initially the teachers did not see that there would be a significant change in their own practice that already reflected an implicit approach to the inculcation of values. What changed after the introduction of the explicit focus and over the duration of the project was a greater commitment to equipping students with a values vocabulary and to finding ways of providing opportunities for students to discuss, apply, and reflect on the values. While many of the students may already have had a tacit understanding of values, acquired from home, school, or church, these and other students still benefited from the verbal, visual, and practical mediums that teachers used to define and clarify “concrete” examples. As noted by Kristjánsson (2017), a values-focused pedagogy represents a strengths-based approach that aims to further develop values that children already possess in nascent form. The role of the school and the teachers is to create the kind of environment that provides opportunities to practice values and that scaffolds and acknowledges this development.
Conclusion The final word goes to a student and a teacher, both from different schools who independently identified the transformative effect of an explicit values education program. When asked to describe how they had been learning about values, a Year 6 student simply stated, “We have been finding out what to do to be better people.” In a similar fashion, a teacher from a different school also recognized that when teachers set clear expectations for children and acknowledge their efforts, provide explicit examples, and act as good role models, schools can create an environment in which children can grow and flourish, not just socially, emotionally and academically, but also morally and spiritually. I guess the crux of the most significant change for our school is that the person children want to be and are asked to be, one who acts out of the goodness God made them in, is more attainable now and realistic because they’ve been shown how values can be implemented into their own lives.
References Benninga, J. S., Berkowitz, M. W., Kuehn, P., & Smith, K. (2003). The relationship of character education implementation and academic achievement in elementary schools. Journal of Research in Character Education, 1, 19–32. Commonwealth of Australia. (2010). Giving voice to the impacts of values education: The final report of the values in action schools project, October 2010. Education Services Australia Ltd. http:// www.curriculum.edu.au/values/val_vasp_final_report,30121.html. Accessed 19 June 2022. Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). The “Most Significant Change” (MSC) technique: A guide to its use. www.clearhorizon.com.au. Accessed 19 June 2022.
84
K. Dally
DEEWR (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations). (2005). Commonwealth of Australia. Values curriculum resources. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/values/val_ about_values_for_australian_schooling_resource,33493.html. Accessed 19 June 2022. DEEWR (Department of Education, Employment, and Workplace Relations). (2008). At the heart of what we do: Values education at the centre of schooling. The final report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools project- Stage 2 [Report for the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment, and Workplace Relations (DEEWR)]. https://www.yumpu.com/en/ document/view/41525325/at-the-heart-of-what-we-do-values-education. Accessed 7 August 2023. DEST. (2003). Values education study (Executive summary final report). Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_ resources/VES_Final_Report14Nov.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. DEST. (2005). National framework for values education in Australian schools. Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_ resources/Framework_PDF_version_for_the_web.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. DEST. (2006). Implementing the national framework for values education in Australian schools. Report of the Values Education Good Practice Schools Project – Stage 1: Final report, September 2006. Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum. edu.au/verve/_resources/VEGPS1_FINAL_REPORT_081106.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2022. Elias, M. J., Parker, S. J., Kash, V. M., & Dunkeblau, E. (2007). Social-emotional learning and character and moral education in children: Synergy or fundamental divergence in our schools? Journal of Research in Character Education, 5, 167–181. Flay, B. R., & Allred, C. G. (2010). The positive action program: Improving academics, behaviour, and character by teaching comprehensive skills for successful learning and living. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 471–502). Springer. Gunawardena, H., Merlo, S., & Stevens, R. (2020). The preconditions to flourishing: Structural necessities for achieving well-being in schools. British Journal of Educational Studies, 68(4), 425–441. Howard, P. G. (2018). Twenty-first century learning as a radical re-thinking of education in the service of life. Education Sciences, 8(4), 189. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040189 Howell, W. S. (1982). The empathic communicator. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Kim, S. (2013). Neuroscientific model of motivational process. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(98), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00098 Kristjánsson, K. (2017). Recent work on flourishing as the aim of education: A critical review. British Journal of Educational Studies, 65(1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2016. 1182115 Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011). Values pedagogy and student achievement: Contemporary research evidence. Springer. Narvaez, D. (2010). Building a sustaining classroom climate for purposeful ethical citizenship. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 659–674). Springer. Osterman, K. F. (2010). Teacher practice and students’ sense of belonging. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 239–260). Springer. Patton, M. Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. Guildford Press. Ryan, R. M., Curren, R. R., & Deci, E. L. (2013). What humans need: Flourishing in Aristotelian philosophy and self-determination theory. In A. S. Waterman (Ed.), The best within us: Positive psychology perspectives on eudaimonia (pp. 57–75). APA. https://doi.org/10.1037/14092-004 Seligman, M. (2018). PERMA and the building blocks of well-being. Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(4), 333–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2018.1437466
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in Colombian Schools Professional Development A Cross-Cultural Collaboration Melinda C. Bier, Christopher D. Funk, Marvin W. Berkowitz, Nicole Bruskewitz, and Satabdi Samtani Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Character Education in Colombia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The PRIMED for Character Education Conceptual Framework and Primary Translation Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translating Research-Based PRIMED for Character Education Design Principles . . . . . . . . Brief History of PRIMED and Successful Implementations of PICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRIMED in Colombia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coschool Participant Recruitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Planning an Enhanced PRIMED Institute for Character Education –Colombia (PICE-C) . . . . Evaluating PRIMED Professional Development and Implementation Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Opening Retreat Satisfaction Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Satisfaction Survey Description and Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Satisfaction Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pandemic-Related Changes to Data Collection Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRIMED Focus Group: Description and Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Potential Differences Between the Expected In-Person Team Focus Groups Versus the Zoom Cross-Team Focus Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRIMED Focus Group Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immersive Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participants’ Examples and Perception of Changes Pre-Pandemic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participants’ Perceptions of the Interaction Between Their PRIMED Initiatives and the Challenges of the Pandemic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
86 87 88 88 90 90 91 91 93 95 95 96 100 101 101 102 102 104 105
M. C. Bier (*) · C. D. Funk · M. W. Berkowitz University of Missouri, St Louis, MO, USA e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] N. Bruskewitz CoSchool, Bogota, Colombia e-mail: [email protected] S. Samtani Louisiana State University (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_5
85
86
M. C. Bier et al.
Summary of Focus Group Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRIMED Retrospective Pre–Post (RPP) Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRIMED Retrospective Pre–Post Test Description and Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRIMED Retrospective Pre–Post Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
106 107 108 108 109 110
Abstract
Colombia is looking to build a new, peaceful society following 52 years of internal conflict. Many believe that the integration of character education in Colombian schools can make a significant contribution to improving the quality of education and the potential for lasting peace in post-conflict-era Colombia. One recent effort to provide research-based character education programming to Colombian schools is the PRIMED (Prioritization, Relationships, Intrinsic Motivation, Modeling, Empowerment, and Developmental Pedagogy) for Character Education Project. The project is being carried out through a cross-cultural partnership between the Center for Character and Citizenship (the US program developers and evaluators) and Coschool SAS (one of the most prominent providers of character education expertise and training in Colombia). Together, these partners set out to (1) provide high-quality professional development and (2) evaluate participants’ perceptions of the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of PRIMED in their particular school contexts. The planned professional development and implementation support had three components: (1) a 5-day opening retreat, (2) an academic year of follow-up professional development and support, and (3) a culminating conference. In this chapter, we describe phase I of the project implementation and the ways in which evaluation strategies were reconceived in response to the global COVID pandemic. This project was supported by a grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to Coschool SAS, Bogota, Colombia. Keywords
Character education · Educational leaders · Cross-cultural intervention
Introduction The development of student character, and the role schools can play in that effort, is a global priority. There is ample evidence of this global interest albeit under a variety of labels. In the United States, organizations such as Character.org, CharacterPlus, and the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning, as well as philanthropies such as John Templeton Foundation, Kern Family Foundation, and Bechtel Foundation, are testament to this interest. Globally, organizations such as the Templeton World Charities Foundation, Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtue in the United Kingdom, the Ministry of Education in Singapore, Coschool SAS in Colombia, and the HTC
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
87
Educational Foundation in Taiwan are similarly examples of a much more far-reaching global impetus to implement character/virtue/moral education.
Character Education in Colombia Colombia has reached a key crossroad in its history as the country looks to build a new, peaceful society following 52 years of internal conflict. Education has not been a national priority for many years, but that is changing. Existing initiatives aimed at improving the quality of education and the prospects of peace in post-conflict era Colombia are beginning to focus on promoting professional development of principals and teachers. Rectores Líderes Transformadoras (Principals Leading Change) is a program offering training and accompaniment in educational leadership to principals. The Programa Todos a Aprender (Everyone will learn) developed between 2010 and 2014, and still operating today, focused on teacher training, among other elements, to ensure positive learning environments and gains in achievement on standardized tests in language and math. El Premio Compartir (Compartir Foundation Prize) recognizes outstanding principals and administrators assigning new prestige to the role of educators in society. Initiatives around citizenship education began with Programa de Competencias Ciudadanas (Citizenship Competencies) spearheaded by the National Ministry for Education (2011–2014), which established a set of national standards for citizenship accompanied by a curriculum. While these national efforts are a step in the right direction, in practice, what teachers receive is static information, limited professional development (if any) on the curricula, and no distinguishable training on how to implement character education in their schools and classrooms. Without sufficient professional development of educators, implementation of any educational innovation is likely to be shallow or nonexistent (Albers & Pattuwage, 2017). Indeed, without high-quality implementation in significant numbers of schools, the hope that Colombia’s K-12 educational system will produce safe environments and responsible, active, and peaceful citizens will not be realized. It is this need for systematic, deep professional development and widespread whole-school implementation of researchbased character education that led Coschool SAS to review existing character education programs and frameworks for their 1. 2. 3. 4.
Conceptual and programmatic appeal/alignment Availability of adequate professional development and implementation support Track record of successful international implementation and contextualization Potential to be scaled up, throughout Colombia and potentially other Spanishspeaking countries in Latin America
After a careful review of character education approaches that met these criteria, Coschool SAS began a partnership with the University of Missouri-St Louis, Center for Character and Citizenship, to bring the research-based PRIMED program to Colombia.
88
M. C. Bier et al.
The PRIMED for Character Education Conceptual Framework and Primary Translation Mechanism The PRIMED Framework of six design principles for implementing comprehensive character education is the culmination of two decades of work at the Center for Character and Citizenship, University of Missouri-St. Louis. It is based on a distillation of the most extensive collection, synthesis, and analysis of the scientific literature related to effective school-based character education (Berkowitz & Bier, 2007; Berkowitz et al., 2017; Johnson et al., in press; Brown et al., in press). PRIMED is an acronym that stands for six broad principles (Prioritization, Relationships, Intrinsic Motivation, Modeling, Empowerment, and Developmental Pedagogy) for creating education experiences that nurture the flourishing of human goodness (Berkowitz, 2021). The principles are a result of the synthesis of the scientific literature, begun with the What Works in Character Education project and a vision that successful educational implementation initiatives enable the people in schools to own, master, implement, and continually refine and extend their character-promoting programming. The principles are defined as follows: • Prioritization involves making character development central to the school’s mission and purpose; it must be an authentic, intentional, and strategic priority in the school. • Relationships refer to intentionally and strategically nurturing healthy relationships among all stakeholders in the broadly defined school community. • Intrinsic motivation relies on fostering the internalization of core values and the authentic development of virtue and actively removing extrinsic motivators to promote students’ good behavior. • Modeling emphasizes the power of what students see in the adults around them; adults must take the responsibility to become and model the character they aim to nurture in students. • Empowerment includes the flattening of school and classroom governance structures and making authentically welcoming spaces for all stakeholder voices and positive actions. • Developmental pedagogy is about shifting pedagogy toward long-term outcomes, intentionally promoting the lifelong love of learning that has a lasting impact on the holistic quality of students’ lives and their contribution to a peaceful democratic society.
Translating Research-Based PRIMED for Character Education Design Principles While the Center for Character and Citizenship has disseminated PRIMED in multiple formats including print publications (scientific journals, chapters, and
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
89
most recently a full-length book published in both English and Spanish), professional conference keynotes, short live and video presentations, and full-day workshops, PRIMED has primarily been translated into school-based practice via a 5-day team-based immersive experience called the PRIMED Institute for Character Education (PICE). PICE is aimed at school leadership teams that intend to use the PRIMED Framework to design and implement character education in their schools. PICE normally enrolls up to five school leadership teams made up of 4–6 members, including the school principal. PICE has had three primary goals: (1) immerse participants in the fundamental concepts and effective practices of character education; (2) provide team building experiences for the school leadership team members; and (3) support school assessment and strategic planning (Berkowitz, 2021) for implementing character education. Character Education Immersion. PICE is delivered in a concentrated 5-day block of time, typically with a full day each day of a work week (Monday– Friday). The majority of the first four days is spent exploring the concept of character and character education, and then studying the PRIMED model of six design principles for effective comprehensive character education and their respective research-based implementation strategies (Berkowitz, 2021; Berkowitz et al., 2017). PICE is grounded in the field of character education’s scientific knowledge base and adult learning theory. It includes a series of short lectures, small group discussions, individual and team reflections, and experiential activities. Cohort and Team Relationship Building. PICE promotes relationship and team building. This is accomplished through a series of small group activities, collaborative school analysis, and concludes with a full day of school team strategic planning. There is also an orchestrated series of “unity builders” (experiential activities designed to build relationships among all members of PICE cohort). These activities build from fairly simple and nonchallenging activities culminating on day 4 with a long and emotionally intense triadic experience. The targeted outcomes for all this relational work are (1) a network of dyadic relationships among the entire group, (2) a stronger sense of unity within the school teams, and (3) a sense of whole-group community. School Assessment and Strategic Planning. The school assessment work begins with school team reflections following each “unit” of the PRIMED material, with a worksheet for each reflection. Because PRIMED is an acronym for six big ideas (“design principles”), it is organized into six units. All participants are asked, by the end of day 4, to individually evaluate their school using the Character.org Eleven Principles Framework: Cultivating a Culture of Character (https:// character.org/11-principles-overview/). Day 5 is dedicated exclusively to processing the PRIMED reflection worksheets, collating, and processing the team members’ Eleven Principles evaluations, and engaging in collaborative strategic planning derived from these assessments and the school team members’ knowledge of their schools.
90
M. C. Bier et al.
Brief History of PRIMED and Successful Implementations of PICE PRIMED was first presented by invitation at the Defining and Measuring Character and Character Education Workshop at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine in 2017 (https://www.nap.edu/read/24684/chapter/1). In 2018, it was listed as one of five evidence-based approaches in the Final Report of the US Federal Commission on School Safety (https://www2.ed.gov/documents/schoolsafety/school-safety-report.pdf). PICE (the primary translation mechanism for moving the research behind PRIMED to school practitioners) evolved from a St. Louis-based bootcamp for school leadership teams called the Summer Institute in Character Education (SICE) to become the PRIMED Summer Institute in Character Education (PSICE) to the current iteration, PRIMED Institute in Character Education (PICE). Although regularly delivered in St. Louis, PICE has been implemented in other US locales and is currently being implemented in pockets across the globe. PRIMED has been the core of a weeklong institute in Taiwan for a decade, parts of it have also been piloted in Spain, and it is in its first year of implementation in Guadalajara, Mexico (also funded by Templeton World Charities Foundation).
PRIMED in Colombia Coschool SAS is a private for-profit educational service provider founded in 2014. Coschool is currently one of the leading organizations focused on delivering character education professional development and implementation support to pre-K-12 schools and educators in Colombia. With funding from several philanthropic entities, including Templeton World Charities Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and NGOs such as Save the Children and World Vision, Coschool partnered with the US-based creator of PRIMED, the Center for Character and Citizenship, to develop and deliver contextually aligned PRIMED for Character Education. This cross-cultural partnership worked to create and pilot test high-quality educator professional development in two formats: (1) as an asynchronous PRIMED for Character Education course delivered in Spanish to educators in participating schools throughout Colombia, and (2) a near-ideal year-long in-person PRIMED for Character Education professional development and implementation support experience for private bilingual school leadership teams. This PRIMED professional development experience for school leadership teams was designed to be as near to the ideal implementation of PRIMED as possible. It included two components, a 5-day residential PICE to be facilitated by the original PRIMED research team followed by monthly schoolsite-based coaching by the Coschool implementation support experts, as well as other character education experts. In this chapter, we will not report on the implementation and evaluation of the online Spanish-language PRIMED course but will limit our reporting to the school leadership team-based version of PRIMED for Character Education professional development and implementation support.
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
91
Coschool Participant Recruitment Ten pre-K-12 schools were initially targeted for recruitment based on their status as bilingual (English and Spanish) status and prior history with Coschool SAS as an educational service provider. The co-leader of Coschool approached each school owner to invite them to attend an informational webinar in which the American developer of the PRIMED program, Marvin W. Berkowitz, explained the program, the requirement that school heads attend the training as members of the school leadership teams, and answered questions. All interested schools were provided with a memo detailing the evaluation aspects of the program and the data collection requirements. The eight schools that wished to participate submitted applications that identified teams of between 5 and 8 English-speaking school leaders and paid a subsidized participation fee of $3000 USD per school. Although not required, all eight schools were considered well-resourced and academically high achieving in addition to being bilingual private schools. Using matched pairs random assignment, the eight schools were divided into two cohorts. In this chapter, we limit the scope of our reporting to the experiences and perceptions of the first cohort off our school leadership teams (N ¼ 25). It is important to note that the school teams began their participation in the “maskless” world of September 2019 and culminated in their Coschool PRIMED program participation in March 2021 during the “Delta variant” lockdown phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Planning an Enhanced PRIMED Institute for Character Education –Colombia (PICE-C) PICE-C had the same three goals: (1) immerse participants in the fundamental concepts and effective practices of character education; (2) provide team-building experiences for the school leadership team members; and (3) support school assessment and strategic planning (Berkowitz, 2021) for implementing character education. PICE-C was also designed to include all the learning activities and experiences of the previously described PICE implementations. Coschool leveled up the professional development with implementation support in three ways: (1) the 5-day school leadership team professional development was implemented as an immersive all-inclusive retreat referred to as the opening retreat; (2) an academic year of follow-up professional development, implementation support, and coaching sessions was provided; and (3) a grand in-person culminating conference to bring all participants together to present their progress and share their experiences with each other, the four Cohort 2 schools, as well as education ministry and funder representatives was planned. PICE-CO Opening Retreat: With the support of the Templeton World Charity Foundation, PICE-C, hosted by Coschool SAS, was delivered in a near-ideal immersive setting. Coschool arranged for exclusive use of a fairly secluded hotel in a small town outside Bogota. All participants lived in the all-inclusive retreat
92
M. C. Bier et al.
setting for the entire work week (Monday–Friday), including the implementation team from the Center for Character and Citizenship (University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA) and the Coschool character education team. The formal 35 h of instruction took place in a lovely and versatile atmosphere as ideally conducive to the highly interactive pedagogical strategies of PRIMED as the American developers could imagine. The exclusive use of the hotel for the PRIMED opening retreat enabled participants to easily and regularly move between the large conference room for short lectures, a central courtyard with numerous table and chair groupings for individual teams to comfortably gather for strategic planning, a lush outdoor area with lawn chairs for whole-group circle time, a hearth and crackling fire-facilitated individual reflection, and a large continuously open dining hall with large tables enabled groups to spread materials out while snacking. Most of the core PICE activities are intentionally designed to build relationships, and the all-inclusive retreat format of PICE-C greatly expanded the relational possibilities of a 5-day professional development experience – it turned every meal into an opportunity to get to know one another across school teams, the American PRIMED Facilitators and the Coschool service providers. The informal off-theclock opportunities for interacting in pairs promoted deeper conversations. The additional time participants spent together in the evenings or as a result of this residential design created a mission-focused comradery as well as spaces for members of different teams to build relationships. It also enabled participants to share fun purely recreational experiences such as marshmallow toasting and impromptu sing-a-longs. PRIMED Follow-Up Professional Development and Implementation Support: With the funding provided by Templeton World Charities Foundation and the educational consultation expertise of Coschool, PICE-C was able to include an academic year of follow-up support customized to the needs of the participating school teams. Monthly on-site consultations were delivered by the Coschool PRIMED coach. The coach provided an accountability buddy to the school leadership teams, identified particular needs, and generally nurtured individual school teams and members as they began to share their learning and to seek buy-in for their PRIMED for Character Education plans from additional faculty, staff, students, and parents. She also began to arrange what might be thought of as just-in-time professional development by appropriate experts, including members of the extended Coschool team, the Center for Character and Citizenship Facilitators, and other experts. The sessions were flexibly conducted: some were in-person, while others were virtual; some utilized English as the primary language, while others used Spanish; some were done with the entire cohort, while others were customized and delivered to individual schools. Indeed, every effort was made to meet the particular needs and capacity of the participants. The role of the school coach was instrumental in supporting the school leadership teams throughout the academic year, and her importance in helping school teams maintain their character education implementation intentions in the face of the COVID-19 crisis cannot be overstated.
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
93
The PRIMED Culminating Conference: This event was originally designed as an in-person celebration that would reunite the original four schools, the American Facilitators, and the extended Coschool staff. The 2-day conference was intended to provide Cohort I schools with the opportunity to formally and informally share their PRIMED experiences with the next TWCF-sponsored cohort of schools, national educational policymakers, researchers, funders, and the media. COVID-19 group gathering and travel bans necessitated a radical rethinking of this plan, and the PICE-C Culminating Conference was rescheduled and redesigned to be held online in March 2021. The American facilitators and Coschool leadership team agreed that the most critical objective of the Culminating Conference was providing Cohort I schools with the opportunity to present their accomplishments to each other and share their experiences and insights with Cohort II so that they could begin their character education journey informed by the lessons Cohort I had learned. It was determined that these objectives could be accomplished using the Zoom videoconferencing platform, with its ability to do large group presentations and small group breakout sessions. Designed and orchestrated by an experienced large group facilitator, the Coschool team, American facilitators, Cohort I, and two school teams gathered online for the first Virtual PRIMED in Colombian Schools Conference.
Evaluating PRIMED Professional Development and Implementation Support Our evaluation strategy is built on Urban et al.’s (2014) model of evolutionary evaluation. Urban et al. make the case that intervention programs and evaluation methods are routinely mismatched and that the associated studies result in lost learning opportunities and wasted resources. The evolutionary evaluation model they present proposes that evaluation goals and methods can and should be matched to the appropriate life-cycle stage of the program being evaluated and that program development and evaluation should be linked as a program moves forward from the initiation phase to the dissemination phase of the program’s life cycle. While PRIMED professional development has been going on for some time with various versions being in different stages of a program life cycle, creation, and delivery of PICE-C are in Phase I-A of both the program and evaluation life cycles (Table 5.1). Given that PICE-C is a greatly enhanced version of the PICE with components that did not exist prior to this project, we deemed it appropriate to examine implementation and participant satisfaction using “post-only evaluation of participants’ reactions and satisfaction” (Urban et al., 2014) with their PICE-C experience. Consistent with this approach, we assessed participants’ satisfaction with the PICE-C immediately following the Opening Retreat at the conclusion of the follow-up professional development and coaching sessions, and following the PRIMED in Colombian Schools Culminating Conference. Data was collected using a PRIMED Professional Development Opening Retreat Satisfaction Survey,
94
M. C. Bier et al.
Table 5.1 Program and evaluation life-cycle stage alignment Initiation
Development
Program evolution Program is in initial implementation(s), either as a brand new program or as an adaptation of an existing program
Phase I-A
Program still undergoing rapid or substantial change/ adaptation or revision, after initial trials
I-B
Scale and scope of revisions or changes/ adaptations are smaller; most program elements are still evolving while a few may be implemented consistently
II-A
Most program elements are implemented consistently; minor changes may still take place as some elements may still be evolving
II-B
Evaluation evolution Examines implementation, participant and facilitator satisfaction. Uses process and participant documentation and assessment and postonly evaluation of reactions and satisfaction. Focuses on implementation, and increasingly on presence or absence of selected outcomes. Evaluation is postonly; outcome measures may be under development with attention to internal consistency (reliability). Examines program’s association with change in group outcomes, for these participants in this context. Uses unmatched pre- and post-test of outcomes, quantitative/qualitative assessment of change. Assessment of measure reliability and validity. Examines program’s association with change in group (and/or individual) outcomes, for these participants in this context. Uses matched pre- and post-test of outcomes, quantitative/ qualitative assessment of change, verifying measure reliability and validity.
Process and response
Change
(continued)
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
95
Table 5.1 (continued) Stability
Dissemination
Program evolution Program is implemented consistently; participant experience from one implementation to the next is relatively stable (formal lessons or curricula exist) Program has formal written procedures/ protocol and can be implemented consistently by new well-trained facilitators
Phase III-A
Evaluation evolution Assesses effectiveness using design and statistical controls and comparisons (control groups, control variables or statistical controls).
III-B
Program is being implemented in multiple sites
IV-A
Program is fully protocolized and is being widely distributed
IV-B
Assesses effectiveness using controlled experiments or quasiexperiments (randomized experiment; regressiondiscontinuity). Examines outcome effectiveness across wider range of contexts. Multi-site analysis of integrated large data sets over multiple waves of program implementation. Formal assessment across multiple program implementations that enable general assertions about this program in a wide variety of contexts (e.g., meta-analysis).
Comparison and control
Generalizability
appreciative focus group interviews, and a retrospective pretest. In the following section, we describe the data collection mechanisms and our findings.
Opening Retreat Satisfaction Survey Satisfaction Survey Description and Administration A simple, time, and cost-effective means for evaluating professional development is to survey participants at the conclusion of the learning experience. Surveys are easy to create, simple to administer, and have a relatively high response rate. The practice
96
M. C. Bier et al.
of surveying participants of professional development/training was introduced in 1959 (Kirkpatrick, 1994, Kirpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) and has become the most popular means of establishing whether the participants of professional development felt the conditions created were conducive to their learning and what might be changed in future iterations to improve the learning experience. Accordingly, at the conclusion of the 5-day PRIMED Institute, participants were asked to complete a satisfaction survey to capture their perceptions of the relevance, quality, and applicability of the PRIMED professional development to their specific contexts. Specifically, the PRIMED Training Satisfaction Survey included 35 Likertlike questions covering diverse areas of participants’ experiences with the PRIMED Institute, including language fluency and linguistic concerns, relevance and practicality of PRIMED, the quality of presenters, materials, and activities, as well as impressions of the venue and logistical arrangements. With the exception of the fluency questions, which were rated on a 0–100 slider, all the Likert-like scales ranged from 1 to 5, with anchors varying based on the nature of the questions. For general statements regarding the relevance and practicality of the training, anchors ranged from “1 ¼ strongly disagree” to “5 ¼ strongly agree.” For statements regarding the presenters/facilitators as well as those covering venue amenities and logistics, anchors ranged from “1 ¼ very dissatisfied” to “5 ¼ very satisfied.” For learning activities and materials, anchors ranged from “1 ¼ not at all useful” to “5 ¼ very useful.” In addition to the Likert questions, one ranked-choice question asked participants to rank the six PRIMED components participants in order of the most- to leastinteresting/relevant. One additional multiple-choice question asked participants to select the PRIMED component they would most like to focus on improving in their school. Finally, 10 open-ended questions provided participants the opportunity to give more detailed feedback on their PRIMED training experiences, as well as their existing character education programs and future plans.
Satisfaction Survey Results Overall, participants (N ¼ 16) rated the applicability and quality of the PRIMED Institute quite highly (Table 5.2). Specifically, participants’ mean ratings of the relevance of the PRIMED training (M ¼ 4.88) as well as its practicality to their needs and interests (M ¼ 4.88) were both very high. In addition, satisfaction with facilitators/presenters and the utility of learning activities ranged from a low of M ¼ 4.31 (the PowerPoint presentations) to a high of M ¼ 4.94 (presenters’ knowledge). Moreover, while English-language fluency varied and some participants would have preferred to have a simultaneous translator, in general participants did not find it difficult to understand the English-speaking presenters (M ¼ 1.38). Indeed, participants reported being both highly satisfied with (M ¼ 4.88) and engaged in (M ¼ 4.69) the PRIMED Institute. Ultimately, the satisfaction survey supports the conclusion that participants (1) judged the PRIMED Institute to be culturally relevant, applicable, and useful to their educational work in Colombian schools; and (2) found
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
97
Table 5.2 PICE-C opening retreat satisfaction survey, rated questions, and descriptive statistics (N ¼ 16) Question Min Fluency (0 ¼ not at all fluent to 100 ¼ perfectly fluent) English comprehension fluency 40 English speaking fluency 10 English reading fluency 60 General reaction (1 ¼ strongly disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree) Relevant to my school 4 Practical to my needs and interests 4 Presented at the right level 4 Presenters/facilitators (1 ¼ very dissatisfied to 5 ¼ very satisfied) Facilitator’s knowledge 4 Facilitator’s presentation style 4 Facilitator covered material clearly 4 Facilitator responded well to questions 4 Learning activities (1 ¼ not at all useful, to 5 ¼ very useful) Printed materials 3 PowerPoints 3 Lectures and explanations 4 Icebreakers (at the beginning of the session) 3 Reflections on strengths and opportunities for improvement 4 Closing circle activity 4 Discussion activities 4 Institutional planning activity 4 Audiovisual materials 3 Anecdotes and stories 4 Coschool staff participation (1 ¼ strongly disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree) Enjoyed Coschool staff’s facilitation/presentation style 3 Enjoyed Coschool staff’s facilitation of the evaluative conversations 3 English as primary (Q1, 1 ¼ not at all to 5 ¼ very much so) language (Q2, 1 ¼ strongly disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree) Found it difficult to understand because it was in English 1 Would prefer to have a simultaneous translator 1 Amenities and logistics (1 ¼ very dissatisfied to 5 ¼ very satisfied) Room where the lectures were held 3 Hotel rooms 3 Food 3 Snacks 3 Coffee and tea 3 Transportation (if you took the bus) 2 Daily schedule 3 Duration of institute 4 Hotel overall 3
Max
Average
100 100 100
85.88 75.75 88.38
5 5 5
4.88 4.88 4.75
5 5 5 5
4.94 4.63 4.63 4.88
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
4.50 4.31 4.75 4.69 4.63 4.75 4.81 4.75 4.44 4.63
5 5
4.38 4.44
3 5
1.38 1.81
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
4.00 4.56 4.50 4.50 4.56 4.33 4.50 4.56 4.69 (continued)
98
M. C. Bier et al.
Table 5.2 (continued) Question Overall satisfaction
(1st question, 1 ¼ very dissatisfied to 5 ¼ very satisfied) (2nd question, 1 ¼ not at all engaged to 5 ¼ highly engaged) Overall, how satisfied were you with the PRIMED Institute? Overall, how engaged did you feel during the institute?
Min
4 3
Max
5 5
Average
4.88 4.69
Fig. 5.1 Wordle of participants’ PICE-C descriptors
the CCC and Coschool staff to be knowledgeable, effective trainers/leaders of the PRIMED curriculum (Fig. 5.1). Interestingly, participants ranked the interest/relevance of the PRIMED components by accentuating the first alphabet of the acronym. As elaborated in Fig. 5.2, Prioritization was clearly ranked the highest, with Relationships and Modeling clustered together as the next important interest. Intrinsic Motivation was ranked third, followed by Empowerment and Developmental Pedagogy, which were ranked lower in relevance by most participants. Surprisingly, no participants selected Prioritization as the component of PRIMED they would most like to focus on in their schools (Table 5.3). Intrinsic Motivation (n ¼ 5) was the most frequently selected component, followed by Modeling (n ¼ 4) and then Empowerment as well as Developmental Pedagogy (both, n ¼ 3). One explanation for this seeming contradiction may be that while participants felt that Prioritization of character education was the most interesting/relevant component in general; their particular schools, having already prioritized character education to some degree, needed to begin the process of implementing other, student-facing pedagogies like Intrinsic Motivation and Modeling (Fig. 5.3). Indeed, participants’ responses to two of the open-ended questions may support this interpretation. The first asked participants to describe their existing virtue/ character education programs. All of the participants indicated that their schools were already engaging in character formation. Most frequently, participants referenced these local, preexisting school programs in terms of “values” education and “social-emotional” learning. A second question asked participants which aspects
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
99
PRIMED topics ranked in order of Relevance (mutually exclusive ranks from 1-6) Developmental Pedagogy Empowerment Modeling Intrinsic Motivation Relationships Prioritization 0
2
Rank 1
4
Rank 2
6
8
Rank 3
10
Rank 4
12
Rank 5
14
16
Rank 6
Fig. 5.2 PICE-C opening retreat satisfaction survey; frequencies graph for interest/relevance ranked question Table 5.3 PICE-C opening retreat satisfaction survey; frequencies table for focus of improvement question Which of the components of PRIMED would you most like to focus on improving in your school? Prioritization Relationships Intrinsic motivation Modeling Empowerment Developmental pedagogy
Count (N ¼ 16) 0 1 5 4 3 3
Percentage 0 6.25 31.25 25 18.75 18.75
of PRIMED were most challenging to them personally. Intrinsic Motivation, Empowerment, and Prioritization were mentioned most frequently (three times), with the next most frequent, Modeling, being mentioned twice. In short, while some participants still regarded Prioritization as the primary challenge, others saw Intrinsic Motivation, Empowerment, and Modeling to be more important. It is likely that the state (and content) of a school’s existing character education programs informed which components of the PRIMED model participants find most salient to their needs. Other open-ended questions provided additional evidence that participants found the PRIMED training to be relevant and useful in their schools. The word cloud (Fig. 5.1) was derived from an open-ended question asking participants for three
100
M. C. Bier et al.
Components of PRIMED would you most like to focus on improving in your school. 0 6.25 18.75
31.25 18.75
25
Prioritization Modeling
Relationships Empowerment
Intrinsic Motivation Developmental Pedagogy
Fig. 5.3 PICE-C opening retreat satisfaction survey; frequencies graph for focus of improvement question
words they would use to describe the PRIMED training. Relevant and interesting (in orange) were among the words most frequently used to describe PRIMED. These were followed by useful, inspiring, and motivated (in green). In short, while the PRIMED model was developed within the United States, it appears to retain strong applicability and utility in the Colombian context. Interestingly, participants felt that the primary use of English by the CCC presenters was not highly problematic as many participants were fairly fluent in English (MComprehension ¼ 85.88 out of 100). However, the assistance of Coschool staff, bilingually fluent in English and Spanish, was appreciated, and one participant agreed that future trainings should include a simultaneous translator. Certainly, language appears to pose some additional challenges for participants in international projects, though the degree of the challenge will be higher or lower, based, of course, on participants’ familiarity with the language of instruction (in this case, English). Finally, participants were asked about their concerns and the support they needed as they move forward. Responses suggest that some participants expected difficulties in finding time to engage in meaningful character education and relationship building, especially when balancing the academic mission of the schools.
Pandemic-Related Changes to Data Collection Plan In May of 2020, at the conclusion of Cohort I’s first academic year of PRIMED implementation American researchers were scheduled to visit each of the Cohort I schools to conduct (1) a PRIMED School Site Implementation Observation Checklist/Audit and (2) in-person group interviews with the PICE-C school team members.
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
101
Due to COVID-19 lockdowns in both the United States and Colombia, this plan became logistically impossible. Given the degree to which school faculties all over the world were experiencing severe staff shortages, stress and burnout as well as the difficulty, if not impossibility, of finding a common time when the 5–8 home-bound members of each school leadership team were all available, the researcher, in collaboration with the Coschool Coach, investigated the mechanisms for adapting the data collection plan. We sought to minimize the burden of data collection for participating educators in three ways: (1) limiting the number of interviews to be conducted to two, (2) limiting the number of school representatives asked to participate to one per participating school team in each focus group, and (c) employing an Appreciative Inquiry (Preskill & Catsambas, 2006; Shuayb et al., 2009). It is important to note that we did not conduct a full Appreciative Inquiry; instead, we simply took an appreciative approach to framing of questions (Shuayb et al., 2009) in order to elicit participant’s positive stories and examples of their character education initiatives. We felt this was a responsible adaptation that enabled us to meet both our data collection responsibility to the project funder and our ethical responsibility to minimize the additional stress-deficit or problem-focused questions about the early adoption of an educational innovation might produce for participants.
PRIMED Focus Group: Description and Administration The first focus group was conducted on June 3 and included the school head/ principal for each school, and the second focus group was conducted with one of the other leadership team members from each school. Focus groups were held using the software application Zoom. Although the interviewer and participants had met during the PRIMED Institute Training, each interview began with all participants stating their name and school affiliation to help make the transcription of the recording more accurate. Informed consent and assent were reviewed, including a reminder that participation was voluntary, and that the data belonged to the participant and could be withdrawn at any time. Zoom norms, which were somewhat unfamiliar at the time, were briefly discussed. The researcher shared her screen with the interview protocol slide deck and requested permission to record the session. The slide deck contained six slides – each question and associated probes. Each question was read out loud and then passed by name to the first respondent who answered the questions and then called on another participant. There was some degree of chiming in with “Oh yes, I agree” and “Oh I forgot to say that”; however, each school representative answered the question fully before we moved on to the next slide/question.
Potential Differences Between the Expected In-Person Team Focus Groups Versus the Zoom Cross-Team Focus Groups In-person team focus groups have some similarities and some differences with Zoom-based meetings. Similarities first: As they would in a site-visit focus group,
102
M. C. Bier et al.
participants were allowed to expand on their experience and reflect on what and how they wished to share. As with our planned in-person focus groups, we used the preplanned questions, encouraged free and open expression, left “wait-time” when asking questions, were sensitive to those who might be more hesitant or shy, and generally sought to create an inviting and nonjudgmental atmosphere. Likewise, during the Zoom focus group, the interviewer could interject, ask for clarification on terms or other facts, or ask follow-up questions just as they would in-person. Differences between plans and execution: we can only speculate as to how the Zoom focus groups might compare to the in-person focus groups we had planned but could not complete. Where we would have done a separate focus group for each of the teams, under the strained COVID conditions, we did one focus group with representatives from all the leadership teams, and one focus group with teachers from all the teams. The focus groups appeared to work well, and everyone participated in describing their schools’ efforts and openly reflecting on the researcher’s questions. Participant answers were lengthy – with representative answers ranging from 570 words to well over 1000 words each. They shared their personal opinions, the school administration’s opinion, and stories of success and failure. On the negative side, interviewing all the leadership teams together probably limited the number of stories we would hear. Everyone listened as the other participants answered the researcher’s questions. People generally do not wish to be redundant. So, once one group brought up a topic, such as how the trainers used modeling effectively, no one else is likely to do more than agree with what has been said. If we had had the opportunity to do a focus group with each team, we may well have gotten a story about appreciating the modeling in the training from each group rather than one story and several thumbs-up.
PRIMED Focus Group Results Although two focus groups were implemented, the researcher has taken the liberty of drawing examples across these two groups of participants. To more easily allow the reader to differentiate between the role of the speaker, we refer to the school owner/ head/principals as leaders and other school leadership team members as teachers.
Immersive Experience Participants in both focus groups commented on the valuable and unusual opportunity the immersive PICE-C afforded them to be totally focused on important aspects of their schools and what they wanted for themselves, their colleagues, and their students. An educational leader noted the gift of time the PICE offered: “One of the most valuable things for us was to be able to spend five days thinking about character education without the distractions that we normally get in school. Being able to dive in really deeply into things that we’re doing at school, and how we can align. And I think it was a really great team booster for our leadership team, and for our thinking on these
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
103
topics. I think that was really, really valuable . . .. just the opportunity to discuss all those aspects with our leadership team in an uninterrupted way was fantastic.” All participants in both focus groups praised the PICE-C (sometimes referred to as the seminar, training, or Institute) they had attended, recounting a number of strengths. One school leader argued that the success of the program lay in the “coherence in the persons who led the project”, saying, “They live character . . .. walk the talk . . .. and model.” Several school leaders noted the strength of the teaching strategies, with one saying that what most impacted them “was that everything was modeled . . .. I think that was amazing because usually when you go to a training everything is just theory, right?” The importance of having trainers model the values and activities they advocate is a PRIMED principle. One teacher was very empathic in declaring, “Well, I have to say that, of course, I totally agree with everyone here . . . In my case what was really valuable, was the modeling done during the seminar. The modeling was, for me, impressive, it was, ‘Wow! Okay, this is what we’ve got to do.’. . . because we’re role models for our students. So we need to start by doing this.” One leader focused on the way the PICE-C materials enabled their team to see the feasibility of the PRIMED Framework for their team, saying, “This training gave us the idea that it’s not something new. I mean, that it’s almost something that we have, but now we have this structure, and to organize, and prioritize what we need to do . . . That’s why today we feel empowered.” This was accompanied by nods and head bobs from the other school leaders. This sentiment was echoed by the teachers who expressed appreciation for the PRIMED Framework and its adaptability to their particular school contexts saying they were “very impressed by the way . . . PRIMED was not a program that needed to be followed step by step.” Other teachers nodded their heads with one chiming in that “everything that we learned, it was really customized everything, because it wasn’t something you have to follow just like that, like a curriculum . . . that you have to just adhere to it. But we were just taking what was useful for us. So I think that flexibility, for us, we found it very good.” Leaders expressed appreciation for the opportunity to compare experience, with one saying “For me the thing that I really enjoyed the most was that time of sharing experiences with people from other schools.” Another concurred, saying that “the open share experience that we had was amazing.” Another educator appreciated the networking opportunities, saying, “The way the institute was structured – it was a great opportunity, not only for us to build relationships amongst the members of our groups, but also to build relationships with all the other participants.” This then carried over to how they worked when back in their school. “And once I came back from the session and started rethinking about everything that I had learned, I always quoted that Maslow comes before Bloom [meaning safety comes before higher order thinking]. We are [already] a strong academic school. And then . . . we stopped talking about the importance of academics per se, [instead] giving the importance to relationship building between the student and the teacher, and between the leaders and the teachers, and between teachers and teachers. So this was a year of building relationships. And that was what I brought back from [the PRIMED training] that week.”
104
M. C. Bier et al.
Participants’ Examples and Perception of Changes Pre-Pandemic One leader related how the school leadership team returned from the PICE and felt an obligation to model the relational principle of PRIMED in how they shared the learning they experienced at PICE with the rest of the faculty: “I think that with PRIMED, we started building relationships. Then we trained them, [the teachers], the counselors. We felt super, super empowered with the PRIMED model and we made a Professional Learning Community. So people had a lot of laughs, a lot of comments, a lot of positive vibes and energies, and things were totally different.” It seemed that team building during PICE-C was successful. One teacher explained that the teachers that went to the PICE have become more authentic with each other and have extended this to how they interact with students in class: “Nowadays, we start class by asking students, how are they feeling, but really intentional and really deep. Teachers are expressing themselves vulnerable with kids like, ‘Today, I had a bad morning. Things are very different.’” A clear example of a shift toward a more relational and empowering approach came from the leader of a school with a long tradition of what is to occur on opening day each year. As the school leader explained, “We usually start the school year where every little kid, or every student has to sit down and listen to everything that the board of directors has to say. [Then] the teachers start doing a mini-intro about themselves.” In other words, students’ first day of the semester is usually spent passively listening to adult speeches and introductions in neat rows of chairs. Based on the PRIMED principles of empowerment and relationships, the leadership team felt they needed to reconceive the day to be “totally student-centered.” In stark contrast to tradition, the faculty planned a whole day of student interaction rather than one-way communication, “We started doing different activities that involve the kids, and they felt that they were heard, okay? – that their voice was important. That . . . it’s not only academic, it’s also the positive relationships they have among themselves.” Each focus group yielded stories about how the PICE-C had helped them become more relationally connected to their students and how that resulted in a stronger sense of community. The example above of how one school radically reconceived their opening day to better meet the needs of students and teachers was specifically attributed to what they learned in the PICE about how important the beginnings of relationships are, and how important it is to build in time and activities for students to become comfortable and feel seen. The educators who made their opening day 1 filled with interactive activities rather than the usual informational but dry series of lectures said they did so “because we learned that beginnings are really important. And we learned that during the seminar. So we said, ‘Okay. The beginning of the year has to be something totally different from what they have lived during all these years.’ So it was satisfying for us to see. . . those students’ faces and their emotions on this first day of school. So it was really good.” Another example of a PICE-C-inspired school activity aimed at building staff-tostudent and student-to-student relationships was offered during the teacher focus group: “This year we decided to do something different. What about if we just play
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
105
with kids, we just listen to the kids when we get to the school? So when they got to school, we got everybody in the gym. And we gave them like half an hour to talk about their vacation time. They were like, “Okay. What’s going on? We’re not having everything so strict . . .. And it worked so well. The kids were so happy that they felt the difference.” An educational leader explained that the relational focus of the PRIMED Framework and Coschool’s implementation support led to a change in her perspective that enabled a fundamental change in the culture of the school: “This whole thing about thinking about relationships first, and actually knowing that we have to improve the ways we were relating – me as a leader with my principals, and principals with their teachers, and teachers with their students. It really changed the whole process, because we were trying to implement new methodologies in our school, and we had to actually shift into another way of relating to have buy-in from teachers and from students, and from parents. So Coschool and the PRIMED program was very crucial in a moment where the school was actually looking for ways of moving from probably a contrived belief, a contrived culture to a more collaborative one. So for us, that was a major thing. I mean, a major shift in the culture of the school, and really helped us move forward.” All participants mentioned the unexpected opportunity the program created to build relationships among schools – schools which had previously only seen themselves as competitors were sharing strategies and experiences. One teacher expressed surprise at how rewarding and generative the experience of collaborating with other school teams could be and what a rare experience it was: “I think that we’re building something even bigger than just in our schools, thinking of relationships among our students, teachers, the administrative area. But among all the schools that are here right now [on this zoom], because I know and I lived through an experience in which I visited St. George School. It was amazing how they were so willing to help us, so willing to give us the information about how they’re doing things.”
Participants’ Perceptions of the Interaction Between Their PRIMED Initiatives and the Challenges of the Pandemic On March 20, 2020, the president of Colombia, Iván Duque, declared a mandatory nationwide quarantine due to the pandemic. The focus groups described here were conducted on June 3 and 4, 2020, approximately 2.5 months into Colombia’s COVID-19 lockdown. While the six focus group questions intentionally did not make explicit reference to the pandemic and most participants’ answers reflected pre-pandemic events, some participants did offer comments and/or examples of how COVID-19 impacted their PRIMED-related work. In one way or another, all participants in both focus groups expressed the sentiment that the pandemic was having a dramatic and potentially traumatic impact on their school communities. One leader told how Character Education, with its relational emphasis, had come to have “a very important place at school, because the academic issues are
106
M. C. Bier et al.
important . . . but the situation that we are living now [in the pandemic] has moved us to think about us, to think about how do we know ourselves? In crafting their collective response to the situation, her team had to contend with skepticism that teachers would be able to help students feel cared for through a computer screen. They wondered, “How do we connect with others? How do we manage empathy? How do we manage our emotions . . . it’s very important to achieve those skills to live, and to connect the academic issues with the emotions . . . and to talk about that.” Introducing a new relational practice, they sought to make themselves available: “We have a face to face,. . . [asking] where do students need to connect . . . not to learn . . . only to talk. To talk and to share their experiences, and to see [each other and us] through the computer, but to be together.” At the time the focus groups were conducted, the pandemic was 2 months old. One school leader explained, “We started feeling a . . . sense of fatigue, and overwhelm regarding the staff, and the teachers, and everyone at the leadership team . . .. They needed to learn every day something new, and they weren’t feeling good. That sense of overwhelm, they were transmitting that to kids.” In response, the staff surveyed students, getting frightening responses that mirrored their own sense of being overwhelmed. Students said, “We are overwhelmed,” “We have a lot of academics,” “Teachers, they don’t listen. We are just grades.” The school leader reported being surprised by the severity of the situation, saying, in essence: “Oh my God, we need to stop . . . [and] do something different.” They brought in “psychologists and coaches” and “started speaking with our teachers and caring more about them. I mean, we left a little bit the academics on the side, and we started taking care of them.” Another leader told how they had started, naturally, being concerned about the effects of the pandemic on the students. Over time, however, they had come to realize that “we need to care about the people that we have on top of the students, because, if not, inside of the classes they are going to vomit their stress and their lack of tranquility or whatever. So, we started changing the side, because we were always thinking on students, students, students. Now, we switch a little bit and we started caring with teachers.”
Summary of Focus Group Findings In this chapter, we focus on PICE-C participants’ experience and perceptions as to the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of PRIMED for CE in the school context of private, bilingual, academically focused schools. In summary, we can conclude that certain aspects of their PICE-C experience were particularly salient for these participants: (a) Training – Modeled: Participants were effusive regarding the effectiveness of modeling what we were teaching in the way that we taught it. While this took place pre-COVID, this in-person weeklong training laid the groundwork for effectively continuing to support them from a distance.
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
107
(b) Training – Cohort Collaboration: Several participants appreciated the opportunity to collaborate and discuss CE with educators from other schools. This improved their understanding of CE but also provided a network for sharing their implementation struggles and successes that were far from the norm and which they particularly valued. (c) Program – Flexibility: Participants commented positively on the flexibility of the program, noting that it did not impress unwanted structure on them but rather provided ways to think and suggested options from among which they could pick which worked best for their situation. While this was our intended process, even pre-COVID, this flexibility became even more important as COVID strains pushed aside all nonessential concerns and activities. They could hang onto anything we provided that would keep them afloat and leave anything that seemed too heavy to carry. (d) Program – Relational: Lastly, while the CE training was effective, the shift in relational perspective – from their extreme academic focus and expectations to more appropriately situating academics in a moral and relational school community that more highly valued the well-being of students and colleagues – was also notable. Several participants explicitly expressed their perception that they were better prepared to meet the challenges created by COVID because of their participation in the PRIMED program. They felt the emphasis each school had previously placed on building relationships for character education implementation seemed to have provided a foundation for the extreme challenges associated with moving their programming from the well-understood face-to-face teaching and learning format to a new and often unfamiliar online/virtual environment, a positive outcome that was unforeseeable but extremely significant. Looking across the Opening Retreat Satisfaction Surveys and the follow-up Focus Groups, we feel confident that, at least in terms of this nearly ideally supported academic year of implementation, participants perceived the program as highly relevant, acceptable, and feasible.
PRIMED Retrospective Pre–Post (RPP) Test In a retrospective pre–post test (RPP) program or training, participants are asked to simultaneously assess themselves on a given factor at the time of the assessment and at a specific time prior to their participation in an intervention (Nimon et al., 2011). According to several scientific literature reviews (Nimon & Allen, 2007; Little et al., 2020), the empirical evidence for the RPP’s economy, efficiency, and validity as a means of assessing individual-level changes in knowledge, skill, attitudes, and behaviors is superior to the more traditional pre-test, intervention, post-test model. Advocates argue that this method is more accurate, more convenient, adaptable to a variety of contexts, and more acceptable to adult learners than traditional testing.
108
M. C. Bier et al.
PRIMED Retrospective Pre–Post Test Description and Administration In this study, we used an RPP to assess participants’ perceptions of their individuallevel understanding, appreciation, and practice of character education and each of the six PRIMED design principles, both at the time of the assessment and when they began the PICE- Culminating Conference, using a Likert-like scale, where 0 ¼ none, 1 ¼ very little, 2 ¼ moderate, 3 ¼ somewhat high, and 4 ¼ strong. While there are no definitive guidelines for how an RPP should be structured, the researcher reviewed the RPP literature and followed the formatting suggestions most frequently and cogently argued, including, (1) providing clear instructions to respondents; (2) using less than seven Likert-type response categories; and (3) asking for the “post/now” response before asking for the “pre/then” response, using formatting to draw the respondents attention to this intuitively backward formatting (Nimon et al., 2011). The RPP was delivered online via the Qualtrics platform. As with all other PICE-C data collection mechanisms, invitations to participate were sent out via email from the Coschool coach.
PRIMED Retrospective Pre–Post Test Results Paired t-tests were conducted on the retrospective data to determine whether respondents (N ¼ 18) believed they had experienced increased understanding, appreciation, and practice of both character education in general and the six individual PRIMED components individually. Results strongly support the conclusion that participants believed they had grown significantly in each of these areas. Indeed, t-tests were statistically significant at the p < 0.001 level for all but one of the pairs, with all but five pairs showing a full point increase or more. The highest differences (>1.30) appeared in the understanding (mdiff ¼ 1.33), appreciation (mdiff ¼ 1.44), and practice (mdiff ¼ 1.33) of Prioritization, as well as in the understanding (mdiff ¼ 1.39) and appreciation (mdiff ¼ 1.50) of Intrinsic Motivation, the appreciation (mdiff ¼ 1.33) of Developmental Pedagogy, and the practice (mdiff ¼ 1.33) of Empowerment. These results appear to align with results from the satisfaction survey, in which participants tended to rank Prioritization and Intrinsic Motivation as the most relevant, as well as selecting Intrinsic Motivation, Empowerment, and Developmental Pedagogy as areas on which they sought to focus in their schools. In short, the results of the retrospective survey provided some evidence of the PRIMED training’s effectiveness in increasing participants’ understanding, appreciation, and practice of the PRIMED Framework. Tangentially, it also offered additional support for the PRIMED Framework’s relevance to Colombian schools as it seems unlikely that participants would have reported increasing their practice of PRIMED if they had found it to be irrelevant or inappropriate to their school contexts (Table 5.4).
5
Implementing and Evaluating PRIMED for Character Education in. . .
109
Table 5.4 PICE-C Retrospective Pre–Post (RPP) descriptive statistics and t-test results (N ¼ 18) Construct Understanding
Appreciation
Practice
PICE-C components Character education Prioritization Relationships Intrinsic motivation Modeling Empowerment Developmental pedagogy Character education Prioritization Relationships Intrinsic motivation Modeling Empowerment Developmental pedagogy Character education Prioritization Relationships Intrinsic motivation Modeling Empowerment Developmental pedagogy
Mean Before 2.44 2.44 2.72 1.94 2.72 2.33 1.94 2.89 2.39 3.06 2.00 3.11 2.33 2.06 2.44 2.44 2.72 1.89 2.89 2.11 2.06
After 3.72 3.78 3.67 3.33 3.72 3.33 3.06 3.83 3.83 3.83 3.50 3.78 3.56 3.39 3.67 3.78 3.83 3.17 3.78 3.44 3.17
Difference 1.28 1.33 0.94 1.39 1.00 1.00 1.11 0.94 1.44 0.78 1.50 0.67 1.22 1.33 1.22 1.33 1.11 1.28 0.89 1.33 1.11
t-test t 9.44*** 7.38*** 5.52*** 5.68*** 4.37*** 4.12*** 4.17*** 4.27*** 9.95*** 5.10*** 7.42*** 3.69** 8.02*** 7.38*** 5.91*** 6.23*** 6.22*** 8.10*** 4.53*** 7.38*** 6.97***
df 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
**p 0.01; ***p 0.001
Conclusion The purpose of this chapter has been to provide an overview of the PRIMED for Character Education Framework, describe the historical PICE goals and the new professional development and implementation support components of PICE-C, and finally present findings from this early exploration of the degree to which participants found the PICE-C acceptable for themselves, relevant to their professional needs, and feasible in their particular Colombian school contexts. The results of this research strongly suggest that significant progress has been made toward the achievement of the three primary PICE-C goals from the perspective of school leadership team members. Results from the Opening Retreat Satisfaction Survey revealed that participants rated the PRIMED Framework’s relevance and practicality very highly, while ratings of the personnel, activities, and logistical supports of the PRIMED Institute received similar plaudits. In the follow-up, focus group participants provided personal opinions of the relevance and concrete examples of the feasibility of PRIMED in their contexts. The success of the relationship building aspect of PICE-C was referred to repeatedly during both
110
M. C. Bier et al.
focus groups, and the pleasure and productivity participants attributed to the relationships they developed with and across teams seemed to generate a relational shift in participants’ way of being their authentic selves with students and parents. The last goal of the PIRC-C was to provide time, support, and accountability for strategic planning and action around character education. Participants’ gains in practice scores on the RPP are reflected in the detailed accounts of changes in school processes and the examples of school traditions that have been replaced. Throughout the openended survey responses and the focus group transcript, the use of the PRIMED language was very visible. While not generalizable beyond the pilot school participants, we found the consistency of results from the three data sources a strong first step in an evolutionary evaluation strategy toward producing a strong evidence base for PRIMED.
References Albers, B., & Pattuwage, L. (2017). Implementation in education: Findings from a scoping review. Evidence for Learning. Berkowitz, M. W. (2021). PRIMED for character education: Six design principles for school improvement. Routledge. Berkowitz, M. W., & Bier, M. C. (2007). What works in character education. Journal of Research in Character Education, 5, 29–48. Berkowitz, M. W., Bier, M. C., & McCauley, B. (2017). National Academies of sciences, engineering, and medicine. Approaches to the development of character: Proceedings of a workshop. The National Academies Press. Brown, M., McGrath, R. E., Bier, M. C., Johnson, K., & Berkowitz, M. W. (in press). Meta-analysis of character education programs. Journal of Moral Education. Johnson, K., McGrath, R. E., Bier, M. C., Brown, M., & Berkowitz, B. W. (in press). A metaanalysis of the what works in character education research. Journal of Character Education. Kirkpatrick, D. (1994). Evaluating training programs. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D., (2016). Evaluating training programs. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Little, T. D., Chang, R., Gorrall, B. K., Waggenspack, L., Fukada, E., Allen, P. J., & Noam, G. G. (2020). The retrospective pretest-posttest design redux: On its validity as an alternative to traditional pretest-posttest measurement. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 44(2), 175–183. Nimon, K., & Allen, J. (2007). A review of the retrospective pretest: Implications for performance improvement evaluation and research. Workforce Education Forum, 34(1), 36–56. Nimon, K., Zigarmi, D., & Allen, J. (2011). Measures of program effectiveness based on retrospective pretest data: Are all created equal? American Journal of Evaluation, 32(1), 8–28. Preskill, H., & Catsambas, T. T. (2006). Reframing evaluation through appreciative inquiry. Sage Publications. Shuayb, M., Sharp, C., Judkins, M., & Hetherington, M. (2009). Using appreciative inquiry in educational research: Possibilities and limitations. Retrieved from http://www.nfer.ac.uk/ publications/AEN01/AEN01.pdf Urban, J. B., Hargraves, M., & Trochim, W. M. (2014). Evolutionary evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate. Evaluation and Program Planning, 45(August), 127–139.
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence A Neuropsychological Perspective on Supporting Youth Spiritual Thriving Rodrigo Riveros and Mary Helen Immordino-Yang
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On the Neural Connection Between Biological Homeostasis and Spiritual Thriving . . . . . . . . . Spiritual Meaning-Making in Adolescence Leverages a Sensitive Period of Neural Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adolescents’ Values-Oriented Thinking Grows in Supportive Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methodological Considerations for Research on Adolescent Transcendence and Spirituality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
112 114 118 120 121 123 123
Abstract
Adolescents’ brains undergo development that enables and is enabled by emerging capacities for transcendent thoughts and emotions. These newly emerging psychological capacities form the basis for age-appropriate spiritual development because they push youth to move beyond considering only concrete actions and perceptions to deal with the values and broader meaning that social situations invoke. This chapter reviews evidence for brain development relevant to transcendent thought and argues that the neural underpinnings of these capacities present a useful starting point for studying the possible neural basis of adolescent spiritual development. Reviewing evidence that adolescents grow their brains and
Editors’ Note: This chapter is an adaptation of an earlier work. Adapted by permission from Springer Nature Customer Service Centre GmbH: Springer, Adolescent Research Review, Toward a Neuropsychology of Spiritual Development in Adolescence, Rodrigo Riveros & Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, 2021. R. Riveros · M. H. Immordino-Yang (*) University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_6
111
112
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
selves by actively making meaning in and through supportive social relationships and deeper reflections, we posit that developmentally appropriate spiritual thinking may also grow the adolescent brain. Situating spirituality at the intersection of biological and psychological homeostasis, we argue for the interest and benefits of launching a theoretically grounded interdisciplinary research program investigating the neuropsychological basis of adolescent spirituality and implications for education. Keywords
Adolescence · Brain development · Social emotions · Spiritual development · Abstract thinking · Values education
Introduction Adolescence is a very special developmental period for human flourishing. A sensitive window of brain maturation and psychological development (Steinberg, 2014), the cognitive, social, and emotional growth during this life stage, supports the kind of meaning-making that builds the transcendent values on which enduring spirituality is founded (Good & Willoughby, 2008). Though the contributions of brain development to adolescent thinking and decision-making are an important focus of current research (Casey, 2015), no available neurobiological research directly addresses the relationship between adolescents’ spiritual growth and neural development, or the neurobiological effects of spiritually nurturing relationships and educational opportunities. To begin a theoretical and methodological conversation, this chapter reviews research on the adolescent neuropsychological maturation that is necessary to meaningfully engage in spiritual thinking, and from this hypothesizes ways that spiritual thinking may, in turn, build the adolescent brain. It explains how relevant neurodevelopmental processes are enabled by stable social relationships in which developmentally appropriate social–emotional wellness is nurtured. The chapter concludes that investigating the brain bases of adolescents’ newly developing cognitive and affective capacities for transcendent thinking could provide a starting point from which to launch innovative interdisciplinary research on adolescent spirituality and implications for education. Key to understanding and influencing the spiritual maturational outcomes of adolescence may be examining the social affordances of neurodevelopmental changes in basic drives and motivations that research suggests underlie adolescents’ new capacities to make meaning through transcendent thought. These low-level affective drives power individuals’ survival-related behaviors, including, for example, eating when hungry or sexual attraction, and likely also imbue young people’s forming narratives and identities with a sense of urgency and importance. These drives have increasingly well-studied neurobiological underpinnings, and current research is connecting them to adolescents’ social–emotional meaning-making in the context of social relationships relevant to emotional health (Telzer, 2016). The
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
113
increased plasticity or adaptability of the brain induced by pubertal hormonal changes impacts both these basic drives and their interconnections with higher-level cortical networks responsible for complex cognition and emotion (Larsen & Luna, 2018). Because of these maturational changes, through building advantageous patterns of thinking and feeling, adolescents have the potential to rework the brain networks that undergird intelligence, executive functioning, and mental health, and even to compensate for the neurological impacts of early-life adversity (for a review, see Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Research suggests that adolescents rework the neural connectivity of their brains via deep and meaningful relationships and educational opportunities that support purposeful actions and values-based reflections, as well as healthy behaviors (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020). Put simply, adolescents grow their brains and selves by actively making meaning in and through social relationships and deeper reflections, and their meaning-making takes on a new urgency thanks to the pubertal maturation of basic drives and higher-level cortical networks. An interdisciplinary approach to the study of adolescent spirituality, including its neural developmental underpinnings and potential impact on health and well-being, is well aligned with current efforts in other branches of developmental science (Dahl et al., 2018). Across psychology, recent decades have seen a burgeoning of approaches working to integrate psychological with neurobiological levels of analysis, aiming to constrain and enrich theories of the mind by understanding their biological underpinnings (Immordino-Yang & Gotlieb, 2017). In this vein, new neuropsychological research in healthcare settings is bringing attention to the neural substrates of spiritual changes in children (Werk et al., 2021) and adults (McClintock et al., 2019). Given that the psychological growth associated with adolescents’ spirituality is known to be protective against poor mental health and educational outcomes (Yonker et al., 2012), and given the availability of new tools for probing brain development, the time is ripe to forge an interdisciplinary perspective on adolescent spirituality, and for this perspective to inform educational designs and practices. Considering the primitive state of the field, it is important to proceed in a way that is theoretically informed (Immordino-Yang, 2011a, b). Spirituality has often been defined as the personal search, experience, and response to the perception of the transcendent, sacred, or divine (Pargament, 2013). As such, the experience of spiritual transcendence requires mentally connecting concrete perceptions and actions with broader explanations that invoke sacred values relevant to God, space, nature, the arts, politics, or other domains (King et al., 2020). These connections elicit transcendent social emotions such as awe (Yaden et al., 2016), gratitude (Baumsteiger et al., 2019), admiration, compassion (Immordino-Yang et al., 2009), and moral elevation (Yang et al., 2018). The neural underpinnings of such transcendent emotions are actively engaged across adolescence (Gotlieb et al., 2021). Adolescents’ capacities for experiencing these emotions predict subsequent brain development that is associated in young adulthood with identity coherence, life purpose, and life satisfaction (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020). Taking this evidence together, this chapter presents adolescents’ developing capacities for
114
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
transcendent emotions and their accompanying narratives as a fruitful starting point from which to bridge adolescent spiritual and neural development in research. These capacities and narratives, research suggests, rely on growing interconnectivity between low-level brain systems that support basic drives and motivations important for homeostasis, and high-level brain networks that support abstract thinking and emotion, important for spiritual thriving.
On the Neural Connection Between Biological Homeostasis and Spiritual Thriving Like for all organisms, humans’ survival, health, and thriving depend most basically upon maintaining homeostasis, or self-regulation of beneficial life processes. Maintaining homeostasis requires dynamically adapting to changing internal bodily needs and external environmental and social demands (Damasio, 2005). Homeostasis can therefore be described as the foundation of both biological and psychological health. It manifests in dynamic, responsive, behavioral, and psychological patterns that support well-being and stability of life functions, in addition to harmonious relationships within the social and physical environment in which the person lives (Damasio, 1999). Given humans’ strong dependence on social and cultural learning – humans make meaning of the things they witness and experience (Rogoff, 2003) – spirituality can be described, from a neurobiological perspective, as a cultural and emotional motivator for human psychological survival, flourishing, and thriving (Immordino-Yang, 2015). This view rests on the observation that the biological and psychological dimensions of humans’ homeostasis are co-dependent. It is impossible for people to thrive without both physical and social–psychological health (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Individuals’ physical needs, social needs, and psychological needs must be aligned with each other and with the demands of the world around them for thriving to occur. When people do not have cultural pride, autonomy and stable group membership, healthy relationships, and self-awareness, or when these dimensions of the individual are at odds with the needs of community members around them, they cannot thrive (Levy et al., 2016). The convergence of the biological and psychological dimensions of humans’ homeostasisis facilitated by psychological processes that incorporate the feeling of basic needs and drives into bigger transcendent social narratives – stories that organize and integrate individuals’ or groups’ experiences into coherent conceptual wholes with psychological power (Immordino-Yang, 2011a, b). A prominent hypothesis is that these connections “hijack” subcortical (low-level) circuits subserving reward processing in the service of prosocial behaviors and feelings (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2009; See Fig. 6.1a). Many of these low-level processes are thought to have been repurposed through evolution to serve sociocultural and intellectual processes (Immordino-Yang et al., 2010), potentially including spirituality.
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
115
Fig. 6.1 In an ongoing study, neurological “cross-talk” (functional connectivity) between the basal ganglia and cortical regions involved in abstract meaning-making and emotion is predicted by adolescents’ descriptions of their life goals as values-based and self-transcending in an interview. (a) Regions of the brainstem and basal ganglia (in colors) were functionally identified by their
116
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
The process of building transcendent social narratives is, in essence, meaningmaking. Meaning-making involves imbuing affective experiences, founded on feelings generated by low-level neural circuitry, with personal significance and value. It is the process by which transcendent thoughts come to feel like something vital (Pargament, 2013). In this sense, spiritual thinking is a potent domain of meaningmaking – a fertile domain in which to build thoughts and feelings around the pursuit of survival, health, and thriving for one’s self and one’s community (Park, 2007). Systems supporting survival-related drives, reward processing, and meaning-making converge to form the backbone of individuals’ proclivities toward building transcendent values and experiences, spiritual beliefs (following Damasio, 2005), and ultimately spirituality. From an integrated biological and psychological perspective, this is how spirituality makes one feel alive. Especially in adolescence, the mental power of meaning-making is thought to be supported by the integrity of cortico-subcortical circuits, that is, by the maturation of connections between low- and high-level brain circuits (Roy et al., 2012). Evidence suggests that adolescents’ abilities to build a transcendent life purpose and appreciate the spiritual nature of values rely on the maturation of subcortical brain regions involved in motivational drives (Gee et al., 2018), and in particular on the increasing network connections between these regions and cortical areas that enable newly emerging neuropsychological capacities for complex cognition and affect (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019) and abstract thinking (Ladouceur et al., 2019). As discussed below, current research suggests that the maturation of connectivity between low- and high-level systems is associated with the development of dispositions for values-oriented thinking, life purpose, and civic understanding (Riveros et al., 2018). In relation to spirituality, subcortical regions are engaged during the experience of abstract social and moral emotions that are prosocial and inherently rewarding (Moll et al., 2006), including spiritual emotions such as awe and bliss (Yaden et al., 2017), and emotions based in shared pain or suffering (Eisenberger, 2015). These emotions are important for religious traditional values, such as the experience of compassion (Haidt, 2003). Despite subcortical regions operating below the level of conscious awareness (Venkatraman et al., 2017), their activation spurs and coordinates multimodal cortical activity (Roy et al., 2012). The main cortical regions involved in the processing of narratives and their accompanying subjective experience of social emotions all receive inputs from subcortical systems (Venkatraman et al., 2017). The effect of these inputs is heightening of perceived consciousness – a subjective sense ä Fig. 6.1 (continued) internal “cross-talk” as participating adolescents wakefully rested in the fMRI scanner (note that some highly interconnected core cortical regions were also identified by this datadriven analytic technique). Adolescents who described more values-based goals showed (b) stronger connectivity of the brainstem/basal ganglia (identified in a) to the precuneus (in red) and (c) weaker connectivity of the brainstem/basal ganglia to the anterior inferior and posterior insula. Shown are representative views of the significant clusters, and scatterplots of extracted parameters from 8 mm spheres at the peak of the neural effect. (Data are from Riveros et al., 2018; N ¼ 23; results are thresholded at p < 0.005 with a cluster extent threshold of 164 voxels, corresponding to α < 0.05, controlling for multiple comparisons.) *p < 0.05, *** p < 0.0001
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
117
of being more awake, self-aware, and purposeful (Immordino-Yang et al., 2012). This subjective sense drives the complex ethical, emotional, and cognitive processing that instantiates adolescents’ spirituality, such as thinking about future goals (Gilbert & Wilson, 2007), altruistic behaviors (Cutler & CampbellMeiklejohn, 2019), moral reasoning (Fang et al., 2017), and social values (Sescousse et al., 2013). The cortical regions most central to spirituality and its component psychological processes are likely those involved in the conscious awareness of visceral (internal gut body) states. These cortices are multimodal; they integrate internal bodily feelings, drives, and motivations with conscious thoughts (Barrett & Simmons, 2015), and are centrally involved in the conscious experience of emotions (Craig, 2009) and moral reasoning (Han et al., 2016). In essence, this is why spiritual meaning-making can quite literally produce “gut feelings.” Experiences of transcendence and focused meditation on loving-kindness, for example, universally activate visceral somatosensory cortical regions, most notably the insula (Lutz et al., 2009), which map the state of the visceral body in relation to drives, needs, urges, and motivations contributing to survival, homeostasis, and thriving (Craig, 2009). The functioning of these cortical networks in transcendent moral and social–emotional states is shaped by education and culture (Immordino-Yang & Yang, 2017). The development of these regions reflects both evolutionarily specified structure and social and mental experience (Tost et al., 2015), making them prime candidates for regions impacted by adolescent spiritual growth, as the chapter discusses below. In addition, of particular importance for the growth of spiritual thinking may be the functioning of the posteromedial cortical regions, located along the brain’s midline (Immordino-Yang et al., 2009). The posteromedial cortices together make up the posterior “hub” of the so-called the Default Mode Network (DMN; Raichle, 2015). As a centrally connected hub, the DMN integrates “conversations” across many cortical and subcortical regions of the brain (Parvizi et al., 2006). It is involved in internally directed thinking (Immordino-Yang et al., 2012) and in mentally transcending the here-and-now (Bertossi et al., 2016), for example, to think about long-term and values-based goals (Gilbert & Wilson, 2007), to construct personal memories and a coherent sense of self (Immordino-Yang, 2016), or to think about the future (Vann et al., 2009). Its activity supports experiencing transcendent social emotions such as admiration for virtue and moral elevation (Yang et al., 2018), longterm learning from virtuous people (Gotlieb et al., 2021), and processing sacred values (Kaplan et al., 2016). Unsurprisingly, DMN regions are almost universally implicated in neuroimaging studies of adults’ spiritual (Rim et al., 2019) and transcendent experiences of various types (Miller et al., 2019). Abstract meaning-making can be considered the psychological process that transforms low-level affective drives into the abstract motivations and feelings that lead to thriving. The abstract meaning-making and social emotions that form the psychological basis of spirituality recruit subcortical areas critical for survival (Roy et al., 2012), as well as cortical areas dedicated to complex, self- and socially relevant affective/visceral and cognitive processing (van Elk & Aleman, 2017). Bringing a neuroscientific perspective to bear reveals how spiritual thoughts and emotions can be considered a specialized domain of abstract meaning-making, and as such will
118
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
recruit the very same brain circuits that keep us alive and aware. This interdisciplinary perspective positions spirituality among the basic biopsychological drives motivating human survival and flourishing, and posits that it is the interdependence between low- and high-level brain functions that imbues abstract and spiritual thinking with psychological “power” (Immordino-Yang & Sylvan, 2010). In doing so, this perspective enriches the appreciation of how moral qualities have the psychological power to revitalize us, just as humanities scholars, poets, artists, and civil rights leaders have long claimed (Immordino-Yang, 2015). It also opens the door to considering how developmental opportunities for spiritual growth may therefore have the potential to adaptively support adolescents’ brain growth.
Spiritual Meaning-Making in Adolescence Leverages a Sensitive Period of Neural Growth In adolescence, social relationships promoting meaning-making have an especially strong effect as these relationships are not only sought at this age but biologically “expected” (Schriber & Guyer, 2016). In this developmental period, subcortical circuits, including brainstem regions responsible for basic functions, become increasingly connected with multimodal cortical networks that enable affective and cognitive elaboration for abstract thought (Nelson et al., 2016). This development leads to new proclivities to process social interactions and motivated behaviors in terms of their broader abstract meaning and implications (Immordino-Yang et al., 2012) as youth connect daily life choices and actions to values-based and transcendent meaning-making (Gotlieb et al., 2022). It enables (and even, at times, compels) adolescents to embed their concrete, context-specific experiences and choices into socially framed narratives that transcend the here-and-now (or there-and-then) – a critical capacity for spirituality that also appears to physically grow the brain (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020). The neuropsychological trajectory of adolescents’ development for abstract thinking is complex, incorporating newly emerging cognitive, social, and affective capacities. Across childhood and adolescence, there is gradual growth in cognitive performance as a function of age and experience, particularly in executive control, self-regulation, and long-term goal-directed thinking (Suleiman & Dahl, 2017). Layered onto this incremental cognitive trajectory is a relatively abrupt spurt in affective processing linked to the onset of pubertal hormonal changes in early adolescence (Braams et al., 2015). During this time, the salience of social rewards and sensitivity to emotion increase, in particular in domains relevant to adolescents’ identity and social relationships (Steinberg, 2014). This spurt marks a second window of increased plasticity and socially mediated brain growth – that is, a period of brain growth dependent on social relationships, emotional feelings, and patterns of thinking, second in magnitude only to infancy (Larsen & Luna, 2018). These changes predict higher sensitivity to social rewards and affiliations (van Duijvenvoorde et al., 2016) that can make youth psychologically vulnerable and emotions characteristically labile (Ahmed et al., 2015). These changes can also
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
119
motivate adolescents to explore new, more adult-like social roles and understandings, expanding social learning and fostering commitment to new values and beliefs (Telzer, 2016). As the trajectories of adolescents’ neurodevelopment are better understood, some have become interested in the possible bidirectional connection between brain development and adolescents’ formation of transcendent values (e.g., ImmordinoYang & Gotlieb, 2017). This work is predicated on the notion that goals completed in the service of transcendent social values are understood in a more complex and abstract way than are goals framed exclusively in the service of instrumental achievements (King et al., 2021). For example, a teenager may explain that she aspires to become a pediatrician, holding the concrete goal of finishing medical school. She may also go on to situate her concrete goal in a transcendent, valuesbased life goal of helping all children be healthy and flourish. Though her concrete goal is necessary to achieve her transcendent goal, her transcendent goal expresses intentions of achieving something intrinsically meaningful that may also positively contribute to the lives of others (Damon, 2008). To a much greater degree than is true for the building of her concrete goal, the building of her transcendent goal motivates ethical and values-based perceptions, actions, and decisions (Emmons, 1992). Forming and holding transcendent goals likely recruits and possibly also strengthens connections between subcortical, reward systems, and cortical networks capable of abstract thinking (King et al., 2021). Ongoing research suggests that adolescents’ growing abilities to construct abstract meaning may actually predict the growth of their brain (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020). The participants in this research are from a community sample of urban low-income adolescents of color – a demographic group who are underrepresented in neuropsychological research. Consistent with hypotheses, an initial study revealed that participants’ proclivities toward formulating transcendent life goals (versus more concrete achievement-oriented goals exclusively) are associated with developmental variability in neural functioning when participants wakefully rest in the MRI scanner (Riveros et al., 2018). Specifically, the more a participant situated their concrete instrumental goals in terms of broader, transcendental, and valuesbased life goals in a private interview, the stronger was the neurological “cross-talk” (intrinsic functional connectivity) between key DMN and basal ganglia regions – cortical and subcortical systems, respectively (see Fig. 6.1b). Conversely, participants’ propensities to build transcendent life goals in the interview were associated with weaker “cross-talk” between the basal ganglia and the inferior and posterior sectors of the anterior insula (see Fig. 6.1c), neural regions involved in the processing of immediate social rewards (Watanabe et al., 2014), and emotional reactions (Sridharan et al., 2008). Importantly, there are hints that the discovered associations impact long-term development. Longitudinally, an additional study found that tendencies toward abstract, social–emotional meaning-making predict psychological well-being, life satisfaction, and identity congruence 5 years later, in young adulthood (ImmordinoYang et al., 2023). Notably, the results are not explained by differences in IQ, suggesting that transcendent goals and these connectivity patterns are not merely
120
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
correlates of general intelligence or verbal ability. And, the findings do not differ by youth’s families’ socioeconomic status (measured both financially by income to needs ratio and in terms of parents’ level of education). Taken together, these research findings offer compelling initial evidence of the benefits of abstract meaning-making for both the brain and the mind (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020). Although more work is needed, ongoing studies suggest that adolescents’ formation of transcendent goals may rely on, and possibly develop, functional connections between regions involved in basic motivational processing, and those involved in transcendent narratives and values-based long-term goals (Immordino-Yang et al., 2023). Spirituality could be considered a natural outgrowth and specialization of such reflective thinking, as well as a driver of it – hypotheses that future research should address. Because the brain is shaped by use, actively reflecting on transcendent issues likely strengthens the neural substrate of such thinking over time (Becht et al., 2018).
Adolescents’ Values-Oriented Thinking Grows in Supportive Relationships It has been long known that adolescents’ abstract meaning-making is facilitated by stable, close, and safe social relationships with adults who help youth sort through their thoughts and feelings (Lee et al., 2003). High-quality relationships with adults can provide instrumental resources for integrating the social–emotional and cognitive aspects of youth development (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019), boost adolescents’ motivation to achieve life goals (Oyserman & Destin, 2010), and promote a prosocially oriented sense of purpose (Yeager et al., 2014). Contexts intentionally designed for intergenerational relationships, such as community organizations, religious or school groups, can offer mentoring that helps adolescents reflect on spiritual (Desrosiers et al., 2011) and nonspiritual topics (Damon, 2008). Given adolescents’ need for close personal relationships with adult mentors in the development of life purpose (Damon, 2008), efficacy studies have examined the effects of an intergenerational friendship-through-storytelling intervention on participants’ values-based goals and purpose-in-life (Riveros et al., 2018), (Riveros et al., 2023), (Immordino-Yang et al., 2023). In an 8-week, small-group program (conducted in partnership with sagesandseekers.org), adolescents were supported in building life narratives through meaningful conversations with older adult partners. The program engaged older adults in part because they are more emotionally stable and positively biased than are younger adults (English & Carstensen, 2014). The wisdom gained from these adults’ extensive lived experience (Grossmann et al., 2010) can support adolescents in developing socioemotional skills and skills for self-reflection and broader thinking (Kessler & Staudinger, 2007). Older adults and adolescent participants were recruited from the same communities, including from low-socioeconomic status neighborhoods in urban Los Angeles and from high socioeconomic status areas in Massachusetts. Over 400 individuals participated in the study. Compared to a control condition in which adolescents and older
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
121
adults watched movies together, adolescents who participated in the intergenerational storytelling increased their reported sense of social connectedness and psychological well-being. This effect was stronger for youth who had initially displayed the lowest levels (Riveros et al., 2018). Perhaps more important for the discussion of precursors to spiritual development, youth who participated in the program reported an increased sense of purpose – an effect that was statistically mediated by a shift over time from concrete to abstract and values-based life-goal framing. A similar shift to values-based reasoning was seen in adolescents’ conceptualization of civic participation. Early in the intervention, youth conceptualized civic engagement concretely, describing the main objectives of civic engagement as operationalizing pre-stipulated outcomes and maintaining civility. For example, one participant, “Franco,” expressed: “I want people with differing opinions to get along. There is so much violence and hatred between people.” As the intervention progressed, however, youth moved toward more abstract conceptualizations of civic participation, for example, explaining the need to appreciate others’ perspectives through dialogue and empathy. After the intervention, Franco demonstrated this shift, responding: “I would like for there to be more understanding of differences. There is so much conflict because people refuse to see from others’ perspective.” While Franco’s early sentiment focuses on his desire for people to act nicely, his later statement shows a deeper appreciation of the importance of valuing interpersonal understanding – a considerably more abstract notion. Though this research does not deal specifically with spiritual development, it holds potential implications for the cultivation of youth well-being through spiritual mentoring. Like carefully designed intergenerational mentoring, spiritual mentoring intentionally promotes transcendent conceptions of the social world and proclivities to build narratives that incorporate higher-level meaning (King et al., 2020). In so doing, spiritual mentoring may possibly influence youths’ neurophysiological development as the brain networks hypothesized to be involved in spiritual thinking are the same networks responsible for managing physiological arousal, aspects of cognition and attention, and other capacities important for social and physical health and future learning (van Elk & Aleman, 2017). It is therefore possible that spiritual mentoring can potentially impact not only how adolescents engage in spiritual thinking, but adolescents’ general dispositions of mind, social–emotional functioning, and physical wellness.
Methodological Considerations for Research on Adolescent Transcendence and Spirituality More than individuals in any other life stage, adolescents explore and construct life goals and life narratives designed to carry them into the future (Zarrett & Eccles, 2006). These explorations and constructions organize their budding adult identities and life purpose (Damon et al., 2003) and guide their current efforts in the near-term toward goal-oriented behavior (Nurra & Oyserman, 2018). The emerging mental capacities adolescents recruit for these explorations also position them to reflect on
122
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
the meaning of transcendence and the sacred, and to form long-term spiritual commitments (Good & Willoughby, 2008). Since spiritual development is subjective and experiential in nature, it will be important to develop methods that honor and characterize the deeply personal, social, cultural, and emotional nature of spiritual thinking, in addition to its impacts on observable behavior and decision-making. From a methodological standpoint, it is the effects of transcendent meaning-making, rather than the effects of participation in religious contexts or ideological expertise per se, that an interdisciplinary neuroscientific approach is most likely to help address. The research presented here suggests that it is adolescents’ proclivities toward constructing transcendent meaning that contribute to the maturation of internetwork connectivity between key cortical and subcortical regions involved in cognitive control, prosociality, motivation, and abstract thinking. Taking this into consideration, from an interdisciplinary perspective it will likely prove less informative to study what adolescents know and can do ideologically, and more informative to study how adolescents are forming and reflecting upon spiritual ideas and infusing these ideas into the things that they know and do. A like-minded neuropsychological approach to studying adolescent development is already informing the evidence bases for education (Levy et al., 2016), health (Giedd, 2018), and the law (Minow, 2019). This perspective could also hold insights for developmentally appropriate spiritual programming and mentoring opportunities for youth from diverse circumstances. For example, research has demonstrated the effectiveness of addressing adolescents’ transcendent social values for promoting healthy behaviors and choices (Kang et al., 2017). This work leverages sensitivity to identity-related information (Yeager et al., 2018) to mitigate social influences (Telzer et al., 2018). Though each of these approaches could be utilized without a biological perspective, including neurobiological developmental evidence can give richer insights about when, why, and for whom particular approaches may be most effective (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019), and about how spiritual guidance may support diverse young people or help youth to heal from emotional trauma. Research should capitalize on the fact that adolescence is a unique developmental period of interdependent psychological and neural development (Worthman & Trang, 2018). Considered a sensitive period, adolescence is an inflection point in which spiritual experiences may possibly have a particularly positive impact that research could target (Suleiman & Dahl, 2017). The teenager’s brain is biologically tuned to look for social–emotional and cognitive opportunities to make meaning with close others, and to grow in ways that accommodate these patterns of thinking and feeling (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). This growth, over time and with practice, develops adolescents’ neurological and psychological propensities to connect concrete actions and perceptions with values, emotional commitments, and broader meaning (Gotlieb et al., 2021, 2022). By focusing on the active process of transcendent meaning-making, future research is poised to address the interdependence of neurological development and opportunities for age-appropriate spiritual thinking.
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
123
Conclusion In adolescence, the brain is tuned to seek out socially valued opportunities to think in ways that produce emotion, and to make deep, socially situated meaning (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019), and new evidence suggests that doing so influences youths’ brain development and young-adult outcomes (Immordino-Yang et al., 2023). In view of this, this chapter has argued that the practice of spiritual thinking, when properly and consistently guided, might provide one means of influencing trajectories of brain development by promoting propensities for abstract cognitive and social–emotional meaning-making. The development of such propensities takes place in culturally grounded, appropriate, safe, and close relationships, and involves supportive opportunities to connect daily activities, choices, observations, and experiences to bigger, systems-level and transcendent narratives (Immordino-Yang & Knecht, 2020). Future work should examine and map the possible reciprocal relations between transcendent meaning-making and brain development in adolescence, and the potential to support development through values-oriented programming. Doing so could reveal fundamental insights into the nature and benefits of this rich, uniquely human domain.
References Ahmed, S. P., Bittencourt-Hewitt, A., & Sebastian, C. L. (2015). Neurocognitive bases of emotion regulation development in adolescence. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.07.006 Barrett, L. F., & Simmons, W. K. (2015). Interoceptive predictions in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(7), 419–429. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3950 Baumsteiger, R., Mangan, S., Bronk, K. C., & Bono, G. (2019). An integrative intervention for cultivating gratitude among adolescents and young adults. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 14(6), 807–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2019.1579356 Becht, A. I., Bos, M. G., Nelemans, S. A., Peters, S., Vollebergh, W. A., Branje, S. J., Meeus, W. H., & Crone, E. A. (2018). Goal-directed correlates and neurobiological underpinnings of adolescent identity: A multimethod multisample longitudinal approach. Child Development, 89(3), 823–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13048 Bertossi, E., Aleo, F., Braghittoni, D., & Ciaramelli, E. (2016). Stuck in the here and now: Construction of fictitious and future experiences following ventromedial prefrontal damage. Neuropsychologia, 81, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.12.015 Braams, B. R., van Duijvenvoorde, A. C., Peper, J. S., & Crone, E. A. (2015). Longitudinal changes in adolescent risk-taking: A comprehensive study of neural responses to rewards, pubertal development, and risk-taking behavior. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(18), 7226–7238. https:// doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4764-14.2015 Casey, B. J. (2015). Beyond simple models of self-control to circuit-based accounts of adolescent behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1), 295–319. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevpsych-010814-015156 Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel—Now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2555 Cutler, J., & Campbell-Meiklejohn, D. (2019). A comparative fMRI meta-analysis of altruistic and strategic decisions to give. NeuroImage, 184, 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage. 2018.09.009
124
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
Dahl, R. E., Allen, N. B., Wilbrecht, L., & Suleiman, A. B. (2018). Importance of investing in adolescence from a developmental science perspective. Nature, 554(7693), 441–450. https:// doi.org/10.1038/nature25770 Damasio, A. R. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. Harcourt. Damasio, A. R. (2005). The neurobiological grounding of human values. In J. Changeux, A. Damasio, W. Singer, & Y. Christen (Eds.), Neurobiology of human values (pp. 47–56). Springer. Damon, W. (2008). The path to purpose: How young people find their calling in life. The Free Press. Damon, W., Menon, J., & Bronk, K. C. (2003). The development of purpose during adolescence. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 119–128. Desrosiers, A., Kelley, B. S., & Miller, L. (2011). Parent and peer relationships and relational spirituality in adolescents and young adults. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 3(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020037 Eisenberger, N. I. (2015). Social pain and the brain: Controversies, questions, and where to go from here. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1), 601–629. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych010213-115146 Emmons, R. A. (1992). Abstract versus concrete goals: Personal striving level, physical illness, and psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 292–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.292 English, T., Carstensen, L. (2014). Selective narrowing of social networks across adulthood is associated with improved emotional experience in daily Life. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(2), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413515404 Fang, Z., Jung, W. H., Korczykowski, M., Luo, L., Prehn, K., Xu, S., Detre, J. A., Kable, J. W., Robertson, D. C., & Rao, H. (2017). Post-conventional moral reasoning is associated with increased ventral striatal activity at rest and during task. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 7105. https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-07115-w Gee, D. G., Bath, K. G., Johnson, C. M., Meyer, H. C., Murty, V. P., van den Bos, W., & Hartley, C. A. (2018). Neurocognitive development of motivated behavior: Dynamic changes across childhood and adolescence. The Journal of Neuroscience, 38(44), 9433–9445. https://doi.org/ 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1674-18.2018 Giedd, J. N. (2018). A ripe time for adolescent research. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 28(1), 157–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12378 Gilbert, D. T., & Wilson, T. D. (2007). Prospection: Experiencing the future. Science, 317(5843), 1351–1354. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1144161 Good, M., & Willoughby, T. (2008). Adolescence as a sensitive period for spiritual development. Child Development Perspectives, 2(1), 32–37. Gotlieb, R., Yang, X.-F., & Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2021). Measuring learning in the blink of an eye: Adolescents’ neurophysiological reactions predict long-term memory for stories. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.594668 Gotlieb, R., Yang, X. F., & Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2022). Concrete and abstract dimensions of diverse adolescents’ social-emotional meaning-making, and associations with broader functioning. Journal of Adolescent Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/07435584221091498 Grossmann, I., Na, J., Varnum, M. E. W., Park, D. C., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2010). Reasoning about social conflicts improves into old age. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(16), 7246–7250. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1001715107 Haidt, J. (2003). The moral emotions. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 852–870). Oxford University Press. Han, H., Chen, J., Jeong, C., & Glover, G. H. (2016). Influence of the cortical midline structures on moral emotion and motivation in moral decision-making. Behavioural Brain Research, 302, 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.01.001 Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2011a). Me, my “self” and you: Neuropsychological relations between social emotion, self-awareness, and morality. Emotion Review, 3(3), 313–315. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1754073911402391
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
125
Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2011b). Implications of affective and social neuroscience for educational theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 98–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14695812.2010.00713.x Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2015). Emotions, learning and the brain: Exploring the educational implication of affective neuroscience (1st ed.). W. W. Norton & Company. Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016). Emotion, sociality, and the brain’s default mode network. Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 2372732216656869 Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Gotlieb, R. (2017). Embodied brains, social minds, cultural meaning. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 344S–367S. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 0002831216669780 Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Knecht, D. (2020). Building meaning builds teens’ brains. Educational Leadership, 77(8), 36–43. Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Sylvan, L. (2010). Admiration for virtue: Neuroscientific perspectives on a motivating emotion. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(2), 110–115. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.003 Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Yang, X.-F. (2017). Cultural differences in the neural correlates of social–emotional feelings: An interdisciplinary, developmental perspective. Current Opinion in Psychology, 17, 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.06.008 Immordino-Yang, M. H., McColl, A., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. (2009). Neural correlates of admiration and compassion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(19), 8021–8026. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0810363106 Immordino-Yang, M. H., Chiao, J. Y., & Fiske, A. P. (2010). Neural reuse in the social and emotional brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(4), 275–276. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0140525X10001020 Immordino-Yang, M. H., Christodoulou, J. A., & Singh, V. (2012). Rest is not idleness: Implications of the brain’s default mode for human development and education. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(4), 352–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612447308 Immordino-Yang, M. H., Darling-Hammond, L., & Krone, C. (2019). Nurturing nature: How brain development is inherently social and emotional, and what this means for education. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1633924 Immordino-Yang, M. H., Gotlieb, R., & Yang, X. F. (2023). Beyond IQ: Adolescents’ abstract talk predicts subsequent brain development and young adult achievement and well-being. Manuscript in preparation. Kang, Y., OʼDonnell, M. B., Strecher, V. J., Taylor, S. E., Lieberman, M. D., & Falk, E. B. (2017). Self-transcendent values and neural responses to threatening health messages. Psychosomatic Medicine, 79(4), 379–387. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000445 Kaplan, J. T., Gimbel, S. I., Dehghani, M., Immordino-Yang, M. H., Sagae, K., Wong, J. D., Tipper, C. M., Damasio, H., Gordon, A. S., & Damasio, A. (2016). Processing narratives concerning protected values: A cross-cultural investigation of neural correlates. Cerebral Cortex, 27, bhv325. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhv325 Kessler, E.-M., & Staudinger, U. M. (2007). Intergenerational potential: Effects of social interaction between older adults and adolescents. Psychology and Aging, 22(4), 690–704. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0882-7974.22.4.690 King, P. E., Schnitker, S. A., & Houltberg, B. J. (2020). Religious groups and institutions as a context for moral development. In L. A. Jensen (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of moral development (pp. 591–612). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/ 9780190676049.013.34 King, P., Mangan, S., & Riveros, R. (2021). Religion, spirituality, and youth thriving: Investigating the roles of the developing mind and meaning-making. In E. B. Davis, E. L. Worthington Jr., & S. A. Schnitker (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology, religion, and spirituality. Springer Nature. Kringelbach, M. L., & Berridge, K. C. (2009). Towards a functional neuroanatomy of pleasure and happiness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(11), 479–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009. 08.006
126
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
Ladouceur, C. D., Kerestes, R., Schlund, M. W., Shirtcliff, E. A., Lee, Y., & Dahl, R. E. (2019). Neural systems underlying reward cue processing in early adolescence: The role of puberty and pubertal hormones. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 102, 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. psyneuen.2018.12.016 Larsen, B., & Luna, B. (2018). Adolescence as a neurobiological critical period for the development of higher-order cognition. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 94, 179–195. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.09.005 Lee, C., Spencer, M., & Harpalani, V. (2003). “Every shut eye ain’t sleep”: Studying how people live culturally. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 6–13. Levy, D. J., Heissel, J. A., Richeson, J. A., & Adam, E. K. (2016). Psychological and biological responses to race-based social stress as pathways to disparities in educational outcomes. American Psychologist, 71(6), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040322 Lutz, A., Greischar, L. L., Perlman, D. M., & Davidson, R. J. (2009). BOLD signal in insula is differentially related to cardiac function during compassion meditation in experts vs. novices. NeuroImage, 47(3), 1038–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.04.081 McClintock, C. H., Worhunsky, P. D., Xu, J., Balodis, I. M., Sinha, R., Miller, L., & Potenza, M. N. (2019). Spiritual experiences are related to engagement of a ventral frontotemporal functional brain network: Implications for prevention and treatment of behavioral and substance addictions. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 8(4), 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.8.2019.71 Miller, L., Balodis, I. M., McClintock, C. H., Xu, J., Lacadie, C. M., Sinha, R., & Potenza, M. N. (2019). Neural correlates of personalized spiritual experiences. Cerebral Cortex, 29(6), 2331–2338. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhy102 Minow, M. (2019). When should law forgive? W. W. Norton & Company. Moll, J., Krueger, F., Zahn, R., Pardini, M., de Oliveira-Souza, R., & Grafman, J. (2006). Human fronto-mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(42), 15623–15628. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 0604475103 Nelson, E. E., Jarcho, J. M., & Guyer, A. E. (2016). Social re-orientation and brain development: An expanded and updated view. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 118–127. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.12.008 Nurra, C., & Oyserman, D. (2018). From future self to current action: An identity-based motivation perspective. Self and Identity, 17(3), 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2017.1375003 Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2010). Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(7), 1001–1043. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010374775 Pargament, K. I. (2013). Spirituality as an irreducible human motivation and process. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 23(4), 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619. 2013.795815 Park, C. L. (2007). Religiousness/spirituality and health: A meaning systems perspective. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 30(4), 319–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-007-9111-x Parvizi, J., Van Hoesen, G. W., Buckwalter, J., & Damasio, A. (2006). Neural connections of the posteromedial cortex in the macaque. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(5), 1563–1568. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507729103 Raichle, M. (2015). The brain’s default mode network. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 38(1), 433–447. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-071013-014030 Rim, J. I., Ojeda, J. C., Svob, C., Kayser, J., Drews, E., Kim, Y., Tenke, C. E., Skipper, J., & Weissman, M. M. (2019). Current understanding of religion, spirituality, and their neurobiological correlates. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 27(5), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP. 0000000000000232 Riveros, R., Yang, X. F., McCoy, D., Krone, C., Gotlieb, R., & Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2018, September 27–29). Neural and psychosocial development underlying adolescent’s abstract life goals. Mind, Brain and Education Society Conference, Los Angeles. https://imbes.org/ resources/Documents/2018%20Conference%20Program.pdf
6
Transcendent Social Thinking in Adolescence
127
Riveros, R., Yang, X., Gonzalez, M. J., & Immordino-Yang, M. (2023). Sages and Seekers: The development of diverse adolescents’ transcendent thinking and purpose through an intergenerational storytelling program. Journal of Positive Psychology. In Press. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford University Press. Roy, M., Shohamy, D., & Wager, T. D. (2012). Ventromedial prefrontal-subcortical systems and the generation of affective meaning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(3), 147–156. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tics.2012.01.005 Schriber, R. A., & Guyer, A. E. (2016). Adolescent neurobiological susceptibility to social context. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.12.009 Sescousse, G., Caldú, X., Segura, B., & Dreher, J.-C. (2013). Processing of primary and secondary rewards: A quantitative meta-analysis and review of human functional neuroimaging studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 37(4), 681–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev. 2013.02.002 Sridharan, D., Levitin, D. J., & Menon, V. (2008). A critical role for the right fronto-insular cortex in switching between central-executive and default-mode networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(34), 12569–12574. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800005105 Steinberg, L. (2014). Age of opportunity: Lessons from the new science of adolescence. Harcourt. Suleiman, A. B., & Dahl, R. E. (2017). Leveraging neuroscience to inform adolescent health: The need for an innovative transdisciplinary developmental science of adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 60(3), 240–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.12.010 Telzer, E. H. (2016). Dopaminergic reward sensitivity can promote adolescent health: A new perspective on the mechanism of ventral striatum activation. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.10.010 Telzer, E. H., van Hoorn, J., Rogers, C. R., & Do, K. T. (2018). Social influence on positive youth development: A developmental neuroscience perspective. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 54, 215–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2017.10.003 Tost, H., Champagne, F. A., & Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2015). Environmental influence in the brain, human welfare and mental health. Nature Neuroscience, 18(10), 1421–1431. https://doi.org/10. 1038/nn.4108 van Duijvenvoorde, A., Peters, S., Braams, B. R., & Crone, E. A. (2016). What motivates adolescents? Neural responses to rewards and their influence on adolescents’ risk taking, learning, and cognitive control. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 70, 135–147. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.06.037 van Elk, M., & Aleman, A. (2017). Brain mechanisms in religion and spirituality: An integrative predictive processing framework. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 73, 359–378. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.12.031 Vann, S. D., Aggleton, J. P., & Maguire, E. A. (2009). What does the retrosplenial cortex do? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(11), 792–802. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2733 Venkatraman, A., Edlow, B. L., & Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2017). The brainstem in emotion: A review. Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2017.00015 Watanabe, T., Takezawa, M., Nakawake, Y., Kunimatsu, A., Yamasue, H., Nakamura, M., Miyashita, Y., & Masuda, N. (2014). Two distinct neural mechanisms underlying indirect reciprocity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(11), 3990–3995. https:// doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1318570111 Werk, R. S., Steinhorn, D. M., & Newberg, A. (2021). The relationship between spirituality and the developing brain: A framework for pediatric oncology. Journal of Religion and Health, 60(1), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-020-01014-7 Worthman, C. M., & Trang, K. (2018). Dynamics of body time, social time and life history at adolescence. Nature, 554(7693), 451–457. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25750 Yaden, D., Iwry, J., Slack, K. J., Eichstaedt, J. C., Zhao, Y., Vaillant, G. E., & Newberg, A. B. (2016). The overview effect: Awe and self-transcendent experience in space flight. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/ cns0000086
128
R. Riveros and M. H. Immordino-Yang
Yaden, D., Haidt, J., Hood, R. W., Vago, D. R., & Newberg, A. B. (2017). The varieties of selftranscendent experience. Review of General Psychology, 21(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10. 1037/gpr0000102 Yang, X.-F., Pavarini, G., Schnall, S., & Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2018). Looking up to virtue: Averting gaze facilitates moral construals via posteromedial activations. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsy081 Yeager, D., Henderson, M., Paunesku, D., Walton, G., D’Mello, S., Spitzer, B., & Duckworth, A. (2014). Boring but important: A self-transcendent purpose for learning fosters academic selfregulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(4), 559–580. https://doi.org/10. 1037/a0037637 Yeager, D., Dahl, R. E., & Dweck, C. S. (2018). Why interventions to influence adolescent behavior often fail but could succeed. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(1), 101–122. https://doi. org/10.1177/1745691617722620 Yonker, J. E., Schnabelrauch, C. A., & DeHaan, L. G. (2012). The relationship between spirituality and religiosity on psychological outcomes in adolescents and emerging adults: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Adolescence, 35(2), 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2011. 08.010 Zarrett, N., & Eccles, J. (2006). The passage to adulthood: Challenges of late adolescence. New Directions for Youth Development, 2006(111), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.179
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster Compassionate Morality Darcia Narvaez
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Ecological Model for Raising Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Integrative Ethical Education Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Power of Climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Learning Climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moral Climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Proposal for Wellness-Promoting Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meeting Basic Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moral Habitat of Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Sustaining Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
130 130 131 134 136 136 137 137 138 138 139 142 142
Abstract
Wellness-informed education addresses trauma by helping students develop selfcalming routines, trusting relationships, compassion, and an expanded communal imagination. Wellness-informed education supports student development with the components of the evolved nest and holistic education. A wellness-informed sustaining classroom climate provides more than a good learning environment or caring classroom. A sustaining classroom climate provides as much as possible the type of environment under which human mammals thrive. It fosters students’ sense of positive purpose, as individuals and as a group, and a peaceful moral citizenship. It is characterized by collaborative leadership, community fellowship, democratic practice, and enhancement of human potential. In Triune ethics theory terms, students learn to foster the engagement and imagination ethics D. Narvaez (*) University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_7
129
130
D. Narvaez
while minimizing self-protectionism ethics. In sustaining classrooms, students learn skills for individual flourishing and enabling community flourishing. Keywords
Climate · Wellness · Evolved developmental niche · Integrative ethical education · Ethical skills
Introduction In the recent past, moral and character educational approaches have typically emphasized individual capacities for moral reasoning or good habits. As understanding of human nature has improved, scholars are realizing the intersubjectivity of human behavior, its groundedness in a social fabric, and the importance of both in human development. There is greater understanding of how moral behavior is shaped by context – whether cultural or situational. Positive environments shape individual hopes and movement toward moral self-actualization. This broadening understanding of human behavior has been accompanied by a deepening understanding as well, that is, that cognitive, social, and moral capacities are first shaped by neurobiological development within the context of family and community. When children’s basic needs are met, the result is healthy, flexible neurobiological structures, such as a stress response that is not over- or underreactive. Early-life undercare or other trauma, in contrast, neurobiological structures are impaired, redirecting development toward survival rather than potentiality (Brummer & Thorsborne, 2021). Early-life context and experience influence the nature of the child who enters the classroom, including their sociomoral capacities (Narvaez, 2014). Thus, it is important to be trauma-informed so that children can be helped instead of punished for their misdirected behavior. At the same time, educators need to understand the other end of the spectrum – wellness and thriving – so that they can make those an aim. The latter are the focus here.
The Ecological Model for Raising Children Homo sapiens have been around for at least two million years with the genus Homo for over six million. During this time, humanity evolved a critical system for raising the young, vitally important because children are born highly immature and take decades to fully mature. Humanity’s developmental system, or evolved developmental niche (EDN; Narvaez, 2014), aligns with the maturational schedule of the young. The EDN1 1
The common EDN characteristics identified worldwide include soothing perinatal experiences, lengthy breastfeeding, extensive affectionate touch (and no negative touch), responsive stable support, multiple responsive, caregivers, a welcoming social climate, self-directed social play with multiple-aged playmates, nature immersion and connection, and routine healing practices (see EvolvedNest.org).
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
131
provides companionship care that is needed throughout life but especially in the first six years. Although children attend school after their most sensitive developmental periods, they still need EDN-consistent care to continue optimal development, especially in terms of developing prosocial, compassionate morality. It is important for educators to have in mind what thriving looks like so that they can recognize when it is missing, but also because educators can provide aspects of the nest that school children need. The communities that provide the EDN foster physical, mental, social, and moral thriving (Narvaez, 2014). Thriving includes characteristics such as a quiet mind, a sense of humor, outstanding memory and senses, ability to build habit at will, inner happiness, vitality, trust, a sense of safety, social enjoyment, generosity, relational attunement, and empathic responsiveness (Narvaez & Tarsha, in press; Young, 2019). The EDN components that pertain to school children include a welcoming social climate; affectionate touch and no corporal punishment; opportunities for self-directed social play and learning; secure and responsive relationships with allomothers (nurturers other than mother – the school’s adults); immersion in the natural world to build ecological knowhow, ecological attachment, and respectful relations with the other than human; routine healing practices such as class meetings and conflict resolution practices; and regular joyous group activities such as song games, dancing, and dramatic invention. These are wellness-informed supports that can be integrated into educational practice (Bock et al., 2020; Kurth & Narvaez, 2018; Kurth et al., 2020). Wellness-informed education addresses trauma by helping students develop selfcalming routines, trusting relationships, compassion, and an expanded communal imagination. In wellness-informed sustaining classrooms, students learn skills for individual and community flourishing that includes concern and respect for one another, for community members, including the other-than-human biocommunity. The integrative ethical education model provides the scaffolding needed for transforming classrooms into the supportive environments students need.
Integrative Ethical Education Model2 Environments guide attention, foster specific habits, and channel opportunities. The social fabric of an organization is often called its climate or culture. In this chapter, a wellness-informed sustaining climate is proposed as the optimal culture for moral development and moral functioning. The notion of climate includes relationships, learning structures and aims, self-actualization support, and community bonding. A holistically supportive climate fosters compassionate moral character development, which is summarized by the integrative ethical education model. 2
The project in which the IEE model originated, the Minnesota Community Voices and Character Education Project (CVCE), did not include skills for getting along with the rest of nature. These were added to the skills list in Narvaez, 2014. The original CVCE project materials are available free for download online at https://cee.nd.edu/.
132
D. Narvaez
The Integrative Ethical Education model (IEE; Narvaez, 2006, 2007, 2008) provides a comprehensive approach for fostering moral character in schools and organizations. Grounded in bioecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) and drawing on findings from neurobiology (Narvaez, 2008), anthropology (Hewlett & Lamb, 2005), and social and emotional learning (Elias et al., 2014), IEE’s aim is to foster human flourishing through skill development and novice-to-expert instruction, positive social influences on brain and behavior, resulting in personal and group empowerment. IEE tries to solve many of the issues that arise when educators take on moral character education and presents an empirically derived set of proposals for educators, which are briefly presented here. The first proposal is for educators to establish a secure, caring relationship with the student, ensuring the social context for learning and the mutual commitment to working together and influencing one another (Watson, 2014). Children are born ready for relationship, one of mutual recognition and esteem (Trevarthen & Bjørkvold, 2016). However, relational motivation can become cloaked by experiences of dismissal and despair in babyhood (Narvaez, 2014). In this case, children may arrive at the classroom wounded and wary, in special need of a healing secure relationship with the adults in charge. A caring supportive teacher can foster empathy and caring behavior in students as well as motivation to learn (Wentzel, 1997) by using a developmental discipline approach to helping children learn to be good learners and citizens (Watson, 2014), though it may take extra time for some students (Watson & Eckert, 2018). It is known from social and motivational literature that the classroom climate primes and promotes particular behaviors (Solomon et al., 2002), so the second proposal is to create a sustaining climate that is supportive of ethical behavior and excellence. Educators can ensure that the school and classroom environments are fostering good intuitions – intuitions that promote mastery learning, prosocial relationships, and citizenship development. Climates that help students meet their needs (e.g., for belonging, competence, autonomy; Deci & Ryan, 1985) also foster skills for good character and resiliency (e.g., Benson et al., 1998), thereby encouraging prosocial behavior. High support and high expectations for achievement and behavior produce the best results (Zins et al., 2004). The climate is discussed in more detail below. The third proposal draws on the literature of expertise and schema development, proposing that an apprenticeship model of teaching be adopted to nurture a set of ethical skills in several components: ethical sensitivity, ethical judgment, ethical focus/motivation, and ethical implementation (Narvaez, 2009; Narvaez & Bock, 2009; Narvaez & Endicott, 2009; Narvaez & Lies, 2009). See Table 7.1 for some of the skills by component, emphasizing respect for nature.2 These skills can be integrated into academic instruction. Through four levels of instruction for expertise development (immersion in examples and opportunities, attention to facts and skills, practice procedures, integration across contexts), students build their embodied understanding (intuitions and explicit understanding) of a skill in context. When teachers incorporate ethical skill development and practice into regular academic instruction and school activities, they promote moral capacity building, positively
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
133
Table 7.1 Four ethical processes with suggested skills and subskills Ethical sensitivity Connect to others – human and other-than-human (be civil and courteous, show friendship and care, working with diversity, manage aggression) Communicate well with humans and other-than-humans (express emotion, speak and listen with respect, monitor communication) Take the perspectives of others – human and other-than-human (take different perspectives: justice, mercy, cultural; determine what is happening; perceive moral issues) Control bias (diagnose and overcome personal bias, nurture tolerance, avoid anthropocentrism) Ethical judgment Solve ethical problems, including the natural world in the circle of concern (gather information, predict consequences) Critical reasoning (use sound reasoning, monitor reasoning, be open to paradox) Develop codes and code shifting (honor nature’s laws, determine appropriate codes, choose environments and activities, make good choices) Coping and resiliency (apply earth-centered thinking, develop resiliency) Ethical focus Value community traditions and institutions (understand social structures, practice democracy, cooperate with humans and other-than-humans) Cultivate conscience (overcome fear, be honorable, good stewardship, good citizenship) Respect others – human and other-than-human (cultivate wisdom, show reverence, respect individual dignity of all) Develop ethical identity & integrity (aim to reach your potential, find purpose, persevere in love, cultivate commitment to enhancing others) Ethical action Resolve conflicts and problems (negotiate, make amends, stand up under pressure) Take ethical action (think strategically, get help, respond creatively) Take initiative as a leader (attend to needs of humans and other-than-humans, assert respectfully, mentor others) Work hard (set reachable goals, manage time, be steadfast, develop competence, take charge of your life)
affecting student character development (Narvaez et al., 2004). The goal is to make compassionate moral action so well practiced that it becomes most often a flow of effortless action – wuwei in the Chinese Daoist tradition (Cen & Yu, 2014). The fourth proposal highlights the importance of self-authorship, emphasizing how educators can empower student self-actualization (Baxter Magolda, 2001). Plato pointed out what has become a truism in an individualistic society: character development is a problem of the self – “deciding what to become and endeavoring to become it” (Urmson, 1988, p. 2). Domain-specific self-regulation and metacognitive skills can be coached (Zimmerman et al., 2002) and are necessary for domain success (Anderson, 1989). Students can establish the habit of assessing their psychosocial well-being, including their compassionate morality, and take steps to improve it (Narvaez, 2014; Travis & Callander, 1990).
134
D. Narvaez
The fifth proposal emphasizes the restoration of the ecological network of relationships and communities that support the child’s development. When families, neighborhoods, and schools align their goals and practices for optimal child development, flourishing is more likely to result (Lerner et al., 2003). EDN-consistent education includes multiple relationships that offer positive support and emotional (and when appropriate, physical) affection. Respectful and connected relationships with the other-than-human world (e.g., rivers, forests, wild animals) is also an evolutionary heritage. When applied in a school setting, the IEE approach uses a flexible, collaborative model where educators adapt the research-based framework of skills and noviceto-expert pedagogy to local needs and conditions (see Narvaez, 2009; Narvaez & Bock, 2009; Narvaez & Endicott, 2009; Narvaez & Lies, 2009). The framework is intentionally broad and inclusive so that educators have maximal flexibility in their local adaptations. The initial model was applied in the Minnesota Community Voices and Character Education project (Anderson et al., 2004; Narvaez et al., 2004), where ethical skill development and climate were emphasized. Across participating schools and a comparison school, over a 1-year pre–post evaluation, school climate positively influenced the development of student-reported ethical focus skills: community bonding, citizenship, and ethical goodness (Narvaez et al., 2004). Schools that implemented ethical skill development across their schools (in homeroom/advisory, every academic class, and in school-wide projects) showed positive significant effects on student ethical development, after controlling for climate effects, whereas minimal implementation had little positive effect (Narvaez, 2012). A deeper discussion of the sustaining climate follows. A sustaining climate builds on best practice as demonstrated in mastery learning climates and caring climates, adding the grounding in additional characteristics needed by human mammals for flourishing. See Table 7.2 for a comparison.
The Power of Climates Organizational climates and cultures shape individual perceptions and social behavior (Power et al., 1989; Power & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2008). Using a broad definition, the climate encompasses social structures that include the goals and aspirations of the group, overt and hidden systems, as well as the incentives and disincentives that regulate behavior. More specifically, climate has to do with how members of the group work together, treat one another, and encourage and discourage particular feelings and behaviors. Here, climate is defined as a culture of shared expectations, habitual ways of acting and responding that have been explicitly and implicitly supported initially by the leader (educator) and then enforced by the group as a whole. Climates influence multiple aspects of individual and community life, including implicit learning, and attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors. Implicit Learning. Humans learn in two basic ways, with the deliberate mind through conscious effort (as in book learning), or with the implicit mind through
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
135
Table 7.2 Comparison of mastery learning, caring, and sustaining climates Mastery Learning Climate How do we learn? Student-focused Mastery-focused Intrinsic rewards Students selfregulate Activities maintain student interest Deep thinking encouraged Clear flexible procedures
Caring Climate Who are we as a community? Management is a form of guidance Shared responsibility for classroom tasks Peer interaction encouraged Students have voice in meaningful decisions Encourage sensitivity to needs and perspectives of others Conflicts handled openly with just and caring procedures
Sustaining Climate (in addition to those of mastery and caring) Who should we be? Democratic practices Individual purpose and selfactualization are central to goals of education Positive group purpose Enhancement of human potential Broad ethical skills supported Leadership development Global awareness emphasized High-profile parenting encouraged Partnerships with local community Nature connection and respectful relations with other than humans
unconscious systems that learn automatically without conscious effort (as with most of learning through life experience). Implicit learning includes the “hidden curriculum” of schools (Jackson, 1968). Through the hidden curriculum, environments “educate” the implicit mind in terms of what actions are successful for getting needs met in that environment (Hogarth, 2001). The mind learns effortlessly from the recurrent patterns in the environment (Frensch, 1998; Reber, 1993). For example, from repeated social interaction with members of their cultural group, children learn how to greet someone, when to share eye gaze, what signals indicate pleasure, and so on (Hall, 1973). These habits become automatized without effort. Most of the human behavior is governed by such implicit, tacit knowledge (Bargh & Ferguson, 2000; Bargh & Chartrand, 1999) that forms part of wisdom (Sternberg, 2001). Because of the power of environments, adults who work with children have a great deal of say over what kinds of intuitions and cultural expectations children will develop because the adult designs and supervises the environment. Classroom environmental structures include the overt and hidden systems of rewards and punishment, the goals and aspirations promoted by the environment. The climate that results from the environmental structures plays a large role in how people treat one another, how the group works and makes decisions, and what feelings are allowed. Attitudes, Cognitions, Behaviors. Climates influence member attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in multiple ways. Climates affect what members think about, expanding or narrowing members’ imaginations, fostering or depressing emotional expression (e.g., Can I say what I think?). Attitudes like “boys will be boys” and “everyone gets bullied – you have to learn to stand up for yourself” support certain types of climates. The climate can emphasize dangerous ideas toward other groups such as belief in the superiority or vulnerability of one’s group, or distrust of another (Eidelson & Eidelson, 2003).
136
D. Narvaez
Climates promote particular habits and expectancies that affect the interpretation of events, individual goals, and options for action. Humans are susceptible to suggestion and imitation. This means that if they see someone else do something, they are likely to do it too. Local climates are conveyed not only by social practices but physical properties. For example, when trash is on the ground, rather than in a receptacle, people are more likely to throw trash on the ground. Situations press us to behave in certain ways – for example, wild and crazy at a football game, quiet at a funeral, etc. Climates influence the kind of personality traits members display but also what types of habitual dispositions they develop to begin with. Climates elicit particular behaviors from members often without their awareness. People learn from the reactions their actions elicit in an environment. You don’t guess at an answer if the teacher rebukes you for it or expose your feelings if peers laugh at you for it. You raise your hand when you know the right answer because that is what pleases the teacher. We learn from what is rewarded or punished by those with power. We learn from teacher and peer discourse – what is emphasized or ignored.
Learning Climates Several types of climates have been described and studied in educational settings. The majority of climate research in classrooms has been conducted on the learning climate and its relationship to achievement. The messages that students perceive teachers conveying are related to their cognitive and affective outcomes (Fraser, 1989). When students perceive teachers emphasizing high achievement and competition, students are likely to adopt a performance goal orientation (Urdan et al., 1998). Performance climates emphasize looking good in comparison to others and can have detrimental effects but not always (depending perhaps on whether the goal is to not look bad rather than to look good; Elliot, 1997). In contrast, when students perceive teachers emphasizing understanding, students are more likely to adopt a mastery goal orientation (Urdan & Midgley, 2001). Mastery climates emphasize learning and understanding and bring about positive attitudes toward learning, student engagement, and higher achievement (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Elliot, 1997).
Social Climates Positive classroom climates include caring climates that emphasize community feeling. In such classrooms, students feel greater psychological and physical safety, leading to a stronger sense of belongingness (Anderman, 2003; Ma, 2003). Positive social climates produce fewer behavioral and emotional problems and raise achievement levels (Kuperminc et al., 2001; McEvoy & Welker, 2000); they increase academic achievement among urban students (Haynes & Comer, 1993) and provide a protective factor for boys and high-risk students (Haynes, 1998; Kuperminc et al., 1997).
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
137
Thus, climates influence not only academic motivation but sociomoral development as well.
Moral Climates The relation of school climate to moral development was first examined by Lawrence Kohlberg and his students who began to attend to the climate of schools in the 1970s. When they constructed just community schools, schools-within-schools, they found that the “moral atmosphere” was key to fostering a sense of responsibility to the community and for cultivating moral reasoning in students. Moral climates emphasize fairness and care, and democratic procedures (Oser, 2014). The Child Development Project in the 1980s adopted a caring, just community as a first principle for organizing classrooms (Watson et al., 1989). Caring and just were defined as classrooms where (1) teacher–child relationships are warm, mutually trusting, and supportive; (2) every student’s needs for autonomy, competence, and belonging are met; (3) students have opportunities to discuss and refine understanding about morality that they practice in the classroom; and (4) teachers promote these goals with proactive and reactive techniques that support student behavior in conformance with prosocial values (Watson, 2014). Social and emotional learning practices (SEL) infuse classrooms with skill and attitude development toward treating one another with respect (Elias et al., 2014). Such classroom climates increase prosocial behavior. Characteristics of these three types of climates – mastery learning, caring, and moral – are integrated into a proposal for sustaining climates and wellness-informed classrooms. A wellness-informed classroom is grounded in attending to a broader array of human mammalian needs.
A Proposal for Wellness-Promoting Classroom Children today have lost much of the social scaffolding of the past that cared for and mentored the young – the “village” of care by the community that fostered children’s self-regulation and other key skills for flourishing (Narvaez et al., 2013). Erosion has occurred in all the supports children had in the past other than school: community, religion, family, and culture (Brazelton & Greenspan, 2001). The social environment in the United States has become toxic for child development not only because of the loss of support across the board but also because of the daily “monsters” of family abuse and community neglect (Burke Harris, 2018). Whereas a positive learning climate may have been enough to motivate students 50 years ago and a caring classroom would have been enough to foster moral character 20 years ago, today much more is required as a counterweight to the toxicity and trauma children experience. It is suggested here that children need a sustaining climate that meets a broad array of basic needs, fosters individual resiliency, and strengthens interpersonal relations.
138
D. Narvaez
Meeting Basic Needs Basic needs represent a built-in compass for optimizing a child’s development and well-being. Different theorists have described one or more basic needs, most famously Abraham Maslow (1970) described a list that included safety, belonging, love, and esteem, as well as self-actualization. Other basic needs have been identified by contemporary psychologists, such as autonomy to express oneself and act freely, competence, meaningful purpose, and trust in environmental supports, bodily integrity, affectionate touch (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Fiske, 2003; Narvaez, 2018; Staub, 2003). Most of these basic needs are to be provisioned to young children simultaneously, as occurs when the EDN is the life context (Tarsha & Narvaez, 2023). It should be pointed out that researchers often describe basic needs as individual needs. However, individuals are always embedded in relationships that form the backdrop for their expression and fulfillment. Climate influences how well the individual’s basic needs are met. One teacher writes: “We have all been in classrooms that feel tight and tense. Imagine trying to learn while worrying about pressures, limits, disapproval, and criticism” (Turkanis, 2001, p. 99). Such a climate is unlikely to meet needs for social belonging and autonomy and is likely to provoke resistance or rebellion. We learn how to effectively get needs met in each environment we encounter. If an environment does not provide positive ways to feel a part of the group, then negative ways will be learned. If an environment makes false promises (the discourse does not match practice), then cynicism will prevail and a counterculture may arise. The “developmental assets” approach provides another perspective on basic needs. Assets represent characteristics of individual students and community supports that buttress resiliency (Benson et al., 1998; Wang et al., 1998). Classrooms can foster assets through the IEE practices described earlier.
Moral Habitat of Engagement3 Habitats, the places where humans pass their time, vary in which values and dispositions they foster. This is a critical fact because the values one develops and expresses come from the habitats in which one spends the most time, especially as a child. In the last 10,000 years or so, the common moral habitat has splintered often into inhospitable habitats for the type of moral sense that Darwin (1871/1981) described and the EDN supports. The panoply of habitats apparent today can be sorted according to optimality. Compared to the social habitats of our ancestors that included the EDN, many habitats today are cold and disheartening, promoting suboptimal or even aberrant development (Narvaez, 2013; 2014). Cultural narratives and religious dogma have misshaped some habitats into forms that are counter to human flourishing (e.g., those that encourage punishment and use pain for behavioral control; Prescott, 1996).
3
I adopt the term “moral habitat” from John Ozolins (2007), although I define it differently.
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
139
Triune ethics Meta-theory (Narvaez, 2008, 2014, 2016) describes three basic ethical mindsets that humans develop as part of their evolutionary heritage. Each mindset is rooted in evolved brain systems and can be activated by the situation or by dispositional habit. The self-protectionist ethic is a pre-human orientation toward self-preservation through status, territory, rivalry, and similar urges. It can be triggered by threat or be a default disposition for persons who experienced poor nurturing or trauma at a young age. Children who are undercared for or carry unresolved trauma have developed in ways that make this orientation more likely to be activated in classroom settings where things are unfamiliar and there is potential threat to self-esteem. In contrast, an engagement ethic is rooted in a countervailing set of brain systems and experiences. It focuses on social connection and responsiveness to others in the moment. The imagination ethic uses the most recent parts of the evolved brain that includes executive and abstract reasoning functions. It allows us to envision those who are not present, make plans for the future, and coordinate planned action. The imagination ethic operates usually in coordination with one of the other ethics. Optimal structuring of the brain systems involved in the engagement and imagination ethics rely on warm, responsive parenting in early life and other sensitive periods, but their functioning is influenced by the climate or situation throughout life as well. Within the classroom, educators can calm self-protectionism with the aforementioned IEE practices (Narvaez & Bock, 2014). Educators can employ the ethic of imagination (Who should I be? What can we do for others?) to promote and emphasize the ethic of engagement (e.g., How can we show care and respect for one another?). Climates can evoke different emotional systems. Classrooms can be set up to emphasize and activate one or more of the aforementioned ethics. When climates feel unsafe to the individual, they will provoke a self-protectionist ethic in which survival, through dominance or withdrawal, becomes a major focus and priority for action (Narvaez, 2007, 2008). “Boot camp” classrooms (DeVries & Zan, 1994) emphasize obedience and competition, activating the self-protectionist ethic. In these classrooms, it pays to be self-focused and wary. Learning is impaired. “Factory” classrooms (DeVries & Zan, 1994) emphasize academics, minimizing social and emotional learning, leading to detached imagination (without emotional or relational engagement). On the other hand, when climates are caring and positive, they will evoke an engagement ethic in which the individual is able to feel and show concern for others. Such “community” classrooms (DeVries & Zan, 1994) are about relationships and cultivate the engagement ethic when the joy of interpersonal relations is emphasized. Such classrooms foster empathy for others and compassionate response.
The Sustaining Climate Sustaining classrooms offer the closest match to the EDN and meeting basic human needs. In such classrooms, relationships are central but thinking skills are also. Imagination is rooted in engagement. The climate is caring but also rich in positive
140
D. Narvaez
relational discourse (“let’s think about how we can help our neighbor” “what effect does x behavior have on other people’s well-being?”). A prosocial imagination ethic is fostered that allows a person to consider the needs of others and imagine possibilities for action and response. In sustaining classrooms, students learn to foster the engagement and imagination ethics while minimizing self-protectionism. Students learn skills for flourishing and helping others feel safe and flourish also. Emotional Sensitivity: Emotional Signaling, Responsiveness, and Trust. Climates influence emotional intelligence and the degree of emotional presence and heartminded caring. Cold climates suppress and control emotion, encouraging obedience without protest. Warm climates offer social and emotional support to members as they meet the tasks of the day. A warm climate is a human and humane environment. Feelings are accepted. Sustaining climate shares a lot of characteristics with Rogers and Freiberg’s (Rogers, 1983) person-centered classroom in which unconditional positive regard is practiced. In a person-centered classroom, leadership and rule development is shared; all students can help manage the classroom. Teachers help students with self-discipline and intrinsic motivation. Sustaining climates offer a democratic, negotiating approach to tasks. That is, individuals have a say in what they do, what the goals are, and what are good outcomes. Like their interest in the goings on, their emotions are engaged as a matter of course. The individual spirit is not alienated by coercive strategies. Instead, individuals have an effect on the course of the group activities. They have influence, as in a good parent–child relationship (Kochanska, 2002). Democratic classrooms foster student development by allowing students to have an opportunity to make suggestions for structuring the rules and practices of the classroom. Students have opportunities to discuss all sides of controversial topic (Berman, 1997). In a sustaining classroom climate, students are at ease enough to express their thoughts and feelings about basic issues. They are able to engage in discussions in which viewpoints conflict and develop greater social perspectivetaking skills. Such activities also promote moral judgment development (Reimer et al., 1991) and personal efficacy in democratic functioning: “Open-classroom climate generally is related to higher political efficacy and trust, and lower political cynicism and alienation – to more democratic attitudes” (Ehman, 1980, p. 110). Students who practice designing and creating their curriculum are able to “enhance and embellish assignments, discuss requirements and expectations, seek new depth and experiences, and search for meaning and value in projects and classroom studies” (Turkanis, 2001, p. 102). They develop the motivation to “own” their learning generally and feel more capable in making decisions, solving problems and thinking creatively as adolescents and adults (Turkanis, 2001). Purposeful citizenship is fostered by teachers who help students develop a sense of social responsibility (Berman, 1997). Such teachers promote peer interaction within a context that emphasizes cooperation and equality. They allow conflicts to be openly and effectively resolved. They give students a meaningful voice in controlling their environment. They enlarge young people’s perspectives by inviting them to consider the perspectives of others and the good of the group. Of course, there are different ways to be a cohesive group. You can have a democratic
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
141
community but demonize the outgroup – a self-protectionist ethic. Teachers can set up or allow climates to develop that emphasize the self-protectionist ethic (me against you, us against them), the engagement ethic (relational care), or the imagination ethic (inclusive solutions). Sustaining classrooms are globally sustainable and inclusive. That is, they take multiple perspectives into account when planning, thinking of consequences and solutions that meet the basic needs of all. For a successful participatory democracy, Reimer (Reimer et al., 1991) suggested that several conditions must be met. Student interest must be maintained. Issues are raised clearly so that the pros and cons of concrete proposals can be discussed in a clear, flexible procedural order. Students and staff discuss issues together by voicing reasons for their stands and not by attacking one another on personal grounds. Controversy and conflict are welcomed as a way to encourage cognitive and ethical growth. Moral judgment is promoted through discussions of everyday dilemmas and sociomoral problems and what rules to establish, thereby building understanding of the need for agreements and commitment to following them. Democratic citizenship is enhanced through the development of additional capacities and attitudes required for global citizenship. The policy experts in the Citizenship Education Policy Study Project (Cogan, 1997) identified the public virtues and values that a global citizen would need in the twenty-first century to avoid war and other destructive actions. The experts agreed on the following characteristics, in descending order of importance. Each person should (a) approach problems as member of a global society; (b) work cooperatively with others and take responsibility for one’s roles and responsibilities in society; (c) understand, accept, and tolerate cultural differences; (d) think in a critical and systematic way; (e) resolve conflict in a nonviolent manner; (f) adopt a way of life that protects the environment; (g) respect and defend human rights; (h) participate in public life at all levels of civic discourse; and (i) make full use of informationbased technologies. We might include today because of vast social media misinformation: (j) Become media literate. It may be useful to post this list in the classroom or school. Meaningful Development, Enhancement of Human Potential, and Flourishing. Sustaining classrooms centralize flourishing. As the teacher gets to know students, she co-shapes instruction with students in ways that engage and delight them. Humor and joy are not strangers to classroom life. Student holistic growth is central to the goals of the classroom. For example, in a growth-oriented classroom, discipline is not punishment but is coached character development (Watson, 2014). Moreover, the educator helps students develop a sense of positive purpose through ongoing discussions of a good life in the community. Student self-actualization is part of the classroom mission. Individuals develop their unique gifts and talents under the guidance and encouragement of the classroom and school community in response to community need, an Aristotelian idea (Urmson, 1988). The community is drawn into the classroom, whether for developmental support, instructional purpose, or the investigation of community needs that the students can help meet.
142
D. Narvaez
As in traditional First Nation education, students learn to get along with the biocommunity (Medin & Bang, 2014) through learning respectful relations such as the “honorable harvest” in seeking to harvest animals and plants (Kimmerer, 2013). The time is now, in an era of planetary ecological crises, for moral education to help shape ecological intelligence and ability to live sustainably and regeneratively with the rest of the nature (Narvaez, 2020a, b, 2021).
Conclusion Wellness-informed sustaining climates pay attention to meeting basic needs and foster flourishing within the community, including relations with the biocommunity. They integrate democratic practice and discourse, and enhance human potential and compassionate morality. Sustaining classrooms offer places where students are encouraged to self-actualize through the academic tasks at hand. Students learn to integrate positive purpose, citizenship and flourishing as individuals, as classroom members, as global citizens, and as members of the earth community.
References Anderman, L. (2003). Academic and social perceptions as predictors of change in middle school students’ sense of school belonging. Journal of Experimental Education, 72(1), 5–22. Anderson, L. M. (1989). Learners and learning. In M. C. Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge base for the beginning teacher (pp. 85–99). Pergamon Press. Anderson, C., Narvaez, D., Bock, T., Endicott, L., & Lies, J. (2004). Minnesota community voices and character education: Final report and evaluation. Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning. Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462–479. Bargh, J. A., & Ferguson, M. J. (2000). Beyond behaviorism: On the automaticity of higher mental processes. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 925–945. Baxter Magolda, M. (2001). Making their own way: Narratives for transforming higher education to promote self-development. Stylus. Benson, P., Leffert, N., Scales, P., & Blyth, D. (1998). Beyond the “village” rhetoric: Creating healthy communities for children and adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2(3), 138–159. Berman, S. (1997). Children’s social consciousness and the development of social responsibility. SUNY Press. Bock, T., Narvaez, D., Singh, R., & Tarsha, M. (2020). The nurturing classroom. In T. TsyrlinaSpady & P. Renn (Eds.), Nurture, care, respect, and trust transformative pedagogy inspired by Janusz Korczak (pp. 247–260). Myers Education Press. Brazelton, T. B., & Greenspan, S. I. (2001). The irreducible needs of children: What every child must have to grow, learn, and flourish. Da Capo. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. Brummer, J., & Thorsborne, M. (2021). Building a trauma-informed restorative school: Skills and approaches for improving culture and behavior. Jessica Kingsley. Burke Harris, N. (2018). The deepest well: Healing the long-term effects of childhood adversity. Houghton Mifflin.
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
143
Cen, G., & Yu, J. (2014). Traditional Chinese philosophies and their perspectives on moral education. In L. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (2nd ed., pp. 30–42). Routledge. Cogan, J. J. (1997). Multicultural citizenship: Educational policy for the 21st century. University of Minnesota. Darwin, C. (1871/1981). The descent of man. Princeton University Press. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Academic. DeVries, R., & Zan, B. (1994). Moral classrooms, moral children: Creating a constructivist atmosphere in early education. Teachers College Press. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273. Ehman, L. H. (1980). The American school in the political socialization process. Review of Educational Research, 50, 99–119. Eidelson, R. J., & Eidelson, J. I. (2003). Dangerous ideas: Five beliefs that propel groups toward conflict. American Psychologist, 58, 182–192. Elias, M. J., Kranzler, A., Parker, S. J., Kash, V. M., & Weissberg, R. P. (2014). The complementary perspectives of social and emotional learning, moral education, and character education. In L. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (2nd ed., pp. 272–289). Routledge. Elliot, A. (1997). Integrating the “classic” and “contemporary” approaches to achievement motivation: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 143–179). JAI Press. Fiske, S. (2003). Social beings. Wiley. Fraser, B. J. (1989). Twenty years of classroom climate work: Progress and prospect. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21(4), 307–327. Frensch, P. A. (1998). One concept, multiple meanings: On how to define the concept of implicit learning. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning. Sage. Hall, E. T. (1973). The hidden language. Anchor. Haynes, N. M. (1998). Creating safe and caring school communities: Comer School Development Program schools. Journal of Negro Education, 65(3), 308–314. Haynes, N. M., & Comer, J. P. (1993). The Yale School Development Program: Process, outcomes, and policy implications. Urban Education, 28(2), 166–199. Hewlett, B., & Lamb, M. (2005). Hunter-gatherer childhoods: Evolutionary, developmental, & cultural perspectives. Aldine De Gruyter. Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating intuition. University of Chicago Press. Jackson, P. (1968). Life in classrooms. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Kimmerer, R. W. (2013). Braiding sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge and the teachings of plants. Milkweed Editions. Kochanska, G. (2002). Mutually responsive orientation between mothers and their young children: A context for the early development of conscience. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 191–195. Kuperminc, G. P., Leadbeater, B. J., Emmons, C., & Blatt, S. J. (1997). Perceived school climate and difficulties in the social adjustment of middle school students. Applied Developmental Science, 1(2), 76–88. Kuperminc, G. P., Leadbeater, B. J., & Blatt, S. J. (2001). School social climate and individual differences in vulnerability to psychopathology among middle school students. Journal of School Psychology, 39(2), 141–159. Kurth, A., & Narvaez, D. (2018). The evolved developmental niche and children’s developing morality. In J. Delafield-Butt, A.-W. Dunlop, & C. Trevarthen (Eds.), The child’s curriculum: Working with the natural values of young children (pp. 104–125). Oxford University Press. Kurth, A., Narvaez, D., & Tarsha, M. (2020). Meeting basic needs and getting kids on track to fulfill their potential. In T. Tsyrlina-Spady & P. Renn (Eds.), Nurture, care, respect, and trust transformative pedagogy inspired by Janusz Korczak (pp. 115–126). Myers Education Press.
144
D. Narvaez
Lerner, R. M., Dowling, E. M., & Anderson, P. M. (2003). Positive youth development: Thriving as a basis of personhood and civil society. Applied Developmental Science, 7, 172–180. Ma, X. (2003). Sense of belonging to school: Can schools make a difference? Journal of Educational Research, 96(6), 340–349. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). Harper & Row. McEvoy, A., & Welker, R. (2000). Antisocial behavior, academic failure, and school climate: A critical review. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(3), 130–140. Medin, D., & Bang, M. (2014). Who’s asking? Native science, Western science, and science education. MIT Press. Narvaez, D. (2006). Integrative ethical education. In M. Killen & J. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 703–733). Erlbaum. Narvaez, D. (2007). How cognitive and neurobiological sciences inform values education for creatures like us. In D. Aspin & J. Chapman (Eds.), Values education and lifelong learning: Philosophy, policy, programmes (pp. 127–159). Springer. Narvaez, D. (2008). Triune ethics: The neurobiological roots of our multiple moralities. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 95–119. Narvaez, D. (2009). Nurturing character in the classroom, EthEx series, book 4: Ethical action. ACE Press. Narvaez, D. (2012). Moral neuroeducation from early life through the lifespan. Neuroethics, 5(2), 145–157. Narvaez, D. (2013). Neurobiology and moral mindsets. In K. Heinrichs & F. Oser (Eds.), Moral and immoral behavior: Theoretical and empirical perspectives on moral motivation (pp. 289–307). Sense Publishers. Narvaez, D. (2014). Neurobiology and the development of human morality: Evolution, culture and wisdom. Norton. Narvaez, D. (2016). Embodied morality: Protectionism, engagement and imagination. Palgrave Macmillan. Narvaez, D. (Ed.). (2018). Basic needs, wellbeing and morality: Fulfilling human potential. Palgrave Macmillan. Narvaez, D. (2020a). Ecocentrism: Resetting baselines for virtue development. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 23, 391–406. Narvaez, D. (2020b). Moral education in a time of human ecological devastation. Journal of Moral 601 Education, 50(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2020.1781067 Narvaez, D. (2021). Species-typical phronesis for a living planet. In M. De Caro & M. S. Vaccarezza (Eds.), Practical wisdom: Philosophical and psychological perspectives (pp. 160–180). Routledge. Narvaez, D., & Bock, T. (2009). Nurturing character in the classroom, EthEx series, book 2: Ethical judgment. ACE Press. Narvaez, D., & Bock, T. (2014). Developing ethical expertise and moral personalities. In L. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (2nd ed., pp. 140–158). Routledge. Narvaez, D., & Endicott, L. (2009). Nurturing character in the classroom, EthEx series, book 1: Ethical sensitivity. ACE Press. Narvaez, D., & Lies, J. (2009). Nurturing character in the classroom, EthEx series, book 3: Ethical motivation. ACE Press. Narvaez, D., & Tarsha, M. (in press). What happened to species-typical human nature? In L. Sundararajan & A. Dueck (Eds.), When the gods have fled: Being human in the age of machine and the market. Palgrave Macmillan. Narvaez, D., Bock, T., Endicott, L., & Lies, J. M. (2004). Minnesota’s community voices and character education project. Journal of Research in Character Education, 2(2), 89. Narvaez, D., Panksepp, J., Schore, A., & Gleason, T. (2013). Evolution, early experience and human development: From research to practice and policy. Oxford University Press. Oser, F. (2014). Toward a theory of the just community approach: Effects of collective moral, civic, and social education. In L. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (2nd ed., pp. 198–222). Routledge.
7
Wellness-Informed Classrooms with Sustaining Climates Foster. . .
145
Ozolins, J. (2007). Avoiding bad company: The importance of moral habitat and moral habits in moral education. In D. A. Aspin & J. D. Chapman (Eds.), Values education and lifelong learning: Principles, policies, programmes (pp. 107–126). Springer. Power, F. C., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2008). The just community approach to moral education and the moral atmosphere of the school. In L. P. Nucci & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (pp. 230–247). Routledge. Power, C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989). Lawrence Kohlberg’s approach to moral education. Columbia University Press. Prescott, J. W. (1996). The origins of human love and violence. Pre- and Perinatal Psychology Journal, 10(3), 143–188. Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. Oxford University Press. Reimer, J., Paolitto, D. P., & Hersh, R. H. (1991). Promoting moral growth: From Piaget to Kohlberg (2nd ed.). Waveland Press. Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80’s. Merrill. Solomon, D., Watson, M. S., & Battistich, V. A. (2002). Teaching and school effects on moral/ prosocial development. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook for research on teaching. American Educational Research Association. Staub, E. (2003). The psychology of good and evil: Why children, adults, and groups help and harm others. Cambridge University of Press. Sternberg, R. J. (2001). Why schools should teach for wisdom: The balance theory of wisdom in educational settings. Educational Psychologist, 36, 227–245. Tarsha, M.S., & Narvaez, D. (2023). The developmental neurobiology of moral mindsets: Basic needs and childhood experience. In M. Berg & E. Chang (Eds.), Motivation & morality: A biopsychosocial approach (pp. 187–204). APA Books. Travis, J. W., & Callander, M. G. (1990). Wellness for helping professionals: Creating compassionate cultures. Wellness Associates. Trevarthen, C., & Bjørkvold, J.-R. (2016). Life for learning: How a young child seeks joy with companions in a meaningful world. In D. Narvaez, J. Braungart-Rieker, L. Miller, L. Gettler, & P. Hastings (Eds.), Contexts for young child flourishing: Evolution, family and society (pp. 28–60). Oxford University Press. Turkanis, C. G. (2001). Creating curriculum with children. In B. Rogoff, C. G. Turkanis, & L. Bartlett (Eds.), Learning together: Children and adults in a school community (pp. 91–102). Oxford University Press. Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 115–138. Urdan, T., Midgley, C., & Anderman, E. A. (1998). The role of classroom goal structure in students’ use of self-handicapping. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 101–122. Urmson, J. O. (1988). Aristotle’s ethics. Basil Blackwell. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1998). Building educational resilience. Phi Beta Kappa, 430, 7–61. Watson, M. (2014). Developmental discipline and moral education. In L. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (2nd ed., pp. 159–179). Routledge. Watson, M., & Eckert, L. (2018). Learning to trust: Attachment theory and classroom management. Oxford University Press. Watson, M., Solomon, D., Battistich, V., Schaps, E., & Solomon, J. (1989). The Child Development Project: Combining traditional and developmental approaches to values education. In L. P. Nucci (Ed.), Moral development and character education: A dialogue. McCutchan. Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419. Young, J. (2019). Connection modeling: Metrics for deep nature-connection, mentoring, and culture repair. In D. Narvaez, Four Arrows, E. Halton, B. Collier, & G. Enderle (Eds.), Indigenous sustainable wisdom: First Nation knowhow for global flourishing (pp. 219–243). Peter Lang.
146
D. Narvaez
Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R. (2002). Developing self-regulated learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. American Psychological Association. Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success: Social and emotional learning (pp. 3–22). Teachers College Press.
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education What We Have Learned About Learning from the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI) Kris Acheson, Devi Bhuyan, Lindy Brewster, Jerry Burgess, John Dirkx, Steve Grande, Shagufa Kapadia, Ali Kenny, Kees Kouwenaar, Terence Lovat, Jennifer Ma, Wenjuan Ma, Yoshie Tomozumi Nakamura, Thomas Nielsen, Hajime Nishitani, Guanglong Pang, Christina Raab, Craig Shealy, Renee Staton, Lee Sternberger, India Still, John Style, Ron Toomey, and Jennifer Wiley Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Values-Based Education Is a Type of Values-Based Intervention That Extends Far Beyond the Classroom to Whenever We Try to Influence Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviors . . . . . . . . Values-Based Interventions Such as Values-Based Education Include Both the Teaching About and Teaching of Beliefs and Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI): Empirical Applications in Values-Based Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Is the BEVI? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Is the BEVI Used? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Is the Rationale for the BEVI? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BEVI Domains, Scales, and Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
149 150 151 153 154 154 155 155
Because this chapter is based upon long-term programmatic research and practice with contributors serving in overlapping roles, and draws upon theory and data from multiple initiatives over many years, authorship is listed in alphabetical order rather than level or type of contribution. For purposes of consistency and coherence, aspects of this chapter are derived and/or adapted from (1) Acheson et al. (in press), (2) Shealy (in press), (3) Shealy (2016), and (4) the website for the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI) at www.thebevi.com K. Acheson (*) Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA D. Bhuyan Sheppard-Pratt Psychology, Ellicott City, MD, USA © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_8
147
148
K. Acheson et al.
People in High BEVI Full Scale Score Groups Experience and Express Beliefs and Values Differently from Those in Low Full Scale Score Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . When It Comes to Beliefs and Values, Structures of Identity and Self May Vary Empirically from Who We Say We Are and/or How We Are Experienced by Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What We Believe and Value Not Only Illuminates Who We Are But Can Also Predict What We Will Do in Our Work, Relationships, and Lives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overtly Fostering Values May Not Work and Could Even Cause a Backlash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
158 162 164 166 169 171
Abstract
The chapter examines the intersection between Values-based Education (VbE) and research conducted by the author team under the auspices of the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI). BEVI constitutes a mixed methods instrument with potential to ascertain the beliefs, circumstances, and values that underlie the lives of individuals across a wide range of settings and contexts and, hence, are crucial in understanding and effecting optimal teaching, learning, growth, development, and change. As such, the intersection of BEVI with the aims and objectives of VbE offers potential for enhanced understanding and practice. Keywords
Values-based Education · Values-based Intervention · Beliefs · Values · Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory · BEVI · Assessment · Outcomes · Transformative Learning · Equilintegration Model · EI Model
L. Brewster OR Consulting, Virginia, USA J. Burgess Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK J. Dirkx · W. Ma · G. Pang Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA S. Grande · R. Staton James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA S. Kapadia The M.S. University of Baroda, Vadodara, India A. Kenny LeaderWise, Montana, USA K. Kouwenaar Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands T. Lovat The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia J. Ma Faculty of Education, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
149
Introduction Within both scholarly and lay discourse regarding human motivation and change, it is ironic that there is no construct more crucial but less understood than the concept of “values” (e.g., Braithwaite & Scott, 1991; Rokeach, 1979; Schwartz, 2012), a conceptual conundrum that provides a unique opportunity for this indispensable volume on Values-based Education. So, what might be most helpful at the outset of this chapter is to start by putting cards on table, describing what we understand “Values-based Education” to be along with some exemplary approaches that seek to define and measure the value construct. Such emphases are important for many reasons, not the least of which is that VbE is “not a heavy assessment-driven field,” although its scholars and practitioners are “always looking for ways of tracking progress” (T. Lovat, January 11, 2022, personal communication). More specifically, if our goal is to educate for values – that is, demonstrably to inculcate particular “values” in human beings – we must make sense of what “beliefs and values” actually are, a contention that may seem surprising but is actually fundamental. That is because the definitional underpinnings of the literature in Values-based Education, although deeply illuminating and impactful, have been rightly characterized as a “semantic morass” (Berkowitz, 2011, p. 13). To be fair, the problem here is much bigger than VbE. To consider just one example, let us examine the term, “family values.” Underlying our assumptions of what constitute “family values” is a fundamental understanding of what a “family” is – what kinds of groups “family” includes or excludes, and why. At its heart, conflict over “family Y. T. Nakamura The George Washington University, Washington D.C, USA T. Nielsen University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia H. Nishitani Soka/Hiroshima University, Hachioji, Japan C. Raab Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria C. Shealy Western Washington University, Washington, USA L. Sternberger International Beliefs and Values Institute, Washington, USA I. Still Atlantic City Municipal Utilities Authority, Jersey City, NJ, USA J. Style Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain R. Toomey Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia J. Wiley CoreCollaborative International, Harrisonburg, USA
150
K. Acheson et al.
values” arises because people imagine differently the construct (family) that defines those values (e.g., Gavriel-Fried & Shilo, 2016; Sharma, 2013). More generally, a simple Google search of the word “values,” much less its conceptual cousin, “beliefs,”1 reveals a cacophony of contradictory constructs. This lack of coherence reveals one of the most basic challenges we face as VbE scholars, educators, students, practitioners, and leaders is that the term “values” is so widely used in so many and varied forms, it soon becomes evident that although we talk as though we have a common understanding of what “values” are, this putative contention is anything but. Moreover, the problem is much deeper than semantic, or even conceptual. It is essentially epistemological in nature, in that when talking about “values” – much less “values in education” – we may not know what we do not know or why that lack of knowledge matters. In point of fact, such absence matters profoundly because we cannot effectively “educate for values” if we do not understand what values are and what they are not. For example, values are not beliefs, although they are derivative of them. Moreover, beliefs and values exist in the service of need. And needs are integral to the structure of the human self – and by extension – whether “values-based” change occurs and under what circumstances (Acheson et al., 2022; Shealy, 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015; Wiley et al., 2021). But, we are getting ahead of ourselves and need to back up in order to explain why such understanding is integral to all interventions that are values-based.
Values-Based Education Is a Type of Values-Based Intervention That Extends Far Beyond the Classroom to Whenever We Try to Influence Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviors As advocates of depth-based change that cultivate human potential on individual and group levels, we feel an urgent calling and need to inculcate greater capacity to care for self, others, and the larger world (Aurora Network, 2023; Shealy et al., 2012; Staton & Grande, 2017; Cultivating the Globally Sustainable Self, 2022; Toogoolawa, 2022). But, it is one thing to describe exemplary approaches to “Values-based Education.” It is another matter altogether to explain why they do or do not work, and not just theoretically (e.g., why we think they work) or polemically (e.g., why we think they should work), but empirically to demonstrate with real, quantitative data why exposure to VbE – through courses, programs, systems, and institutions – appears to be associated with real change, if not transformation, regarding how, to what degree, and for which reasons human beings experience self, others, and the larger world as they do. However, as we will see, data of this nature require sufficient clarity regarding the underlying constructs upon Here is an example of a Google search of “beliefs and values” conducted on June 16, 2022: https:// www.google.com/search?q¼beliefs+and+values&rlz¼1C1CHZN_enUS967US968&oq¼beliefs +and+values&aqs¼chrome.0.69i59j0i67i433j35i39j0i67j0i512l3j0i433i512j0i512j0i67i433. 3182j1j15&sourceid¼chrome&ie¼UTF-8
1
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
151
which measures are built and data derived (e.g., Acheson & Dirkx, 2021; Shealy, 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015; Wiley et al., 2021). Broadly speaking, Values-based Education (VbE) is a philosophy of education advocating that a community’s collectively identified values should provide the centerpiece for everything that occurs within that community. To VbE scholars, educators, practitioners, and leaders, much of this focus is on the pre-K-12 school environment but, as we contend, and will seek to demonstrate, VbE occurs across multiple settings and populations, all over the world, and should therefore be framed in VbE terms. As such, although VbE often focuses on school environments – which most certainly have been at the heart of VbE – we wish to emphasize at the outset that we, and many of our colleagues around the world, have been engaged in Valuesbased Education, implicitly and explicitly, for many years. That is because VbE is, from our perspective, integral to all Values-based Interventions (VbI) that include the teaching of and teaching about values. As we will demonstrate through multiple examples of our work with the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory, or BEVI (the mixed methods assessment method we use in teaching, research, and practice) and the Equilintegration or EI Model (the underlying theoretical framework that helps predict and explain the acquisition and modification of beliefs and values), it is not advisable to try and engage human value-systems without carefully designed and delivered processes of education of and about values. That is why we conceptualize Values-based Education as integral to the Values-based Interventions we do. For example, VbE plays a key role in Values-based Interventions across the spectrum of our research and practice activities in areas such as engaged and highimpact learning (e.g., Shealy et al., 2015; Wiley et al., 2021), environmental education and education for sustainable development (e.g., Acheson & Kelly, 2021; Kelly et al., 2016), gender sensitivity training (e.g., Pendleton et al., 2016), international and multicultural education (e.g., Grant et al., 2021; Iseminger et al., 2020; Iyer, 2013; Tabit et al., 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015), leadership development (e.g., Dyjak-LeBlanc et al., 2016; Shullman et al., 2022), mental health clinician training, research, and practice (e.g., Burgess et al., 2004; Coates et al., 2016; Cozen et al., 2016; Kenny et al., 2018), and transformative education and learning (e.g., Acheson & Dirkx, 2021; Acheson et al., 2022). As we seek to demonstrate, the overarching reasons that values-based perspectives in general – and the EI model and BEVI method in particular – are useful across all of these domains is that they (1) help operationalize key constructs that benefit from greater conceptual and empirical specificity and (2) provide an applied system through which these laudable educational aspirations may be facilitated.
Values-Based Interventions Such as Values-Based Education Include Both the Teaching About and Teaching of Beliefs and Values From our perspective, Values-based Interventions, such as VbE, are best described and delivered at two interdependent levels of analysis: (1) transparently introduced, presented, and explained in a way that maximizes interest, enhances engagement,
152
K. Acheson et al.
and lowers resistance by the populations we seek to reach and (2) appropriately integrated and sensitively mediated through culturally congruent curricula, programs, media, and processes that are tailored to specific audiences for clearly articulated objectives. The former approach really concerns the teaching about values, whereas the latter approach addresses the teaching of values. As may be evident, of these two components, the “teaching about” values is perhaps less familiar to VbE intervenors since the focus tends more often to be on the “teaching of” values, typically through curricula or programs that are designed to inculcate particular values within a specific context. Many excellent examples of such work are described in this volume (e.g., Lovat et al., 2023). From our experience, the benefit that accrues from also integrating a “teaching about values” dimension into VbI/VbE work – tailored to the age and needs of participants – is that it deliberately invites the recipients of our interventions into a process which is all about them. After all, the ultimate purpose of such work is to engage our audience in concepts, materials, or processes that are – or should be – of deep significance and meaning to their lives, relationships, and activities. So, from our perspective, it behooves us to employ models and methods that do just that, by juxtaposing the content of our “interventions” (e.g., what we are trying to teach, convey, inculcate, transform, etc.) with a meta-level understanding of why it is important to do so. Through this approach, the participant (1) becomes the subject rather than object of values-based work, (2) is explicitly invited to join in as a co-creator and co-collaborator, and (3) feels and sees their own stake in the intervention and why it matters to them personally. It should be emphasized that we do not approach such activities with the expectation that we can teach people “values” as they are understood by scholars who work in these areas (e.g., Rokeach, 1979; Schwartz, 2012). That is, we do not try to “teach” our participants (e.g., students, leaders, clients, etc.) specific values like “respect,” “openness,” “empathy,” etc. As we explain later, that is because the nature of values is largely affective, needs-based, and non-conscious, so the idea that we would somehow create more “respectful,” “open,” and “empathic” human beings by telling them to be – or telling them about – “respect,” “openness,” or “empathy” is contraindicated from a pedagogical standpoint (Acheson et al., 2022; Shealy et al., 2012; Tabit et al., 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015). Instead, values-inculcation emerges over time from pedagogical and experiential processes that mediate outcomes such as greater respect, openness, or empathy (Iyer, 2013). To be clear, it is not that we do not explain what such constructs mean or why they may be valuable; we do. It is simply that we do not have evidence to expect that interventions of this nature (e.g., psychoeducational, sociolegal) are all that effective when we’re dealing with deep-seated and needs-based motivational states in human beings. As cases in point, dismal outcomes of multi-million-dollar initiatives like “Drug Abuse Resistance Education” or DARE, “Just Say No” approaches to abstinence, or the “Three Strikes Rule” vis-à-vis imprisonment in the United States – all of which are demonstrably and unabashedly “values-based” – demonstrate why simplistic understandings of human nature and human behavior so often lead to harmful practices and ineffective policies (Bullock et al., 2022; Shealy & Bhuyan, 2009). As such, in our VbI/VbE work, we focus explicitly on such failures of policy and practice to demonstrate why they were destined to fail precisely because they
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
153
emerged from reductionistic and antediluvian beliefs and values about human beings (e.g., Iyer, 2013). It should be emphasized that such work is, and must be, nonpartisan (e.g., IBAVI, 2022). In other words, we do not privilege perspectives from the left or the right in any given culture or context, recognizing that the tension between left and right is really an ancient and fraught dialectic between “that which was,” “that which is,” and “that which could be.” That is because, Fever dreams on the far right – yearning for a return to some imagined golden age where the status quo vis-à-vis power and privilege was understood as ordained (e.g., notions of “white supremacy” or its earlier incarnation of “white man’s burden”) – may be mirrored by naïve fantasies on the far left that all we need to do is remove the forces of oppression and dominance, and human goodness, fairness, and righteousness will naturally emerge (e.g., efforts to “defund the police”). These nature/nurture dichotomies predate our current local/ global squabbles as well as their Western progenitors (e.g., Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, JeanJaquez Rousseau), and basically cut to the core of our beliefs and values about why we are who we are – and what to do about all of that – as a species. (Laskar, 2013; Shealy, in press)
From the perspective of values-based pedagogies and processes, such matters may seem unduly abstract, but they are anything but. That is because, more than ever, and particularly among young people in this day and age, human beings long to understand why things are the way they are and where we have agency to change the way things are (e.g., Aurora Network, 2023; Cultivating the Globally Sustainable Self, 2022; Lovat et al., 2023; Shealy, 2016; Toomey et al., 2023). In short, from an empirical standpoint, exhorting others to adopt beliefs and values that are associated with whatever version of reality one believes is superior is likely to be a waste of time and energy (e.g., Tabit et al., 2016). At the same time, in our Values-based Interventions, including VbE, considerable evidence suggests that if we strongly emphasize reflecting on and articulating why we believe and value what we believe and value, a wide range of learning, growth, and development outcomes occur, such as deeper self/other awareness, self-reflection, critical thinking, and tolerance for other belief systems. To take one example of many, the Madison International Learning Community at James Madison University is explicitly and deliberately values-based, with the following overarching goals: to have students think and act locally and globally; learn about the relevance of beliefs and values of self, others and the larger world; and cultivate the values and competencies of informed and enlightened global citizens who are prepared to lead productive and meaningful lives. (See https://www.jmu.edu/global/isss/get-involved/madison-intl.shtml; Iyer, 2013)
The Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI): Empirical Applications in Values-Based Education We focused above on conceptual matters vis-à-vis Values-based Education, such as the rationale for considering VbE as a prominent type or form of Values-based Intervention as well as the benefits of juxtaposing the teaching about values with the teaching of values. Although many other issues are worth examining in this regard
154
K. Acheson et al.
(e.g., see Acheson et al., in press; Shealy, 2016), we turn now to the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory or BEVI – including a description of this mixed methods measure – before examining how the BEVI has been applied across a very wide range of settings and populations over the past few decades as well as attendant empirical evidence of relevance to VbE scholars, educators, practitioners, and leaders.
What Is the BEVI? The BEVI is an accessible, adaptable, and powerful analytic tool useful across multiple populations and settings – from education and research to leadership and mental health – to evaluate, understand, and facilitate processes and outcomes of learning, growth, and transformation (https://thebevi.com/). Based upon decades of research and practice in the United States and internationally – and with excellent psychometric properties – the BEVI asks respondents a series of questions about beliefs, values, and life events that seek to illuminate “who learns what and why, and under what circumstances.” Through 17 empirically derived scales, the BEVI measures basic openness; receptivity to different cultures, religions, and social practices; the tendency (or not) to stereotype in particular ways; self and emotional awareness; and preferred but implicit strategies for making sense of why ‘other’ people and cultures ‘do what they do’. (Shealy, 2005, p. 99)
A grounded theory and mixed methods instrument, including both quantitative and qualitative items, the BEVI was developed on the basis of hundreds of actual “belief” statements from individuals all over the world. The BEVI uses a secure, web-based system that takes about 30 min to complete while generating an array of reports for individuals, couples, families, groups, organizations, and institutions (for more information, see https://thebevi.com/about/).
How Is the BEVI Used? In development since the early 1990s, as of this writing, the BEVI has been administered over 150,000 times across a wide range of countries and cultures. Individuals, groups, institutions, and organizations use the BEVI for a variety of purposes, including • To evaluate learning experiences (e.g., general education, international learning, multicultural courses, growth/development/team-building workshops, etc.) • To understand learning processes (e.g., who learns what and why, and under what circumstances) • To promote learning objectives (e.g., increased awareness of self, others, and the larger world)
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
155
• To enhance teaching and program quality (e.g., which experiences or courses have what impact, and why) • To facilitate growth and development (e.g., of individuals, groups, organizations) • To conduct research (e.g., how and why do people become more “open” to different cultures) • To address organizational needs (e.g., staff/leadership development, assessing organizational climate) • To comply with assessment and accreditation requirements (e.g., substantive assessment) (https://thebevi.com/).
What Is the Rationale for the BEVI? Individuals, groups, institutions, and organization use the BEVI for many reasons, such as the following. First, it is comprehensive, using a mixed methods format (e.g., quantitative and qualitative items) measuring multiple aspects of learning, growth, and development including, but not limited to, basic openness; receptivity to different cultures, religions, and social practices; the tendency (or not) to stereotype in particular ways; self and emotional awareness; and preferred but implicit strategies for making sense of why “other” people and cultures “do what they do.” Second, it is empirically validated and theoretically grounded, with a demonstrable track record of international development and usage across a diverse array of countries and populations, with excellent psychometric properties (e.g., reliability, validity, scale structure) and an integrative and interdisciplinary theoretical framework. Third, it is highly accessible and adaptable, with a secure and online system of administration, which requires about 30 min to complete and provides individual, group, institutional, and cross-institutional report and analysis options, and the ability to add items and/or be used in conjunction with other assessment measures. Fourth, it includes both evaluative and practical applications, which can not only examine processes of change within and between individuals, groups, organizations, institutions, but also facilitate learning, growth, and development through a sophisticated and personally tailored report system as well as the “Beviverse,” an AI-mediated system that allows individuals to “walk into their own self” via their own BEVI profiles within an engaging VR (virtual reality) world. (https://thebevi.com/).
BEVI Domains, Scales, and Items The BEVI is a statistically reliable, well validated, and standardized measure consisting of four interrelated components: (1) a comprehensive set of
156
K. Acheson et al.
demographic/background items that may be modified for particular projects; (2) a life history questionnaire, which is built into the measure; (3) 2 validity and 17 “process scales,” comprised of 185 quantitative items answered on a four-point Likert-type scale (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree); and (4) three qualitative “experiential reflection” items (https://thebevi.com/). The most recent iteration of the BEVI – the BEVI-3 – is normed upon a sample of over 10,000 individuals representing more than 100 countries around the world. The 17 quantitative scales and 3 qualitative items on the BEVI are organized under nine separate domains. These domains, quantitative scales, and qualitative items are as follows.
Domain I: Validity Scales Validity Scale 1: Consistency: The degree to which responses are consistent for differently worded items that are assessing similar or identical content (e.g., “People change all the time,” “People don’t really change”). Validity Scale 2: Congruency: The degree to which response patterns correspond to that which would be predicted statistically (e.g., “I have real needs for warmth and affection,” “I take my own feelings very seriously”). Domain II: Formative Variables Background Information: Demographic items regarding a wide range of variables (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, education, nationality, etc.) Scale 1: Negative Life Events: Difficult childhood; parents were troubled; life conflict/struggles; many regrets (e.g., “I have had a lot of conflict with one or more members of my family,” “My family had a lot of problems with money”). Domain III: Fulfillment of Core Needs Scale 2: Needs Closure: Unhappy upbringing/life history; conflictual/disturbed family dynamics; stereotypical thinking/odd explanations for why events happen as they do or why things are as they are (e.g., “I had a wonderful childhood,” “Some numbers are luckier than others”). Scale 3: Needs Fulfillment: Open to experiences, needs, and feelings; deep care/ sensitivity for self, others, and the larger world (e.g., “We should spend more money on early education programs for children,” “I like to think about who I am”). Scale 4: Identity Diffusion: Indicates painful crisis of identity; fatalistic regarding negatives of marital/family life; feels “bad” about self and prospects (e.g., “I have gone through a painful identity crisis,” “Even though we expect them to be, men are not really built to be faithful in marriage”). Domain IV: Tolerance of Disequilibrium Scale 5: Basic Openness: Open and honest about the experience of basic thoughts, feelings, and needs (e.g., “I don’t always feel good about who I am,” “I have felt lonely in my life”). Scale 6: Self Certitude: Strong sense of will; impatient with excuses for difficulties; emphasizes positive thinking; disinclined toward deep analysis (e.g., “You can
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
157
overcome almost any problem if you just try harder,” “If you play by the rules, you get along fine”).
Domain V: Critical Thinking Scale 7: Basic Determinism: Prefers simple explanations for differences/behavior; believes people don’t change/strong will survive; troubled life history (e.g., “AIDS may well be a sign of God’s anger,” “It’s only natural that the strong will survive”). Scale 8: Socioemotional Convergence: Open, aware of self/other, larger world; thoughtful, pragmatic, determined; sees world in shades of gray, such as the need for self-reliance while caring for vulnerable others (e.g., “We should do more to help those who are less fortunate,” “Too many people don’t meet their responsibilities”). Domain VI: Self-Access Scale 9: Physical Resonance: Receptive to corporeal needs/feelings; experientially inclined; appreciates the impact of human nature/evolution (e.g., “I am a free spirit,” My body is very sensitive to what I feel”). Scale 10: Emotional Attunement: Emotional, sensitive, social, needy, affiliative; values the expression of affect; close family connections (e.g., “I don’t mind displays of emotion,” “Weakness can be a virtue”). Scale 11: Self-Awareness: Introspective; accepts the complexity of self; cares for human experience/condition; tolerates difficult thoughts/feelings (e.g., “I am always trying to understand myself better,” “I have problems that I need to work on”). Scale 12: Meaning Quest: Searching for meaning; seeks balance in life; resilient/ persistent; highly feeling; concerned for less fortunate (e.g., “I think a lot about the meaning of life,” “I want to find a better sense of balance in my life”). Domain VII: Other Access Scale 13: Religious Traditionalism: Highly religious; sees self/behavior/events as mediated by God/spiritual forces; one way to the “afterlife” (e.g., “Without religion there can be no peace,” “There is one way to heaven”). Scale 14: Gender Traditionalism: Men and women are built to be a certain way; prefers traditional/simple views of gender and gender roles (e.g., “Women are more emotional than men,” “A man’s role is to be strong”). Scale 15: Sociocultural Openness: Progressive/open regarding a wide range of actions, policies, and practices in the areas of culture, economics, education, environment, gender/global relations, politics (e.g., “We should try to understand cultures that are different from our own,” “There is too big a gap between the rich and poor in our country”). Domain VIII: Global Access Scale 16: Ecological Resonance: Deeply invested in environmental/sustainability issues; concerned about the fate of the earth/natural world (e.g., “I worry about our environment,” “We should protect the land no matter who owns it”). Scale 17: Global Resonance: Invested in learning about/encountering different individuals, groups, languages, cultures; seeks global engagement (e.g., “It is
158
K. Acheson et al.
important to be well informed about world events,” “I am comfortable around groups of people who are very different from me”).
Domain IX: Experiential Reflection Items The following three qualitative items are included in the BEVI and completed in written format at the conclusion of administration: • Qualitative Item 1: Please describe which aspect of this experience has had the greatest impact upon you and why? • Qualitative Item 2: Is there some aspect of your own “self” or “identity” (e.g., gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious or political background, etc.) that has become especially clear or relevant to you or others as a result of this experience? • Qualitative Item 3: What have you learned and how are you different now? (https://thebevi.com/)2 In light of the above background information on the BEVI, it is now possible to provide international examples of specific findings from various BEVI projects that include an explicit focus on “Values-based Education” with different populations across an array of international settings and contexts.
People in High BEVI Full Scale Score Groups Experience and Express Beliefs and Values Differently from Those in Low Full Scale Score Groups The BEVI has been designed with a reporting system that provides administrators the capacity to examine a wide array of interactions among different variables. Specifically, we can conduct fine-grained analyses by looking at differences and similarities across all of the Background Information items and scales on the BEVI as well as a wide range of analysis, reporting, and AI / VR systems. For example, an administrator may construct a report analyzing (1) cross-sectional data (to see subgroup patterns within a broader population), (2) longitudinal data (to see the impact of interventions on specific subgroups), (3) demographic data (to see the differential impact of variables such as gender, ethnicity, education, income, and nationality), and (4) index data (systems by which scales and/or data are organized in particular ways for reporting purposes, which allow administrators to examine within- and between-group differences for specific cohorts). One of the most powerful indexes on the BEVI is called “Profile Contrast,” an empirically and theoretically derived index based upon the “Full Scale” score on the BEVI. More 2
To read more about various features of the BEVI (e.g., reliability and validity; the report system), please see https://thebevi.com/about/validity/ as well as Shealy (2016) and Wandschneider et al. (2015).
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
159
specifically, Profile Contrast draws upon data from 11 of the 17 BEVI scales to express a composite score that is automatically generated each time someone takes the BEVI (Wang et al., 2020). As such, the Full Scale score really represents the “essence” or “core” of what the BEVI measures via a single score. In the Profile Contrast BEVI index, participants in any given cohort taking the instrument are grouped into thirds – that is, the top, middle, and bottom third of Full Scale scorers. For instance, 30 people who took the BEVI would be automatically calculated by the report system into the top 10, middle 10, and bottom 10 Full Scale scorers. In scholarship and practice, such subgroups are generally referred to as “High Optimal,” “Medium Optimal” and “Low Optimal” responders (Wang et al., 2020). The BEVI scale correlation matrix and other analytic findings over the years have made it clear that these groups differ in important ways with regard to underlying structures of identity and self (Wandschneider et al., 2015). For example, there appears to be a correlation between Full Scale score on the BEVI and length and depth of responses on the three qualitative questions on the BEVI – that is, participants in the High Optimal group are likely to contribute responses with more words and richer content (Giesing, 2017; Wang et al., 2020). A working hypothesis to explain such findings is that the core selves of those in these High and Low Optimal groups are organized differently (e.g., Acheson et al., 2020; Nishitani, 2020; Shealy, 2016). This supposition is supported empirically by the significant differences between these groups that we often see in scores on the 11 BEVI scales that comprise the Full Scale score. Among many other common differences, Emotional Attunement and Self Awareness tend to be higher while Basic Determinism and Gender Traditionalism trend lower for High Optimal groups. These structural differences in self and identity then shape people’s behaviors when they are presented with qualitative questions as they take the BEVI because their capacity and inclination to provide more information of greater depth results from how they are organized at the level of identity and self, which fundamentally differ between the groups (Giesing, 2017; Wang et al., 2020). These differences matter from the standpoint of Values-based Education. In fact, the implications are potentially profound because they indicate that “High Optimal” versus “Low Optimal” participants in VbE interventions are predisposed to experience such interventions in qualitatively different terms, which may interact with the design or delivery of the intervention to produce the outcomes we observe (e.g., greater reported satisfaction on the part of learners, more “change” in directions that are desirable from the standpoint of educators) (Giesing, 2017; Wang et al., 2020). In practical terms, we can see that feedback from participants before, during, and after various experiences (e.g., courses, programs, workshops, etc.) may be shaped as much – if not more – by underlying structures of the learners than by the quality or nature of the intervention itself (Iseminger et al., 2020; Wandschneider et al., 2015). This phenomenon, which is evinced by considerable cross-cultural/cross-country BEVI data (e.g., Acheson & Kelly, 2021; Shealy, in press; Wiley et al., 2021), suggests that we must be careful not to attribute the seeming success or failure of VbIs, or really any intervention, to quality of curricula or instruction alone, because:
160
K. Acheson et al.
BEVI data from all over the world indicate that when we label someone or something “good,” “bad,” or “indifferent” (e.g., through written or verbal feedback; via surveys, polls, or focus group; through public utterances or private thoughts in our head), such versions of reality (VORs) may be relatively 1) predetermined (e.g., although contingencies affect such processes and outcomes, we tend to think, feel, or behave within our own internalized parameters because we are structured to do so at the level of identity and self), 2) subjective (e.g., our versions of reality may or may not be based upon an objective appraisal of whatever it is that we are experiencing or evaluating), 3) obscuring (e.g., what we say we think or feel may have little to do with “the thing” that is being experienced or evaluated, but may be more about the preservation, maintenance, and representation of our identity/selfstructure), and 4) invalid (e.g., if our goal is objective evaluation, we may have to evaluate the evaluator in order to understand their capacity and inclination for objectively evaluating what they say they are evaluating). (Shealy, in press)
In other words, feedback from learners, broadly defined, must be interpreted thoughtfully and with attention to the complexity of what shapes learners’ reactions to learning experiences. Specifically, what students say they feel when asked about their satisfaction with VbE may or may not be a reflection of the “quality” or “nature” of the intervention, but may rather be “predetermined,” “subjective,” “obscuring,” and “invalid” for the reasons noted above. Fortunately, it is in fact possible to predict empirically how people perceive experiences and to explain theoretically why they do so, which in turn gives educators more confidence in our interpretation and usage of data on the effectiveness of Values-based Interventions such as VbE (Acheson & Kelly, 2021; Shealy, 2016; Wiley et al., 2021). We will illustrate this complex phenomenon with multiyear, multi-institution data from international education. The Forum BEVI project made explicit the serious problem of assuming that intercultural contacts occurring via education abroad will always result in transformation of values or the development of intercultural competence for learners (Wandschneider et al., 2015). Even in international programs and courses where – with the use of a values-focused assessment such as the BEVI – values development is integrated into assessment and pedagogical processes, learners who enter such experiences with different “structures of self” leave with different outcomes. For instance, the Forum BEVI project reported a comparison of the three Full Scale score groups across two BEVI administrations (T1 or Time 1, before an international education experience, and T2 or Time 2, afterward). While the lowest Full Scale scorers moved from a mean of 23 at T1 on the Identity Diffusion BEVI scale to a T2 mean of 10, the direction of change for the highest Full Scale scorers was the opposite – they moved from 9 at T1 to 25 at T2 (Wandschneider et al., 2015, p. 191). As another example, in a meta-analysis of BEVI data conducted by Wang and colleagues (2020), differences in BEVI data emerged when subgroups were compared by gender, nationality, ethnicity, and other demographic variables, with the Full Scale score emerging as a particularly strong differentiator of different types of learners. In other words, the clearest pattern of scale score differences were found not in comparisons between males and females or people from different cultural backgrounds but instead between the highest and lowest Full Scale scorers.
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
161
What insights emerge from such findings? With the Full Scale score on the BEVI, we are able to show how individuals are “structured” at the level of identity and self before, during, and after a specific Values-based Intervention, including VbE, has occurred. • First, students are clearly different in the three Full Scale score groups crosssectionally, both before and after their international education experiences: For example, in the Forum BEVI project lowest and highest Full Scale scorers exhibited significant differences in Identity Diffusion at both pre- and post-test administrations. According to Wang and colleagues (2020), students in the “high” Full Scale score group consistently evince much higher Global Resonance, Sociocultural Openness, Basic Openness, Socioemotional Convergence, Emotional Attunement, and Needs Fulfillment. As such, because students enter and leave learning experiences as a diverse group, effective VbE curriculum design and culturally competent teaching must start with sufficient understanding of who our students are and how they experience themselves, others, and the larger world. • Second, we know from these BEVI studies that VbE and other educational experiences can and do make a difference in students’ value development. As an example, Wandschneider and colleagues (2015) found that Basic Determinism and other BEVI scales related to critical thinking were significantly correlated with number of years of college education as self-reported on the BEVI: the more years in college, the less people “prefer basic/simple explanations for why people are as they are or do as they do” (p. 168). The fact is that many published studies of BEVI results reveal some learning gains as a result of VbI, if not for the whole group, then at least for certain subgroups on particular BEVI scales (e.g., Iseminger et al., 2020; Wiley et al., 2021). These findings should be very encouraging to educators invested in VbE, for they provide evidence that what we do makes a real difference in our students. • Third, and inextricably intertwined with the previous point that VbE can work as intended, is the caveat that, in the end, the amount and direction of change in values as measured by the BEVI is highly mediated by how students are structured at the outset of the experience. To be specific, lower capacity and inclination for change as indicated by a “Low Optimal” score is often strongly associated with a lower degree of change by Time 2, or possibly even regression or movement in the opposite direction. Meanwhile, students who have a higher capacity and inclination for change as indicated by “Medium Optimal,” and especially, “High Optimal” scores at Time 1 are in general more likely to reach intended learning outcomes. Other data from the COIL BEVI project, a multiinstitution initiative to measure outcomes of Collaborative Online International Learning or COIL (see https://www.ibavi.org/content/ibavi-coil.php), also demonstrate this tendency (Nishitani et al., 2022). For example, Lowest Full Scale scorers in COIL courses did not shift in Sociocultural Openness from T1 to T2; at both administrations their mean was 24. The middle group increased in Sociocultural Openness from 79 to 87, and the highest Full Scale score group
162
K. Acheson et al.
moved from 86 to 92. These trends are variable, however. In the same study, on Basic Openness, students farthest from desired learning outcomes (those in the lowest and middle Full Scale score groups) shifted more than more prepared students – from 14 to 25 and 27 to 38, respectively, as opposed to the relative stasis of the highest Full Scale scores T1-T2 scores of 83 and 84. Overall, then, the effectiveness of VbI/VbE as measured by the BEVI in these studies was highly predicted by who learners were at the outset of the educational experiences. The implication here for Values-based Education is that a “one-size-fitsall” approach will fail to meet student needs because it misses the essential variability within any learner context or cohort. Furthermore, we have found that the gains or successes of some students toward intended values development are often “washed out” by the losses or failures of other subgroups of students (Wandschneider et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2020). This masking of within-group variation in whole-group aggregates makes looking only at group mean scores over time to determine if VbE “works” quite problematic, for whole-group means can easily hide important gains or losses that are happening only for some students – gains or losses that Valuesbased educators must be aware of if they are to effectively address the needs of diverse groups of learners. In the end, no matter which assessment approach is taken, it is essential that VbE educators engage in robust methods to assess where the recipients of their interventions are pre- and post-experiences. Otherwise, it is impossible to make sense of the complex causes of changes we observe, or don’t observe – whether they are due to intervention design, the quality of the intervention, subgroup variability, or other variables (e.g., Acheson et al., in press; Shealy, 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015).
When It Comes to Beliefs and Values, Structures of Identity and Self May Vary Empirically from Who We Say We Are and/or How We Are Experienced by Others As discussed above, we see Values-based Education as encompassing any intervention that includes education about and education for values. When it comes to human engagement and change, then, we do not see a compelling reason to limit VbE to one specific population, such as students in a pre-K-12 environment. By widening the Values-based Education circle, we believe we can deepen understanding of and broaden receptivity to VbE precepts and practices that are so demonstrably needed in our world, both locally and globally (e.g., Aurora Network, 2023; Cultivating the Globally Sustainable Self, 2022; Embracing Education with the Heart, 2023; Toogoolawa, 2022). We turn next to one such domain for VbE beyond the realm of pre-K-12 education – leadership and organizational development – where we also have conducted applied assessment research with the BEVI method and EI model (e.g., Dyjak-LeBlanc et al., 2016; Shealy & Brewster, 2022; Shullman et al., 2022). By way of context, it should be noted that values are receiving increasing attention in the various management paradigms and practices, such as servant
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
163
leadership, ethical leadership, authentic leadership, and transformational leadership (e.g., Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Brown & Treviño, 2006; Cooper et al., 2005; Copeland, 2014; George et al., 2007; Ilies et al., 2005; Shullman et al., 2022; Williams et al., 2021). In general, values-based leadership seems to be rooted in moral and ethical foundations. Likewise, and especially in times of crisis leadership, values are perceived as critical to leaders’ success. When leaders’ values are clear, they are able to clearly communicate what they stand for, and their followers in turn can understand the motivations behind their actions and the decisions they make (Dyjak-Leblanc et al., 2016; Klepper & Nakamura, 2012; Shullman et al., 2022). However, clearly articulating one’s values as a leader may be more easily said than done. Developing this capacity demands an inner journey involving deep and sustained reflection through which is it is possible to increase one’s self-awareness and discover one’s core values (Gardner et al., 2011; Lawler & Ashman, 2012; Michie & Gooty, 2005). These very issues and dynamics were prominent throughout a coaching intervention that leveraged the BEVI to engage in organizational leadership development with an international technology company (Shealy & Brewster, 2022). During the assessment and consultation process, some participating leaders struggled with the cognitive dissonance of engaging in values-based discussions. The intrapsychic and interpersonal struggles of these leaders generated significant organizational conflict, and in some cases even led people to leave the organization entirely. Before we present data that illustrate in concrete detail these underlying dynamics, we provide some information on methodology. Essentially, leaders within this organization were offered by the head of human resources the opportunity to engage in hour-long confidential coaching sessions after taking the BEVI. Although the coaching was voluntary, most organizational leaders accepted the invitation; several even requested additional follow-up sessions. In this approach, individuals received their own individual narrative report after completing the BEVI. Then, coaches asked participants to offer thoughts and feelings they may have had in reaction to their reports. Deeper explanation of BEVI constructs and how the instrument makes sense of beliefs and values, the specific interpretation of their results, a deliberate connection to their leadership role within the organization, and any other questions or implications they wished to explore all followed. Several of the most striking take-aways from the coaching process included (1) how often their perceptions of self were dramatically different from how they were perceived by others, (2) how diverse the group of organizational leaders truly was in terms of beliefs and values, (3) how generally unaware the leaders were of how differently they experienced self and others, (4) how all of this complexity was clearly linked to interpersonal conflicts and organizational tensions, and (5) how difficult it was for leaders to agree on organizational priorities and goals (Shealy & Brewster, 2022). For the coaching sessions, we conducted dozens of different analyses of BEVI data, but here we focus on two scales – Self Certitude and Emotional Attunement – from a “Within Group Comparative Report” to illuminate our arrival at the above five points. When we juxtaposed individual scores for the leadership team on these scales, three fundamental observations became apparent. First, there was enormous
164
K. Acheson et al.
within-group variability in the group on both scales, with scores ranging from the 1st to the 89th percentile on Self Certitude and the 1st to the 93rd percentile on Emotional Attunement. Second, a negative correlation emerged between individuals across these two scales. In other words, individuals who were higher on Self Certitude tended, overall, to be lower on Emotional Attunement (and vice versa). This pattern is consistent with the psychometric and statistical characteristics of the BEVI as noted in the correlation matrices, factor analyses, and structural equation modeling published in Shealy (2016), Wandschneider and colleagues (2015), and Wiley and colleagues (2021). Third, analysis of these two BEVI scales strongly suggests that, from an organizational standpoint, leaders will likely find it very challenging to find common purposes and ways forward due to the fact that their beliefs, values, experiences, and understanding of self and other all vary so dramatically (Brewster, 2019; Dyjak-LeBlanc et al., 2016; Shullman et al., 2022). It was striking to work with such bright, motivated, and experienced leaders and hear them express in their individual sessions that (1) they saw themselves in ways that were profoundly inconsistent with how others experienced them, (2) they were distressed by being misunderstood by others, and (3) they believed the organization would flourish if others would only function differently. These dynamics were especially pronounced when leaders scored very high or very low on BEVI scales, such as near the lower and upper ends of the wide score ranges for Self Certitude and Emotional Attunement discussed above (Shealy & Brewster, 2022). Our experience with Values-based Interventions indicate that the effectiveness of VbE programs and processes depends on educators’ ability and willingness to assess and address within-group differences among organizational leaders as well as learners. That means engaging in developmental work with faculty and staff in an educational setting so that they can more clearly articulate their values and come to terms with the varied perspectives and experiences that educators themselves bring to the organization. To accomplish this developmental work, we must have access to models and methods by which such differences in beliefs and values may be ascertained. Also necessary is the willingness and the capacity to grapple with how, when, whether, and for whom “issues” must be addressed in order for VbE curricula and co-curricular programming to be successful. If we do not ascertain and subsequently act on these issues appropriately, our Values-based Interventions may well fail without us even knowing why (e.g., Brewster, 2019; Dyjak-LeBlanc et al., 2016; Hoffman, 2012; Lewis, 2002; Shullman et al., 2022).
What We Believe and Value Not Only Illuminates Who We Are But Can Also Predict What We Will Do in Our Work, Relationships, and Lives One of the unique features of the BEVI among psychometric instruments is its distinctive practice, as documented in various publications and even the discussions above, of analysis at both micro (individual or small group) and macro (whole institution or meta-analysis) levels. When we zoom out to explore big data, the
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
165
BEVI reporting and AI / VR system constructs a highly detailed and nuanced profile of group values and subgroup patterns of variation in those values. These profiles are both descriptive of the group and potentially predictive – of how members of the group will behave or of who will join the group in the future, for instance. We can predict with BEVI data, as an example, which students are most likely to study abroad or engage in other elective global learning experiences such as international research projects, virtual exchange or COIL, or service-learning projects (Wandschneider et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2020) and which students are drawn to various areas of study (Nishitani 2020). Beyond voluntary participation, the BEVI is useful to project program retention, for it can be leveraged to predict which students may struggle emotionally and socially and thus potentially leave a program of study. In their report on the Forum BEVI project, Wandschneider and colleagues (2015) described this implication of the data collected by the multi-institutional initiative: It is possible to identify the profile or signature of an institution or organization. The aggregate profile of the BEVI may illuminate how a student body at a given institution or organization tends to see self, others, and the larger world. This profile appears to be relatively consistent across years, indicating that the characteristics of an institution’s student body may be relatively stable and measurable. (p. 202)
As an illustration, consider the contrast between four different universities from around the world on several BEVI scales. These universities – Zamorano in Honduras, Hong Kong Baptist, Georgia State in the south-eastern US, and Hiroshima University in Japan – represent a range of institution types. Some are public and others private; they range from large to small and of course are located within very different local cultural contexts. When we compare BEVI mean scores for these schools, we see that the two small, private schools exhibited nearly identical mean scores on scales such as Gender Traditionalism, Sociocultural Openness, Ecological Resonance, and Global Resonance. In contrast, students at the other two universities in Japan and the United States scored differently on two scales in particular: lower on Gender Traditionalism (reflecting less traditional expectations regarding who males and females ought to be and how they should behave) and higher on Ecological Resonance (indicating more awareness of and investment in environmental issues). Other than institution type, there could very well be other key factors shaping these institutional profiles. For example, Acheson and Kelly’s (2021) detailed analysis of one institution’s profile and the context that shapes it is interesting and helpful. Specifically, in a study comparing different institutional types with the BEVI, two small, private schools both scored high on Religious Traditionalism, perhaps not surprising given the religious contexts of those institutions, contexts which influences stances on gender norms, and environmental issues. Moreover, consider these two schools in comparison with Georgia State, a public institution in an urban setting with a large and highly visible LGBTQ+ community. Among other differences, these students scored much lower on Gender Traditionalism than students in the other two schools (14th percentile for Georgia State students versus
166
K. Acheson et al.
the 56th and 52nd percentile for the two private schools). In short, it would seem that there are quite striking differences between the profiles of students attracted to these different differences, which – from the standpoint of the BEVI method and EI model – suggest fundamental and underlying values-based differences overall at the level of self and identity for these students, a finding that has been replicated elsewhere (e.g., Nishitani, 2020; Wandschneider et al., 2015).
Overtly Fostering Values May Not Work and Could Even Cause a Backlash In investigating VbI processes of values-based learning, growth, and change with the BEVI over the past decades, educators and scholars have been concerned as much with what does not work as what does work, and why (e.g., Grant et al., 2021; Iseminger et al., 2020; Nishitani, 2020; Shealy, 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015). This focus is revealed most obviously in studies of Values-based Interventions that failed – that is, empirically did not achieve the change in values meant to be cultivated by the Values-based Intervention, course, or program. It is not uncommon, actually, for VbIs not only to fail to inculcate the desired values – in terms of their empirical manifestation – but to “make things worse,” by stimulating learning processes and outcomes that appear to go in the opposite direction of what was intended (e.g., Tabit et al., 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015). This backlash effect can be seen on the BEVI when scale scores that were meant to increase or decrease based on the design of the intervention instead move toward the opposite side of the spectrum (for instance, away from more sophisticated gray-area thinking or toward more rigid and constrained understandings of gender) from Time 1 to Time 2 administrations. Although these findings may initially be discouraging for educators (and potentially for learners as well), “failures” like these can in fact offer a powerful opportunity to analyze phenomena of curricula and instruction – that is, aspects of design and delivery – that are influencing documented changes in beliefs and values. The blessings of these failures, when educators capitalize on the opportunities for innovation they provide, are substantive and evidence-based changes to specific intervention approaches. In addition, over the years these failures have contributed much to the general identification of guiding principles and best practices of values-based assessment research and practice (e.g., Acheson & Dirkx, 2021; Cozen et al., 2016; Deardorff, 2015; Hanson et al., 2022; Nishitani, 2020; Shealy, 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2020). An especially stark manifestation of the value of attending deeply to “what doesn’t work and why” is the impact of VbI (e.g., training, workshops, courses, and programs) that are designed to promote “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI)related competencies. Tabit and colleagues (2016) conclude in a comprehensive analysis of BEVI data as well as other programs of applied assessment research and practice that such DEI pedagogies may well “backfire.” Empirically speaking, these VbIs can actually result in lower capacity and inclination to engage, tolerate, or understand different belief and value systems, cultures, or practices, because “urging
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
167
individuals to engage in anti-prejudice thought and activity may inadvertently result in more rigid and stereotyped beliefs about the self, the world, and others” (Tabit et al., 2016, p. 198). This phenomenon is commonly seen when such DEI VbIs are mandatory rather than voluntary. For instance, in a required university course on multicultural identity and communication that was intentionally designed to foster openness to difference and interest in culture, Iseminger and colleagues (2020) found that overall, participants were emotionally activated by the course but that such stimulation did not function as intended for the whole group. Although some demographic subgroups did shift in desired directions on BEVI scales (such as Identity Diffusion and Gender Traditionalism), after this course that explicitly attempted to shape learners’ values, the group as a whole experienced a backlash effect, ending up statistically more likely to think in black and white terms (higher Basic Determinism) and no more likely to be interested in engaging cultures that were different from their own (unchanged Sociocultural Openness). In subgroup analysis, the backlash effect was determined to be the result of score changes in non-optimal directions on the part of male students, White students, and those who self-identified on the BEVI demographics as politically conservative (pp. 6–7). It may be that such students resent or resist explicit instruction that they perceive as critiquing or maligning their current value systems and/or the behaviors of groups with which they identify. We further illustrate this point with the pretest (T1) and posttest (T2) assessment results of a course offered beneath the auspices of the Aurora Network, an innovative higher education consortium in Europe (see https://aurora-universities.eu/). Funded by the European Union, the Aurora Network focuses on four values-based, multidisciplinary and transversal thematic domains: (1) Sustainability and Climate Change, (2) Health and Wellbeing, (3) Digital World and Global Citizenship, and (4) Culture, Identity and Diversity. Developers of the Aurora Network integrated assessment research and practice deliberately into its mission and practices. More specifically, the Aurora Competence Framework (ACF) was designed in order to ensure the effectiveness of courses in terms of personal, interpersonal, and linguistic competencies. The BEVI is one of three instruments included in the Aurora Competence Framework, along with the “Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation Scales: Measuring Increase in Competence” (SEISMIC) and “Learning Outcomes in University for Impact in Society” (LOUIS), based upon the American Association of Colleges & Universities Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) rubrics (www.aacu.org/value/). Through the implementation of the Aurora Competence Framework, we already have evidence through the BEVI that the abovedescribed competencies are in fact being successfully achieved (e.g., Style, 2021). Given this background and context of the Aurora Network, the following data illustrate why it is vital in VbE to assess the underlying interactions associated with learning, growth, and development. In autumn of 2021, in an Aurora Network course on Sustainability and Climate Change, the BEVI was administered, as is common, in a pre-/post-test design. As might be expected with a self-selecting group of students in an elective course, the mean scores on Ecological Resonance and Global Resonance BEVI scales were high at the beginning and high at the conclusion.
168
K. Acheson et al.
Digging deeper into the data, however, we uncovered unexpected and unintended results that would not have been revealed without rigorous and granular analysis of values-based assessment data such as the BEVI offers. When changes on BEVI scales were contrasted by gender, a highly consistent pattern emerged on many BEVI scales, including Needs Fulfillment, Identity Diffusion, Basic Openness, and Self Certitude. Essentially, as compared to females, students self-identifying as male exhibited a backlash in values, decreasing in self-efficacy and satisfaction with their relationships and developmental processes (Needs Fulfillment), increasing in anxiety and confusion about their identities (Identity Diffusion), decreasing in attention to their inner life of thoughts and feelings (Basic Openness), and decreasing in complexity of understanding of social and material constraints on agency (Self Certitude). On most of these scales, females moved in the opposite directions – that is, toward intended learning outcomes. It would thus seem that females were predisposed to be more willing and/or able to benefit from the design and/or delivery of the course than males. In short, “soft skill” competencies important to the Aurora Network appeared to be steady or increasing for female students but decreasing on the whole for male students. Empirically, it seems likely that educational experiences in general, including VbE, are experiencing such failures (i.e., undesirable learning processes and outcomes) all the time and all over the world over to one degree or another. However, we just do not see such outcomes because we are not looking for them via appropriate models and methods of measurement (e.g., Acheson et al., in press; Hanson et al., 2022; Shealy & Brewster, 2022). This “problem” may be especially salient for VbE because such courses and programs are emotionally laden, with content and experiences that inexorably evoke the unique beliefs, values, histories, needs, and potential of those who are on the experiential end of such pedagogies and processes. The dynamic is that much more fraught when content is designed and delivered to provoke discomfort – as “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or DEI-related courses and workshops so often are – whether intentionally or not (e.g., Tabit et al., 2016). For values-based educators and interventionists in particular, it is important to appreciate that human beings do not like being told what to believe and value not only because we feel “imposed upon,” “coerced,” “shamed,” or whatever affective state accompanies such an experience. We also do not like it because such VbIs activate internalized structures that are psychologically and physiologically integral to our experience of identity and self, which have been laid down within us over time in ways that are most likely to meet our core needs – to the degree they actually can be met – given the formative variables, adaptive potential, and contingencies that have been our lot in life, for better or worse (Shealy, 2016, in press). In short, when we tell people what to believe and value – explicitly and/or implicitly – we are forcing others to encounter internalized structures of identity and self that they may not even know are there. That may be a good thing. Certainly, education is all about learning, growth, change, and ideally, transformation. But, as the above results indicate, we need to understand and take responsibility for what we are actually doing, especially as values-based educators and interventionists. In this
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
169
regard, comprehensive, process-oriented, and depth-based assessment can be a very powerful method to help us first do no harm, while also cultivating greater capacity in us to be caring, effective, and responsive agents of change (e.g., Acheson & Kelly, 2021; Acheson & Dirkx, 2021; Nishitani, 2020; Shealy & Brewster, 2022; Tabit et al., 2016; Wandschneider et al., 2015; Wiley et al., 2021).
Conclusion We have covered a lot of ground in this chapter. Essentially, we are synthesizing decades of theory, data, and application that – from our perspective – not only demonstrate the value of Values-based Education, but why this international field and profession can and must go global in the best and broadest sense (Lovat et al., 2023; Shealy et al., 2022). In partnership with our sister organization, the International Beliefs and Values Institute (https://www.ibavi.org/), we are as committed as ever to understanding and facilitating greater capacity and inclination across the primary domains that constitute the BEVI method and EI model: (1) formative variables; (2) fulfillment of core needs; (3) tolerance of disequilibrium; (4) critical thinking; (5) self-access; (6) other access; and (7) global access (https://thebevi.com/). As international work with the BEVI attests, these seven domains prove to be relevant and insightful across four major sectors of inquiry and practice: (1) Education and Learning, (2) Leadership, Organizations, and Training, (3) Research and Evaluation, and (4) Mental Health and Wellbeing. In the final analysis, for us, the aspiration to “go global” is rooted in our conviction, grounded in considered evidence, that we can and must do a much better job of reaching and raising the next generation of human beings (e.g., Acheson & Dirkx, 2021; Hawkes, 2014; Ikeda et al., 2022; Lovat et al., 2023; Shealy et al., 2022; Toogoolawa, 2022). But even as we go about this work, we know and see that the oft-cited cliché – “children are our future” – is anything but. Rather, it is an ineluctable and empirical reality that our species must learn how to cultivate “sustainable selves,” and do so deeply and rapidly, both locally and globally (e.g., Aurora Network, 2023; Cultivating the Globally Sustainable Self, 2022; Embracing Education with the Heart, 2023). That is because The old ways have failed. We are running out of time. We know it, we see it, we feel it. We may well survive, but not as we are now. Our species is in the middle of a transition, from an analogue state of consciousness that has, for aeons, held us in its jealous grip – where, by and large, we knew who men and women were, believed in the gods of our fathers, trusted our institutions, had faith in our leaders – to a digitally and spiritually indeterminate void. We long to fill this vacant space at the core of our being, but with what? All of the shiny things, painted facades, manufactured drama, old and new chemistry, vacuous talk, and perfect escapes, these distractions fail to fill the emptiness within. Until we come to terms with who we are, deliberately meeting our local needs and global potential, we will drift ever closer to our collective edge, yearning alone from each other, and apart from ourselves, lost in an artifice of misspent creation. (Shealy, in press)
170
K. Acheson et al.
There is another way, another path, another future. In particular, as this chapter and volume illustrate, we actually know – through rich and rigorous theory, research, and practice – how to “cultivate the capacity to care” for ourselves, each other, and all living things (Acheson & Dirkx, 2021; Hawkes, 2014; Lovat et al., 2023; Shealy et al., 2012; Toogoolawa, 2022). Values-based Education can and must play a key role in this regard. But as we have sought to demonstrate, the potential and promise of Values-based Interventions in general, and VbE in particular, would benefit greatly from much deeper attention to models and methods that can “get at” and “make real” the core of Values-based Education: why we are who we are and whom we may become. Ultimately, such pursuits are simultaneously complex and basic, as the following and concluding case study illustrates, from Dr. Jennifer Wiley: People are not always aware of their beliefs and values. As such, they can sometimes become unsettled or distressed when they see themselves reflected in the words or observations of others. Many years ago, I was hired to evaluate an intercultural course that was being introduced by a US study abroad provider in several locations around the world. For three semesters, I collected focus group data and, with the support of Dr. Craig Shealy, BEVI data, in order to triangulate the impact of the course on U.S. study abroad students in three different sites. On one of those data collection visits in Chile, Craig and I encountered a situation where it was clear from the BEVI data that one of the thirteen participants had a profile very different from their peers. We discussed how to approach the group debrief ahead of time in order to prevent anyone from feeling “outed” in front of the group. As I welcomed them into the brightly lit classroom of the large Catholic university where they had been studying all semester, however, plans shifted. No sooner had Craig said the words, “BEVI data suggest one of you may be different from the group in some ways, but please don’t out yourself,” than a young woman shot up her hand, waving it vigorously saying, “It’s me, it’s me, I know it.” Chuckles and smiles rose in the group and someone volunteered, “Yep. She’s a Conservative, but she is our Conservative.” The young woman (we’ll call her Maya in order not to disclose her identity) who had raised her hand nodded in agreement as an enthusiastic grin spread across her face. I acknowledged the belonging that had apparently developed between groupmates over the experiences they had shared as US students in Chile, and then I distributed individual BEVI narrative reports to each student and gave them time to digest their reports. Voices faded into sounds of papers shuffling and minds churning. When I brought their attention back to the group and Craig asked what they thought of their reports (cautioning them to avoid details from the report), Maya’s voice rang out first as she pushed her BEVI report away from her like a kid who didn’t want to eat her peas. “That’s not me,” she proclaimed. “It says I’m a Liberal.” Craig paused a moment and asked her to elaborate. Maya brought her report up to her face and read, “. . .in terms of cultural and political matters, you are likely to be described as accepting, open, liberal, and progressive.” She looked up at me, arms folded across her body, “That’s not me.” The other students in the room waited to see us wrangle Maya into a label that didn’t fit, but Craig gently asked her to share a little more about what it felt like to read the report. Stories spilled out of her about her experiences at church and her parents’ involvement in the Republican party. She shared about the challenge it had been to come to Chile to learn Spanish and how she might never have been friends with the “Liberals” in her study abroad group if she were back at her university. But, the shared experiences had brought out their commonality. At that point, other group members jumped in and started a discussion of “Liberal” in the US versus “liberal” in the Chilean context. As they made sense of their own results, I watched Maya become quiet and slowly slide lower and lower in her chair. As we came to the end of the time allotted for the debrief and focus group, I put my hand on Maya’s forearm and said, “Hey, you got quiet on me. Would you like to share anything else?”
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
171
She pulled herself upright in her seat and sighed. "No one at home is ever going to understand this." Her voice was quiet but resolved. As she opened up more, it became clear that she had realized she was not anymore the person she thought she was back in the US, and she was trying to make sense of that in the moment. She had chosen to study Spanish in Chile, not Spain with the rest of her peers. She easily made friends with a group of students who wore "Liberal" as a badge of honour. And, she had learned about the role of the US in Chile’s history which led her to question her notion of the US as a noble, benevolent superpower. In a few short moments, Maya realized the threat that this new self awareness might have on her belonging at home. She despaired – not that family and friends back home could not really understand her experiences in Chile, but that she wouldn’t belong there anymore if she shared her thoughts and new awareness. This was a poignant lesson for me as a researcher and educator: How can we mindfully prepare learners to see themselves more clearly, knowing the consequences that selfknowledge might have on other needs?
Jennifer’s closing question is among those we ask ourselves and each other every day. We know there is much more to learn and do. So, to all of our kindred scholars, educators, practitioners, and students – current and future leaders in the indispensable field and profession of Values-based Education – come share your voice and shape our work. We welcome the opportunity to seek answers together with all of you.
References Acheson, K., & Dirkx, J. (2021). Introduction: Special issue assessing transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 19(4), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 15413446211045158 Acheson, K., & Kelly, C. (2021). Understanding student values and identity: Benchmarking institutional initiatives with the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI). Internationalisation of Higher Education – Policy and Practice, Section B, 2(14), 65–95. https://doi.org/10.36197/INT.1-2021.04 Acheson, K., Finley, A., Hickman, L., Sternberger, L., & Shealy, C. (2020). Formative, adaptable, and interdisciplinary innovations in assessment: Beliefs, Events, and, Values Inventory (BEVI), VALUE Rubrics, and Cultural Controllability Scale (CCS). In S. A. Nolan, C. Hakala, & R. E. Landrum (Eds.), Assessment: Individual, institutional, and international approaches (pp. 246– 262). American Psychological Association. Acheson, K., Dirkx, J., & Shealy, C. (2022). High impact learning in higher education: Operationalizing the self-constructive outcomes of transformative learning theory. In E. Kostara, A. Gavrielatos, & D. Loads (Eds.), Transformative learning theory and praxis: New perspectives and possibilities (pp. 172–196). Taylor & Francis. Acheson, K., et al. (in press). Cultivating the globally sustainable self: What we have learned from 30 years of theory, research, and practice. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Cultivating the globally sustainable self: How the human species might fulfill its potential. Oxford University Press. Aurora Network (2023). Aurora competence framework. https://aurora-universities.eu/auroracompetence-framework/ Avolio, B., & Gardner, W. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua. 2005.03.001 Berkowitz, M. W. (2011). What works in values education? International Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 153–158.
172
K. Acheson et al.
Braithwaite, V. A., & Scott, W. A. (1991). Values. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 661–753). Academic. Brewster, L. (2019, August). The impact of a leader’s mindset on performance feedback. Training Industry. Retrieved from https://trainingindustry.com Brown, M., & Treviño, L. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004 Bullock, M., Hofgaard, T. L., Benito, E., Flattau, P., Clinton, A., Shealy, C., & Kapadia, S. (2022). Policy: Why and how to become engaged as an international policy psychologist. In C. N. Shealy, M. Bullock, & S. Kapadia (Eds.), Going global: How psychologists can meet a world of need. APA Books. Burgess, G. H., Sternberger, L. G., Sanchez-Sosa, J. J., Lunt, I., Shealy, C. N., & Ritchie, P. (2004). Development of a global curriculum for professional psychology: Implications of the combinedintegrated (C-I) model of doctoral training [special series]. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60(10), 1027–1049. Coates, M., Hanson, W., Samuel, D. B., Webster, M., & Cozen, J. (2016). The Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI): Psychological assessment implications and applications. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values: Theory, research, and practice (1st ed., pp. 373–405). Springer. Cooper, T., Scandura, T., & Schriesheim, C. (2005). Looking forward but learning from our past: Potential challenges to developing authentic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 475–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.008 Copeland, M. K. (2014). The emerging significance of values-based leadership: A literature review. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 8(2), 105–135. https://www.regent.edu/acad/ global/publications/ijls/new/vol8iss2/6-Copeland.pdf Cozen, J., Hanson, W., Poston, J., Jones, S., & Tabit, M. (2016). The Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI): Implications and applications for therapeutic assessment and intervention. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values (pp. 575–621). Springer. Cultivating the Globally Sustainable Self. (2022, April 23). https://summitx.org/ Deardorff, D. (2015). Demystifying outcomes assessment for international educators: A practical approach. Stylus Publishing. Dyjak-LeBlanc, K., Brewster, L., Grande, S., White, R., & Shullman, S. (2016). The EI leadership model: From theory and research to real world application. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values (pp. 531–574). Springer. Embracing Education with the Heart (2023). The global initiatives. https://eduwiththeheart.com.au/ Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1120–1145. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007 Gavriel-Fried, B., & Shilo, G. (2016). Defining the family: The role of personal values and personal acquaintance. Journal of Family Studies, 22(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2015. 1020991 George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A. N., & Mayer, D. (2007). Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Business Review, 129–138. https://hbr.org/2007/02/discovering-your-authenticleadership Giesing, W. (2017). MEPI, BEVI, and EI leadership: Implications and applications for global leadership assessment and development (Dissertations, 2014–2019), 160. https://commons.lib. jmu.edu/diss201019/160 Grant, J., Acheson, K., & Karcher, L. (2021). Using the BEVI to assess individual experience to enhance international programming. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 33(1), 129–147. https://www.frontiersjournal.org/index.php/Frontiers/article/view/491 Hanson, W. E., Leighton, J. P., Donaldson, S. I., Oakland, T., Terjesen, M. D., & Shealy, C. N. (2022). Assessment: The power and potential of psychology testing, educational measurement, and program evaluation around the world. In C. Shealy, M. Bullock, & S. Kapadia (Eds.), Going global: How psychologists can meet a world of need. APA Books. Hawkes, N. (2014). From my heart: Transforming lives through values. Independent Thinking Press.
8
Demonstrating the Value of Values-Based Education
173
Hoffman, B. (2012). American icon: Alan Mullaly and the fight to save Ford Motor Company. Crown Business. Ikeda, K., Nishitani, H., Shealy, C., & Style, J. (2022, March). Applied global studies: Connecting international students through a virtual bridge. Panel presentation (virtual) at the annual conference of the Asia-Pacific Association for International Education, Vancouver. Ilies, R., Morgeson, F., & Nahrgang, J. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudemonic well-being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 373–394. https://doi. org/10.1016/J.LEAQUA.2005.03.002 International Beliefs and Values Institute. (2022, April 23). https://www.ibavi.org/ Iseminger, S., Acheson, K., Kelly, C., & Morris, P. (2020). The effects of social identities on student learning outcome attainment. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(1), Article 12, 1–13. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article¼1988&context¼ij-sotl Iyer, C. (2013). Assessing and engaging beliefs and values in a learning community of U.S. and international students: Implications and applications from the Forum BEVI Project (publication no. 3592877) (Doctoral dissertation). James Madison University. PQDT Open. https://www. proquest.com/openview/cb9fc989e51ef4aaae668c5975d5a976/1?pq-origsite¼gscholar& cbl¼18750 Kelly, J., Holt, J., Patel, R., & Nolet, V. (2016). Environmental beliefs and values: In search of models and methods. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values (pp. 233–260). Springer. Kenny, A. C., Shealy, C. N., & Henriques, G. (2018). Couples questionnaire. Authors. Klepper, W. M., & Nakamura, Y. T. (2012). The leadership credo. Developing Leaders, 24–31. https://www.developingleadersquarterly.com/fb/Developing-Leaders-issue-8-2012/ Laskar, M. (2013). Summary of social contract theory by Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2410525 Lawler, J., & Ashman, I. (2012). Theorizing leadership authenticity: A Sartrean perspective. Leadership, 8(4), 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715012444685 Lewis, J. P. (2002). Working together: Principles for achieving excellence in managing projects, teams, and organizations. McGraw-Hill. Lovat, T., Toomey, R., & Clement, N., & Dally, K. (Eds.). (2023). International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (revised ed.). Springer. Michie, S., & Gooty, J. (2005). Values, emotions, and authenticity: Will the real leader please stand up? Leadership Quarterly, 16, 441–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.006 Nishitani, H. (2020). English education reform-based on EBPM (Evidence-Based Policy Making). Open Access Government. https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/english-education-reform/ 79823/ Nishitani, H., Dirkx, J., Ikeda, K., & Shealy, C. (2022, March). COIL BEVI Project: Cultivating globally sustainable selves through values-based assessment. Panel presentation (virtual) at the annual conference of the Asia-Pacific Association for International Education, Vancouver. Pendleton, C., Cochran, S., Kapadia, S., & Iyer, C. (2016). Understanding the gendered self: Implications from EI theory, the EI self, and the BEVI. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values (pp. 261–302). Springer. Rokeach, M. (1979). Some unresolved issues in theories of beliefs, attitudes, and values. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 27, 261–304. Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116. Sharma, R. (2013). The family and family structure classification redefined for the current times. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 2(4), 306–310. https://doi.org/10.4103/22494863.123774 Shealy, C. N. (2005). Justifying the justification hypothesis: Scientific-humanism, Equilintegration (EI) theory, and the Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI) [special series]. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61(1), 81–106. Shealy, C. N. (2016). Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI). In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values: Theory, research, and practice (1st ed., pp. 115–173). Springer.
174
K. Acheson et al.
Shealy, C. N. (Ed.). (in press). Cultivating the globally sustainable self: How the human species might fulfill its potential. Oxford University Press. Shealy, C. N., & Bhuyan, D. (2009). The value of value based education. In M. Mukhopadhyay (Ed.), Quality school education for all (pp. 94–113). Education Technology and Management Academy. Shealy, C. N., & Brewster, L. (2022, April). Assessing and facilitating transformative learning through quantitative measurement. Symposium presented (virtual) at the International Transformative Learning Conference, East Lansing. Shealy, C. N., Bhuyan, D., & Sternberger, L. G. (2012). Cultivating the capacity to care in children and youth: Implications from EI theory, EI self, and BEVI. In U. Nayar (Ed.), Child and adolescent mental health (pp. 240–255). Sage. Shealy, C. N. (Chair), Harris, T., Sternberger, L.G., Thomas, T., & Wishon, P. (2015, September). Cultivating the globally sustainable self: Engaged scholarship on transformative teaching, training, and learning. Symposium presented at the Engagement Scholarship Consortium Conference held at Pennsylvania State University, State College. Shealy, C. N., Bullock, M., & Kapadia, S. (Eds.). (2022). Going global: How psychologists can meet a world of need. APA Books. Shullman, S., White, R., Brewster, L., Grande, S., & Bhuyan, D. (2022). Leadership: How psychology and psychologists develop global leaders and leadership. In C. Shealy, M. Bullock, & S. Kapadia (Eds.), Going global: How psychologists can meet a world of need. APA Books. Staton, A. R., & Grande, S. E. (2017). Enhancing global community engagement through constructivist approaches to education. In R. D. Williams & A. Lee (Eds.), Engaging dissonance: Developing mindful global citizenship in higher education (pp. 3–24). Wiley. Style, J. (2021, November). Use of BEVI in the Aurora Network. Presentation delivered at the biannual meeting of the Aurora Network, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona. Tabit, M. B., Legault, L., Ma, W., & Wan, K. P. (2016). In search of best practices for multicultural education: Empirical evidence from the Forum BEVI Project. In C. N. Shealy (Ed.), Making sense of beliefs and values (pp. 261–302). Springer. Toogoolawa. (2022, July 27). https://www.toogoolawa.com.au/ Toomey, R., Lovat, T., Farmer, R., Farmer, S., & Shealy, C. (2023). Values-based education for ‘at risk’ students. In D. Rayson (Ed.), Education, religion, and ethics – A scholarly collection (pp. 69–89). Springer. Wandschneider, E., Pysarchik, D. T., Sternberger, L. G., Ma, W., Acheson, K., et al. (2015). The Forum BEVI Project: Applications and implications for international, multicultural, and transformative learning. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 25, 150–228. http://frontiersjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/WANDSCHNEIDERetalFrontiersXXV-TheForumBEVIProject.pdf Wang, F., Pait, K., Acheson, K., Sternberger, L., Staton, R., & Shealy, C. (2020). BEVI assessment of global identity: Implications and applications for international, cross-cultural, and transformative learning. In J. Frawley & G. Russell-Mundine (Eds.), Cultural competence in higher education: Dilemmas, policies, and practice. Springer. Wiley, J. L., Wiley, K. R., Intolubbe-Chmil, L., Bhuyan, D., & Acheson, K. (2021). A new, depthbased quantitative approach to assessing transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 19(4), 400–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/15413446211045164 Williams, E. N., Grande, S., Nakamura, Y. T., Pyle, L., & Shaw, G. (2021). The development and practice of authentic leadership: A cultural lens. European Journal of Training and Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-03-2021-0039
9
Embrained, Embodied Values: Pedagogical Insights from Developmental Neuroscience Minkang Kim
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Return to a Kohlbergian Notion of Social Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Biological Basis of Moral Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Predictive Brain Making Moral Evaluations: Evidence from EEG Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shaping Moral Values in the Brain: How Parenting and Values Education Contribute . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
176 177 179 181 184 186 187
Abstract
Despite much evidence to the contrary, there remains a strong body of opinion within education that moral values are a social construct, that moral decisionmaking is largely a product of deliberate, conscious reasoning, and language is the main medium of moral reasoning. Against a backdrop of recent “social justice” theory that eschews science, this chapter calls for a reappraisal of moral values and adopts a scientific evidence-based approach in claiming that much moral decision-making occurs below the level of conscious awareness and is prior to conscious deliberation. In particular, the author’s own electroencephalogram (EEG) findings and those of other researchers show that the brain’s response to a moral dilemma normally occurs within 200–300 milliseconds, well before conscious reasoning kicks in. This chapter also presents scientific empirical evidence supporting the notion of a brain that is essentially predictive and that embrained, embodied moral values subconsciously initiate our moral responses. Furthermore, experimental and intervention studies with young children, using EEG, provide evidence that persistent, active, and long-term engagement in value practices can reshape and modify the brain’s evaluation processes, both M. Kim (*) The School of Education and Social Work, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_9
175
176
M. Kim
consciously and subconsciously. This discussion has important implications for educational research focused on values pedagogy and the cultivation of student’s moral values. Keywords
Values · Developmental Neuroscience · Embrained · Embodied · Pedagogy
Introduction There seems to be an emerging narrative that moral values education has hitherto primarily been concerned with trying to produce “nice people,” when it should instead have focused on issues of “social justice.” For example, the Introduction to the 2021 annual conference of the Association of Moral Education (AME) stated that “It is not enough to simply produce nice people who adhere to traditional cultural values so long as our societies treat people unjustly on the bases of gender, race, ethnicity, social class and ability” (AME, 2021). This is surprising because AME was previously very closely associated with Lawrence Kohlberg and his concern for social justice, arising out of the dread of the Holocaust and his quest for a moral response (Lapsley, 1996). The Kohlbergian paradigm can be criticized for its rationalist account of moral reasoning and decision-making as deliberative and conscious (Kim & Sankey, 2009), but it was not about creating “nice people.” Rather, it was concerned with combatting the insidious social and moral relativism of much scholarship in Kohlberg’s day (Lapsley, 1996). Moral relativism has reappeared with vengeance in our day, in the activist scholarship that The Economist (2021) referred to as “the illiberal left,” which propagates a strident post-modern, exclusive, and tribalistic (Chua, 2018a, b) relativist agenda within universities, which reduces everything to race, gender, and identity (Pluckrose & Lindsay, 2020), though to be fair to AME, their statement included social class and ability in the list. This “activist” movement is permeating education, to the extent that “some students and faculty today seem to think that the purpose of scholarship is to bring about social change, and the purpose of education is to train students to more effectively bring about such change” (Lukianoff & Haidt, 2019, p. 254). Typically, it tolerates no criticism and aggressively attacks (“cancels”) “prominent individuals who have spoken against Social Justice, often unwittingly” (Pluckrose & Lindsay, 2020, p. 222). It disregards scientific evidence as just another narrative it can conveniently ignore, and “views evidence and reason to be the cultural property of white western men” (p. 192). It appropriates the language of “social justice” as a subversive tool for its own legitimization. Amy Chua (2018a, b) notes that within America, where much of this thinking originated in the 1980s and 1990s, it constituted an inversion in left-wing political thinking, from the universalism and inclusion of 1960s and 1970s, as exemplified by John Rawls’ (1971) Theory of Justice and the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King, toward tribalism,
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
177
exclusion, and division. “As a result, many on the left have turned against universalist rhetoric” (Chua, 2018a, b). Moreover, central to this new exclusivity is the claim that “out-group members cannot share in the knowledge possessed by in-group members (‘You can’t understand X because you are white’; ‘You can’t understand Y because you are not a woman’: ‘You can’t speak about Z because you are not queer’)” (Chua, 2018a, b). In response, this chapter calls for a return to what unites us, both biologically and as members of the same homo sapiens species, rather than what divides us socially. It begins by briefly re-visiting Kohlberg’s notion of social justice and advocates his liberal (though not rationalist) notion of moral values in education. It will then question the largely unquestioned assumption that education is a “social science,” which empowers the propagation of these ideas in education. Instead, it will propose that education is a distinct discipline that is, or should be, informed as much by biology (and particularly neurobiology) as it is by putative social “theory.” To this end, the chapter highlights the evolutionary and biological origins of moral values (Churchland, 2011) and explores the notion that moral values are necessarily “embrained” (Kitayama & Salvador, 2017) and “embodied” (Immordino-Yang & Gotlieb, 2017). The main aim of this chapter is to argue that scientifically grounded “values pedagogy” (Toomey et al., 2010) in schools, supported by sound scientific educational research, has much to offer education in providing a context where critical debate can flourish, within and across diverse social groups, as a means of realizing equitable and just communities. And, it should be noted, this advocacy of scientific research in education, including moral education, is not by a white Western man, American or otherwise, but by an Asian, Korean woman. Korea has a deep and ongoing commitment to education and a long tradition of science, going back to King Sejong (1397–1450), well before the onset of the seventeenth-century Western “scientific revolution.”
A Return to a Kohlbergian Notion of Social Justice The AME’s Introduction, referred to above, benignly states “Concerns for social justice are a global issue and addressing these concerns should be an integral part of moral education” (AME, 2021). Well, of course, but it rather depends on what one means by “social justice.” A first important step in reclaiming moral values from the grasp of present-day critical theorists, or should it be “cynical theorists” (Pluckrose & Lindsay, 2020), is to affirm that a Kohlbergian notion of “social justice” has been at the core of moral values education worldwide for a very long time, not only in so-called “western” nations, but also and perhaps more emphatically in the East, in China, Korea, and Japan, for example. There is, therefore, considerable parochialism in the AME assertion that gender, race, and ethnicity are of overriding global concern–arguably none are prominent issues in the East. Furthermore, Lawrence Kohlberg (1981) stressed the notion of “morality as justice” which was incorporated into moral values education, not only in America but also internationally. The morally good person was conceived not as being “nice” but as “one who reasons
178
M. Kim
with, and acts on the basis of principles of justice as fairness” (p. 623) or who recognizes “basic moral premise of respect for other persons as ends, not means” (p. 412). Arguably, instead of the current obsession with gender and identity (Furedi, 2021), we would do much better to reclaim Kohlberg’s concern to combat the rise of moral relativism. And, in our day, perhaps, instead of focusing on the individualism of gender and identity, our concern should first and foremost be rescuing the planet from the peril of global warming and over-population. We would also do well to recognize that for vast swathes of people trapped in debilitating poverty the key issue is survival, not gender or identity, those concerns in their current guise are social constructs that largely stem from Western affluence. Turning to education, a major problem, not just for moral values education but education as a whole, is a widespread belief that education is primarily if not exclusively a “social science” (Friedenberg, 1951). Thus, for example, we read that social science “informs effective, efficient and equitable education policies,” drawing on “a broad range of diverse social science disciplines, including economics, psychology, sociology, and statistics” (Baron, 2017). The claim that education is primarily a social science might be contrasted with the view of distinguished develop mentalist, Jean Piaget, that teaching or “pedagogy is like medicine in that it is a craft that is founded or should be founded on sound scientific principles” (Piaget, 1949). The analogy with medicine can be extended further in that both medicine and education are directed toward practice, in the case of education pedagogical practice focused on children’s learning and development, and both constitute “a moral practice” (Pring, 2001), directed toward ends that are deemed to be inherently good. Any reappraisal of moral values and their place in education should recognize that while education may usefully be informed by social science disciplines such as economics, psychology, and sociology; nevertheless, those disciplines do not define education, nor should they constrain it. Education as a distinct discipline is necessarily directed toward solving the problems of educational practice, in particular how best to enhance children’s learning and development, including their moral learning and development. And, because all learning occurs in the brain (Dehaene, 2020; Kim & Sankey, 2022), education policy, research, and practice have to engage with brain biology. One clear example of failing to ground education practice in brain biology has been the disastrous attempt to teach reading without teaching phonics, based on the misconception that children learn to read “naturally,” in the same way they learn to speak, which is simply false (Castles et al., 2018; Dehaene, 2009, 2020). Our understanding of moral values (and hence moral values education) should similarly be informed by an interweaving of the social and the biological sciences, especially brain science, as I will elaborate shortly. However, this move brings some bad news. As soon as one incorporates brain science into the study of education and education research, one is soon having to grapple with the scientific finding that much of our thinking, including our moral thinking, is occurring subconsciously, not in the Freudian sense of being repressed, but simply not available to conscious introspection (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999). The significance of this for educational research that uses self-report methodologies should be immediately clear; researchers are asking participants to account for
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
179
thoughts and actions introspectively, when that data are not consciously available. Actually, in the field of moral psychology, this limited accessibility of decision processes when justifying one’s moral conviction is often called “moral dumbfounding” (Haidt & Bjorklund, 2008; Haidt & Hersh, 2001). When applied to pedagogy, this implies that teachers should be constantly aware that much thinking and learning are occurring subconsciously (Kim & Sankey, 2022; Sankey & Kim, 2013). In regard to moral values education, the subconscious nature of much moral thought severely undermines the rationalist claim (and Kohlbergian assumption) that moral decision-making is a matter of conscious, rational, deliberation. Moral action frequently results from a quick, subconscious, intuitive response to perceive moral injustice (Haidt, 2012; Kim et al., 2021; Sankey, 2006). Thus, to take the well-known trolley dilemmas (Foot, 1967; Greene et al., 2001) as an example, which asks respondents to consciously decide on moral preferences in extreme situations, the answer should be that one has no idea what one would do when faced with such a dilemma. The subconscious nature of much moral decision-making also immediately problematizes the rationalist assumption that the main medium of decisionmaking is language. This is not to deny that moral reasoning can be, and perhaps often is, a matter of conscious, rational, deliberation when contemplating intended action and, in that case, it will involve language. However, EEG analysis shows that when responding to immediate moral violations, there is much more happening in the head within fractions of a second than rationalists might introspectively imagine (Leuthold et al., 2015; Sarlo et al., 2012; Van Berkum et al., 2009). We return to this EEG evidence shortly, after first examining the biological basis of moral values. For clarification, it should be noted at this point that when referring to “values” in this chapter, including cultural values and moral values, it is generally taken to mean “guiding principles, beliefs, sensitivities, held and displayed by individuals or groups in respect to how they relate to and deal with others and the world” (Sankey & Kim, 2016, p. 118).
The Biological Basis of Moral Values So far, this chapter has mostly been written in the third person, but moral values are a first-person concern so let me briefly use the first person. I am well aware that what I am about to say about the biological grounding of moral values and have already said in claiming that all learning occurs in the brain, will meet with some strong resistance from those who find the ideas uncomfortable. I meet it all the time and I am often sympathetic; the way science is presented can be unnecessarily lacking in humanity (Kim & Sankey, 2022). But I also have to admit I am genuinely baffled; we are biological creatures and if learning is not occurring in the brain, then where is it occurring? Is it thought to be somewhere else in the body or is it assumed to be disembodied? Moreover, in some of the literature and in papers received for peer review, I come across the notion of “mindfulness” and I wonder what concept of mind is operating in the notion of mindfulness? I hasten to add that I am not
180
M. Kim
advocating scientific “reductionism” and certainly not “eliminativism” (Churchland, 1986). As a dynamic systems theorist, I am strongly opposed to both, but, on the other hand, I am not a dualist, I think mind/brain dualism is philosophically and scientifically untenable. Whatever we mean by “mind,” it is necessarily a product of the brain. So, are those who advocate mindfulness actually advocating brainfulness? I’m not sure. Having just rejected Patricia Churchland’s (1986) advocacy of reductionism and eliminativism, her 2011 book Braintrust: What neuroscience tells us about morality, provides an insightful scientific account of the revolutionary origins of moral values. A quite similar argument is offered by Derek Sankey (2018) in a paper which applies the neurobiology of trust to schooling. Both authors draw an important distinction between moral norms and moral values that is often muddied in the literature. Churchland argues that moral values are “more fundamental than rules” (Churchland, 2011, p. 9) and that: “Moral values need not involve rules, though they sometimes do” (p. 10). Her core argument is that across species “Moral values ground a life that is a social life” (p. 12). These values originated with the homeostatic imperative to care for self. Churchland says, “In the most basic sense, therefore, caring is a ground-floor function of nervous systems. Brains are organized to seek well-being, and to seek relief from ill-being” (p. 30). “Whatever kind of central nervous system creatures possess; its main function is keeping the organism alive and functioning. That remains the primary biological function of our embodied and environmentally/socially embedded human brains” (Sankey, 2018, p. 185). Given the homeostatic imperative to care for self and the neural processes involved, especially the role played by the neuropeptides oxytocin (OXT), over evolutionary time care for self was extended in some species (particularly mammals and some social birds) to care for offspring, such that the brain perceives a sense of danger to offspring as a danger to one’s self. Thereafter, in some mammalian species, care for self and for offspring “extended further to encompass kin or mates or friends or even strangers, as the circle widens. This widening of other-caring in social behaviour marks the emergence of what eventually flowers into morality” (Churchland, 2011, p. 14). Thus, she argues, “the values rooted in the circuitry for caring – for well-being of self, offspring, mates, kin, and others – shape social reasoning about many issues: conflict resolution, keeping the peace, defence, trade, resource distribution, and many other aspects of social life in all its vast richness” (p. 8). Brains are embodied in the most basic sense that they are an organ of the body and their primary function is the maintenance of metabolic balance (homeostasis) throughout the totality of the body. It stands to reason, therefore, that the work of the brain in all of its totality is embodied, including its ability to perceive (through bodily senses), conceive, and act, both generally and morally. It has long been accepted that perception is embodied, but “conception – the formation and use of concepts- has traditionally been seen as purely mental and wholly separate from and independent of our abilities to perceive and move” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 37). However, what is this notion of the “mental,” if it is not understood as a product of the brain or, from a strictly monist position, that it is the brain? Although it is way
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
181
beyond the scope of this chapter to get entangled in monist/dualist debate, that can be found elsewhere, for example in Maslin (2001), the point being raised here is that, “From a biological perspective, it is eminently plausible that reason has grown out of the sensory and motor systems and that it still uses those systems or structures developed from them” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 43). In other words, conceptualization and thought, including moral conceptualization and thought, being products of the embodied brain, are themselves thoroughly embodied. However, conversely, it equally implies that conceptualization and thought, including moral conceptualization and thought, are thoroughly embrained. There is no separate social or cultural realm of experience that exists independently of experiencing brains. Without brains, there would be no experience. Despite a long tradition of separating the social and cultural from the neurobiological in cultural psychology (e.g., Nisbett, 2004), leading cultural psychologist Shinobu Kitayama now argues, “no longer is it possible to demarcate the domain of culture as separate from biology and ignore the latter in the analysis of the former. . . the brain is the quintessential biological organ” (Kitayama & Park, 2010, p. 125). The key point is that “recurrent, active, and long-term engagement” in cultural practices can “powerfully shape and modify brain pathways” (Kitayama & Uskul, 2011, p. 421). As children and young people engage with everyday practice in family and schools, and receive consistent feedback on their thoughts and behavior, “they will contribute to a cumulative change of the neural networks” (Kitayama & Salvador, 2017, p. 844). This process will shortly be exemplified with two recent studies with preschool-aged children, but first a brief word about the notion of the predictive brain and error detection and how it is measured in research, as a necessary background.
Predictive Brain Making Moral Evaluations: Evidence from EEG Studies Contrary to much conventional, cognitivist belief, our brains are not waiting to receive sensory inputs from the world. On the contrary, brains are constantly, actively attempting to make sense of the world, by predicting what will unfold, and then updating these predictions as the situation demands (Clark, 2013), informed by a wealth of past experience held in memory (Barett, 2017a). This continuous updating in the predictive brain is initiated by what is called “prediction error,” which is “a mismatch between the sensory signals encountered and those predicted” (Clark, 2013, p. 183) that is instantiated in the brain through a very large number of feedback loops. The process is also evaluative. In the context of research, when using the electroencephalogram (EEG), for example, this activity is recorded in terms of “brain waves” that are displayed on a computer screen. However, this is not simply recording a stimulus–response activity in the brain, rather, as Rauss et al. (2011) suggest, neural signals, such as those captured by EEG are “related less to a stimulus per se than to its congruence with internal goals and predictions, calculated on the basis of previous input to the system” (p. 1249). In other words, the EEG is
182
M. Kim
allowing the researcher to view the predictive-error feedback process in the brain, in real time. This is the focus of much on my own current education research, using EEG in school-based projects (Kim et al., 2021). The methodology used in many such EEG studies (including those conducted by my research team) records what are called Event-Related Potentials (ERPs). The “potentials” are electrical, the “potential for current to pass between two electrodes” (Luck, 2005, p. 102). This technique was first discovered in the 1930s and began to be used in the 1960s, but it was not until the end of the twentieth century and the start of the twenty-first century that it became widely employed as a research methodology. EEG had fallen into decline by the 1990s, in the wake of other new measuring techniques such as MRI and fMRI, but it was restored as the use of ERPs was further developed. As Steven Luck (2005) explains, “in its raw form. . . EEG is a very coarse measure of brain activity, and it is very difficult to use it to assess the highly specific neural processes that are the focus of cognitive neuroscience” (p. 4). However, by using a time-locked design that allows researchers to record neural activities from the onset of specific event or stimuli, it is possible to extract “electrical potentials associated with specific events” (p. 4). Event-related potentials (ERPs) studies consistently show that the error feedback process in the brain begins within 200 to 250 milliseconds of the onset of a stimulus and prior to conscious awareness. The conscious response kicks in around 400 milliseconds. When the ERP methodology is applied within the context of moral values research, researchers are able to monitor the subconscious and conscious reactions in the brain to moral dilemmas (for example, see Kim et al., 2021). This includes the brain’s response when participants observe an event that is congruent (or incongruent) with the moral values that participants uphold (Leuthold et al., 2015; Sarlo et al., 2012; Van Berkum et al., 2009). For example, in one study, participants were invited to read several morally laden statements (e.g., “Euthanasia is acceptable”) while their neural response was monitored by EEG. A person’s evaluation as to whether euthanasia is acceptable or not is informed by many different aspects, including personal experiences of observing sufferings of others and long-standing religious belief. What is remarkable is that our brain makes an informed value evaluation of such a statement subconsciously and swiftly, within some 200 to 250 milliseconds. Hence, when a person, who firmly believes euthanasia violates divine law, for example, reads a statement such as “euthanasia is acceptable,” a broadly distributed positive deflection, called P2, is elicited by the onset of the target word “acceptable.” When reading the statement, processing mechanisms within our brain “generate predictions about upcoming words” (Shain et al., 2020). However, when the target word “acceptable” clashes with the prediction informed by one’s held value system, prediction error arises and its extent is visible as a positive deflection (Van Berkum et al., 2009). Neuronal activities arising from prediction errors are similarly observed in the neural responses of young children, way before they have acquired reading and literacy skills. This finding problematizes the rationalist assumption that the main medium of moral decision-making is language. When preschool aged children watch
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
183
cartooned images of social behaviors (e.g., helping others vs. harming others), prediction errors stemming from an implicit evaluation process are observed by researchers using EEG after seeing a target image (Cowell & Decety, 2015; Kim et al., 2021; Meidenbauer et al., 2018; Wu & Kim, 2019). As in the studies with adults, a positive, subconscious P2 deflection is observed when a young child who has an aversion to harming others watches images of one cartoon character intentionally kicking another child’s LEGO castle, for example. Thereafter, after some 500 to 650 milliseconds after viewing the value-inconsistent cartoon image, another positive-going deflection (called a late positive potential, LPP) is observed (Cowell & Decety, 2015; Kim et al., 2021; Meidenbauer et al., 2018; Wu & Kim, 2019). This is indicative of the conscious and sustained appraisals that also involve emotion regulation, found in the rationalist accounts of moral reasoning; however, EEG evidence reveals that this follows an initial prediction error response that is subconscious. Although the way the brain functions is the same for all humans (and a very large swathe of other animals too), what the brain produces is individual difference – simply because the brain is molded by experience and no two individuals have the same experiences. Indeed, as John Geake observed “no two human brains are, have ever been or ever will be, identical. This applies to identical twins” (Geake, 2009, pp. 46–47). The magnitude of prediction error recorded for each individual will differ (sometimes markedly) from that of others, even when engaging with the same morally laden situations. Indeed, empirical evidence shows that some people exhibit very little prediction error even when engaging with violations of widely recognized universal values. A recent preschool-based EEG study (Kim et al., 2021) found that this lack of prediction error in young children, when viewing cartoon characters inflicting harm/ distress to another, correlates with a lack of spontaneous intervention into third-party moral transgression in real-life situations. In this study, some 3- to 6-year-old children exhibited significantly reduced prediction error (indexed by P2), compared to their peers, when viewing cartoon characters harming another. When those same children were situated in an experimental context where they witnessed an adult intentionally damaging a library book (public property), they did not intervene to stop such behavior. However, those who showed a larger prediction error response in the EEG study intervened when witnessing that third-party transgressions, by questioning the adult (why are you doing that?), commanding to stop tearing the page out of the book, or telling the adult explicitly why the behavior is wrong. This finding suggests that children’s immediate subconscious reactions are not a mere “gut-feelings” that are subsequently (linearly) filtered by conscious higher-order reasoning, rather they are intelligent responses that feedback (non-linearly) into constant, ongoing cycles of prediction, perception, and moral action. Indeed, what we often refer to as a “gut-feeling” is more likely a conscious visceral, intuitive sensing of the subconscious predictive/fire back process (sensing something is right or wrong) based on past experience (Barett, 2017b; Friston, 2012).
184
M. Kim
Shaping Moral Values in the Brain: How Parenting and Values Education Contribute Experimental and intervention studies with young children, using EEG, are also providing evidence that persistent, active engagement in value practices can reshape and modify the brain’s evaluation processes. These findings provide evidence that parenting and values pedagogies are operating at a neurobiological level, modifying and augmenting what I have elsewhere called an inborn “predilection to value” (bias toward positive value preferences) found throughout the natural world (Kim & Sankey, 2009), which becomes evident soon after birth and continues through early childhood (Sankey & Kim, 2013). For example, in a study with infants and toddlers (12–24 months old), what researchers referred to as parent’s “justice sensitivity” (in the Kohlbergian sense) was predictive of infants’ and toddlers’ event-related potentials (ERP) differences in the perception of helping versus harmful scenes (Cowell & Decety, 2015). Furthermore, in the previously mentioned study conducted in a preschool with 3- to 6-year-old children (Kim et al., 2021), children of parents, who are alert to their treatment of others and respond with guilt when feeling they have taken advantage of others, showed a more pronounced early neural responses to third-party harm. Also, children of those parents were more likely to partake in overt “costly” intervention behavior when witnessing an adult damaging another’s property. Children’s intervention behavior observed in this study (Kim et al., 2021) is particularly significant in that a significant proportion of the 3- to 6-year-old children who participated in the study actively enforced moral values on others when their own personal interests were not at stake, and even when potential retaliation was anticipated. There has long been a general recognition by philosophers (Rawls, 1971), moral psychologists (Kohlberg, 1984; Hiadt, 2012), and behavioral economists (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2003) that morality is a corrective against “self-interest” and toward maintaining cooperation within society. In that regard, children’s thirdparty moral interventions observed in this recent study show the early ontogeny of moral values and sensitivities that transcend the “ethical egoism” of some illiberal educational approaches that would focus children’s attention onto their own welfare, gender, and identity (Lukianoff & Haidt, 2019; Pluckrose & Lindsay, 2020). Findings from these developmental studies with young children, using EEG, provide tantalizing preliminary evidence that parents’ moral values are literally being “embrained” as discrete moral sensitivities in their children, enabling their rapid subconscious discernment between what is morally acceptable or unacceptable. These subconscious, implicit embrained sensitivities modulate children’s behavior when facing morally salient real-life situations, and there is every reason to hypothesize that they continue throughout adulthood. Moreover, it should be emphasized that the moral values and sensitivities identified in these studies are directed away from self to the needs and interests of others – precisely the direction taken in the evolutionary development of human values, as noted above. The research claim that moral values and sensitivities are being laid down in the brain at both a conscious and subconscious level has clear implications for values pedagogy; it cannot be left to chance; it has to be systematically cultivated in young
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
185
brains. Elsewhere, in a jointly written paper I have suggested that moral sensitivity can be viewed as “a form of connoisseurship”(Sankey & Kim, 2016, p. 121) a tacit sensing (Polanyi, 1966) and “discernment that can be refined and cultivated through constant practice and rehearsal” (Sankey & Kim, 2016, p. 125). I have also noted that “in education there has been a longstanding view that moral learning need not require dedicated curriculum time; rather it can form part of the hidden or implicit curriculum” (p. 125). However, I argue that though this may be helpful, it is not sufficient, moral values and sensitivities “require explicit teaching and learning; they can’t just be caught, they need to be taught, they need constant rehearsal. . .. And the importance of rehearsal is emphasized in neuroscience in regard to the plasticity of learning and memory, where repetition in the firing of neuronal connections strengthens the connections, whereas those not strengthened by repetition become weakened or pruned” (p. 125). Much more research is needed. Two main priorities of the work undertaken by my research team at The University of Sydney, Australia, are first, whenever possible, to get into the natural setting of schools and preschools to conduct the research, rather than in a lab and, second, to orientate the research toward solving the problems of educational practice, in particular how best to enhance children’s learning and development, including their moral learning and development. One clear message arising from this research is the relatively short time it takes to enhance children’s moral sensitivities, when using carefully planned intervention strategies. For example, when conducting research in a primary school in Korea, not long after the devastating Japanese Tsunami in 2011, carefully planned values pedagogy was able to help children view this disaster not through the eyes of the predominantly antiJapanese media in Korea, but rather with care, concern, and compassion for the victims (Kim & Chang, 2014). This study shows that if children are situated in a safe environment where they can open up and test their prejudices, they can move away from “group-based conventional reasoning” and employ “moral-based reasoning” (Kim & Chang, 2014, p. 297). Changes to the neural dynamics that subserve other-oriented concerns can also be prompted by educational intervention within a relatively short period of time. One intervention study (Wu & Kim, 2019) conducted in an Australian preschool has demonstrated that a carefully planned empathy education component in early childhood education can change very young children’s “automatic evaluativecategorisation” which is essential when engaging with other people in social situations. In this study, children in one preschool were invited to play a tablet game that was specially designed for this study that guides children to (1) attend to and perceive emotionally salient events in stories; (2) actively share the emotions of the characters in stories; and (3) take others’ perspectives, reasoning why a given emotion arises within given contexts (Wu & Kim, 2019). Empathy pedagogies employed in this study were systematically translated from developmental neuroscience research (Decety et al., 2016; Malti et al., 2016; Preston & de Waal, 2017), in order to cater for particular developmental needs of preschool-aged children whose ability to recognize, discriminate, and understand others’ emotion is changing rapidly.
186
M. Kim
Teachers of this preschool reported that children who engaged with the empathy learning game became considerably more observant to peer’s emotions, compared to children who did not participate in this intervention. Also, EEG data collected from children showed that, after engaging with the empathy learning, children’s attentional resources became more readily available when encountering others’ antisocial or harming actions. According to previous studies (e.g., Decety et al., 2016), if such neural resources are mobilized (not “precluded”) when perceiving others’ distress, the person is more likely to show empathic concern and act to improve the welfare of the person in need. Therefore, this small change in children’s brain induced by the intervention is paramount in “sowing the seeds of empathy in young minds” (Wu & Kim, 2019, p. 341), enhancing children’s moral discernment or connoisseurship, understood as the guiding principles, beliefs, sensitivities, they hold when relating to and dealing with others and the world, particularly the dire needs of many marginalized and socially underprivileged groups.
Conclusion If, in the twenty-first century, we are to understand ourselves as human moral agents acting in the world, and if we are to convey this into contexts of educational pedagogy and research, we need to stop pretending that science has nothing much to offer. In particular, it is important to counter the claim that everything can be reduced to issues of race, gender, and identity (Pluckrose & Lindsay, 2020), conceived as “social justice” and viewed as a purely social phenomenon. In contrast to this strident post-modern, relativist and anti-scientific agenda that has pervaded many western universities, particularly in the US and UK, this chapter has advocated the return to a broad, anti-relativist, Kohlbergian notion of social justice and a liberal notion of moral values that is thoroughly consistent with sound scientific evidence. To that end, this chapter has suggested we would do well to start by recognizing that education is not reducible to being a “social science,” rather it is a distinct discipline that draws on relevant multidisciplinary evidence, including neuroscientific evidence, in order to solve the problems of educational practice, especially how best to enhance children’s learning and development, including their moral learning and development. A broader, more multidisciplinary account of education as a discrete discipline in its own right, in that it is focused on educational practice, will open moral values education or, as I would prefer, moral values pedagogy to the realization that human moral values are grounded in biology, in terms of their evolutionary origins and also in that way moral values are embodied in the brain – moral values are embrained. The main assumption underpinning this chapter is that scientifically grounded educational research and a scientifically-informed “values pedagogy” have much to offer teachers and students in schools, not least in providing a context where critical debate can flourish, within and across diverse and sometimes divisive social groups, as a means of realizing truly, caring, equitable, tolerant, and just communities.
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
187
References Association for Moral Education. (2021). Introduction to the 47th annual conference of the association for moral education. https://www.amenetwork.org/2021 Barett, L. F. (2017a). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Barett, L. F. (2017b). The theory of constructed emotion: An active inference account of interoception and categorization. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(1), 1–23. Baron, J. (2017, August 22). Why social science? Because social science informs effective, efficient, and equitable education policies. Consortium of Social Science Associations. https://www. whysocialscience.com/blog/2017/8/22/because-social-science-informs-effective-efficient-andequitable-education-policies Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nationa, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51. Chua, A. (2018a). Political tribes. Penguin Press. Chua, A. (2018b, March 1). How America’s identity politics went from inclusion to division. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/01/how-americas-identity-politicswent-from-inclusion-to-division Churchland, P. (1986). Neurophilosophy: Toward a unified science of the mind/brain. Bradford Books/PIT Press. Churchland, P. (2011). Braintrust: What neuroscience tells us about morality. Princeton University Press. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 181–204. Cowell, J. M., & Decety, J. (2015). Precursors to morality in development as a complex interplay between neural, socioenvironmental, and behavioural facets. Proceedings of National Academic of Science, 112(41), 12657–12662. Decety, J., Martal, I., Uzefovsky, F., & Knafo-Noam, A. (2016). Empathy as a driver of prosocial behaviour: Highly conserved neurobehavioural mechanisms across species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 371(1686), 20150077. Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. Penguin. Dehaene, S. (2020). How we learn: The new science of education and the brain. Penguin Random House. Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003). The nature of human altruism. Nature, 425, 785–791. Foot, P. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect. Oxford Review, 5, 5–15. Friedenberg, E. Z. (1951). Education as a social science. Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors, 37(4), 672–692. Friston, K. (2012). Predictive coding, precision and synchrony. Cognitive Neuroscience, 3(3–4), 238–239. Furedi, F. (2021). 100 years of identity crisis: Culture war over socialisation. De Gruyter. Geake, J. (2009). The brain at school: Educational neuroscience in the classroom. Open University Press. Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R., Brian, N., Leigh, E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108. Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Penguin. Haidt, J., & Bjorklund, F. (2008). Social intuitionists answer six questions about moral psychology. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed.), Moral psychology, Vol. 2. The cognitive science of morality: Intuition and diversity (pp. 181–217). MIT Press. Haidt, J., & Hersh, M. A. (2001). Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133(44), 55–66.
188
M. Kim
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Gotlieb, R. (2017). Embodied brains, social minds, cultural meaning: Integrating neuroscientific and educational research on social-affective development. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 344S–367S. Kim, M., & Chang, H. (2014). An investigation of Korean children’s prejudicial attitudes toward a national tragedy in Japan. Journal of Moral Education, 43(3), 282–301. Kim, M., & Sankey, D. (2009). Towards a dynamic systems approach to moral development and moral education: A response to the JME special issue, September 2008. Journal of Moral Education, 38(3), 283–299. Kim, M., & Sankey, D. (2022). The science of learning and development in education: A researchbased approach to educational practice. Cambridge University Press. Kim, M., Decety, J., Wu, L., Baek, S., & Sankey, D. (2021). Neural computations in children’s third-party interventions are modulated by their parents’ moral values. npj Science of Learning, 6, 38. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00116-5 Kitayama, S., & Park, J. (2010). Cultural neuroscience of the self: Understanding the social grounding of the brain. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 5(2–3), 111–129. Kitayama, S., & Salvador, C. E. (2017). Culture embrained: Going beyond the nature-nurture dichotomy. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 841–854. Kitayama, S., & Uskul, A. (2011). Culture, mind, and the brain: Current evidence and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 419–449. Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice: Essays on moral development. Harper and Row. Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays in moral development: Vol. 2. The psychology of moral development. Harper & Row. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thoughts. Basic Books. Lapsley, D. (1996). Moral psychology. Westview Press. Leuthold, H., Kunkel, A., Mackenzie, I. G., & Filik, R. (2015). Online processing of moral transgressions: ERP evidence for spontaneous evaluation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10, 1021–1029. Luck, S. (2005). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. The MIT Press. Lukianoff, G., & Haidt, J. (2019). The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure. Penguin. Malti, T., Chaparro, M. P., Zuffianò, A., & Colasante, T. (2016). School-based interventions to promote empathy-related responding in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 45(5), 718–731. Maslin, K. T. (2001). An introduction to the philosophy of mind. Blackwell. Meidenbauer, K. L., Cowell, J., & Decety, J. (2018). Children’s neural processing of moral scenarios provides insight into the formation and reduction of in-group biases. Developmental Science, 21(6), e12676. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12676 Nisbett. (2004). The geography of thought: How Asians and westerners think differently and why. Free Press. Piaget, J. (1949). La pédagogie moderne. Gazette de Lausanne et Journal suisse (Lausanne), 152 (63), 10. Pluckrose, H., & Lindsay, J. (2020). Cynical theories: How universities made everything about race, gender, and identity – And why this harms everybody. Pitchstone Publishing. Polanyi, M. (1966/1983). The tacit dimension. Peter Smith. Preston, S. D., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2017). Only the PAM explains the personalised nature of empathy. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(12), 769. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.140 Pring. (2001). Education as a moral practice. Journal of Moral Education, 30(2), 101–112. Rauss, K., Schwartz, S., & Pourtois, G. (2011). Top-down effects on early visual processing in humans: A predictive coding framework. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(3), 1237–1253. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
9
Embrained, Embodied Values
189
Sankey, D. (2006). The neuronal, synaptic self: Having values and making choice. Journal of Moral Education, 35(2), 27–42. Sankey, D. (2018). The neurobiology of trust and schooling. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 50(2), 183–192. Sankey, D., & Kim, M. (2013). A dynamic systems approach to moral and spiritual development. In J. Arthur & T. Lovat (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of education, religion and values (pp. 182–193). Routledge. Sankey, D., & Kim, M. (2016). Cultivating moral values in an age of neuroscience. In C. W. Joldersma (Ed.), Neuroscience and education: A philosophical appraisal (pp. 111–127). Routledge. Sarlo, M., Lotto, L., Manfrinati, A., Rumiati, R., Gallicchio, G., & Palomba, D. (2012). Temporal dynamics of cognitive-emotional interplay in moral decision-making. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(4), 1018–1029. Shain, C., Blank, I. A., van Schijndel, M., Schuler, W., & Fedorenko, E. (2020). fMRI reveals language-specific predictive coding during naturalistic sentence comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 138, 107307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107307 The threat from the illiberal left. (2021). The Economist (London), 440(9261), 7–8. Toomey, R., Lovat, T., Clement, N., & Dally, K. (2010). Teacher education and values pedagogy: A student wellbeing approach. David Barlow Publishing. Van Berkum, J. J. A., Holleman, B., Nieuwland, M., Otten, M., & Murre, J. (2009). Right or wrong: brain’s fast response to morally objectionable statements. Psychological Science, 20, 1092–1099. Wu, L., & Kim, M. (2019). See, touch, and feel: Enhancing young children’s empathy learning through a tablet game. Mind, Brain, and Education, 13(4), 341–351.
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities in Cultivating Values
10
Tobin Hart
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spiritual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Consciousness and Cognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two Ways of Knowing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
192 193 196 197 200 202
Abstract
This chapter will first briefly consider the what and why of spirituality; that is, what do we mean by spirituality and what does it offer the consideration of values? As worldview and as a process of development, spirituality provides foundational aspirations and underpinnings for the cultivation of values. Further, drawing from material ranging from the wisdom traditions to contemporary neuroscience, this chapter uses the concept of the psychospiritual, two dimensions both seemingly paradoxical and intimately intertwined. As inner capacities, the psychospiritual points to innate potentialities that may remain underdeveloped yet increasingly appear essential for human flourishing, serving as an important counterweight especially to the influence of emerging technology on human consciousness and society. These capacities enable ways of knowing and being that act as implicit precursors and foundations for values. Identified and cultivated they provide inner art and technology to navigate an increasingly complex and challenging world. Most simply the argument is that if you want to develop dynamic, mature, self-sustaining values – those that support individual and societal well-being – psychospiritual capacities are essential. T. Hart (*) University of West Georgia, Carrollton, GA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_10
191
192
T. Hart
Keywords
Values · Consciousness · Culture · Spirituality · Psychospiritual capacities
Introduction It is not that we want to sleep our lives away. It is that it requires a certain amount of energy, certain capacities for taking the world into our consciousness, certain real powers of body and soul to be a match for reality. (Richards 1989, p. 150)
Psychologist Abraham Maslow (1962) once commented that approaching peak experiences, one of his primary interests, directly is a like trying to hunt for happiness, it is best not done directly. Maybe this is similar for values. That is, self-sustaining, mature values can be difficult to inculcate directly from outside in; they have to be equally seeded from the inside and approached, at least to some extent, indirectly. There are plenty of ethical commandments suggesting the path to goodness or civility, but great souls throughout time show us that mature virtue arises not simply from adhering to a script but from a dynamic interior capacity. And those capacities are both innate and cultivated, developed in a dialectic between inside and out. It is meaningful to speak of these as psychospiritual capacities as they address interrelated dimensions recognized across time and culture of what it means to be fully human. These capacities are potentialities, while often underdeveloped, essential for human flourishing. These can act as implicit precursors, foundations, and powers – even serving as a kind of matrix or womb – through which values manifest. Identified and developed they provide the inner art and inner technology to help navigate an increasingly complex and challenging world. We do honorable service to make explicit and create the conditions for the values we want to share and nurture; they provide mirrors, aspirations, models, and organizing pillars for individual and social behavior, and when infused in curriculum, they provide welcome touchstones. But mature values are a dynamic, complex, living, interactive process. They are relatively absolute – fairly universal across ages and cultures – and they are also absolutely relative – culturally, developmentally (e.g., Kohlberg, 1981), and situationally variable. I might go so far as to say that values are scaffolded by and can manifest as an organic byproduct of certain capacities of knowing and being. Invoking Maslow’s dictum, I want to approach the formation of values from an oblique angle and from the inside out. One of those angles of approach is the spiritual. In what follows I will describe how the inclusion of the spiritual may be useful for understanding human consciousness and values, and extend that to recognize the interwoven nature of the psychological and spiritual. Some examples of core capacities are named alongside an updated understanding of consciousness and cognition, concepts that support the development of capacities and are consistent with a psychospiritual orientation.
10
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities. . .
193
Spiritual The deepest questions about being human – including values, identity, flourishing, and, increasingly, survival, are questions that inevitably mingle with what we think of as the spiritual. We can consider values and capacities without invoking the word spiritual but there are some worthwhile reasons to name it, especially today, including the notion that these values are generally consistent with and derived from those found in the wisdom traditions themselves. At this moment in history, including the word spiritual in consideration of values helps to do a couple things. First, it makes room for those most profound moments and impulses of existence. It welcomes the innate drive for meaning, the fascination with mystery, the consideration of what feels sacred as central to our humanness. Those things associated with spirituality: meaning, connectedness, transcendence, awe as so forth as well as remarkable well-documented transformative experiences themselves, seem universal throughout time and culture and thus important to understanding human existence. Including the spiritual as normative gives us remarkable exemplars, aspirational potential, and permission to honor and reflect on our own and others direct subjective experience, especially as it relates to values. To include spirituality does not require any ontological commitments; it is not necessary to believe in one thing or another, it is about recognizing the apparent universal impulses and lived experiences that, though sometimes hard to articulate, are nevertheless central to humanity. Secondly, contemporary life is increasingly influenced by technology that has the potential to significantly impact human consciousness. Awash in the tsunami of information, alongside remarkable technological breakthroughs that enable: instant access to nearly everyone and everything, gene splicing, remote control warfare, the manipulation of information, and much more, we are increasingly reliant on the influence of algorithms and artificial intelligence without really ever choosing it. These are undeniably powerful tools that are shaping our lives, our thought and even our brains. Beyond the sheer volume of information generated and the remarkable and increasing ubiquity of their presence, and thus our reliance on them, these tools are based largely on categorical organization, algorithmic editing, decision trees, and calculated probability – a particular way of processing information – powerfully useful to be sure. However, human thinking and experience also involve bodies, context, images, beauty, metaphor, imagination, emotion, that incorporates contact along with category. We are at least as much resonant beings – humming with what we encounter – as we are rational beings – calculating our sense of the world. To understand human experience through machine learning enables worthwhile efficiencies, pattern recognition, and breakthroughs in plenty of domains but runs the risk of overwhelming and overriding other ways of being and knowing. Machine learning attempts a simulacrum of human being, but it is not human. I will return to this consideration of knowing below. It is worth noting that such technology, while enabling us to do all sorts of remarkable things, has not made us more ethical, compassionate, or humane; instead,
194
T. Hart
the world appears more anxious, depressed, and distressed. Thus, some other perspective, an equally powerful one, is needed as a counterweight to technology as a de facto driver of contemporary society and self. Including the spiritual (and the psychological) anchors the depth of humanness as one such counterweight. In general, when the term spiritual is used, it points to questions of meaning and existence, connection and unity, sacredness, transcendence and immanence, and an opening or expansion of consciousness in some way, for example, toward greater compassion or awareness. There are many ways to frame the spiritual: Tillich’s (1951) ground of being, or as a transcendent realm or consciousness, as the divine immanence infusing all things, a quality of presence or awareness, the relationality of Buber’s (1970) I and Thou, the nonduality of all existence, or even as physicist David Bohm’s (1980) Implicate Order. Spirituality and religion are often conflated. Religion is a systematized approach to spiritual growth formed around doctrines and standards of behavior. Religions were generally inspired by spiritual insight – “the word in the heart from which all scriptures flow” – according to Quaker William Penn (1945, p. 14) and developed in order to spread that insight through various teachings, rituals, and rules of conduct. To be “religious” implies some adherence to those standards and practices. Spiritual moments are described as direct, personal, and often have the effect, if only for a moment, of waking us up, expanding our glimpse of who we are and what our relationship to others and the universe is. Spiritual experiences can serve as benchmarks and catalysts for growth. These are frequently described in mystical terms (e.g., James, 1982) – often as a unitive moment or a revelatory insight. The spiritual is likewise invoked in small everyday moments: a child hugs us tightly and our heart opens; we breathe in the softness of a spring day and our own hardness softens with appreciation; we assume a loving attitude instead of a defensive posture and in so doing heal a wounded relationship, or maybe we witness a moment of courage in overcoming some obstacle and feel the rising current of possibility. These are not other than human but instead the most human of qualities. The ancient Greek understanding, and they were and are not alone with this idea, is that the sacred manifests not as something other than us – something distant and transcendent – but instead through us (Hadot, 1995). The point was and is to cultivate our full humanness so that we might be a better conduit for expression of the divine through our thoughts and deeds in community. Spirituality may be seen both as a worldview and as a developmental process. A worldview shapes the way we see the world and touches the big questions of existence. Our answers to these questions affect our values and thus the way we live in the world. Today, the doctrines of materialism and objectivism tell us that only what we can observe and measure is real. The modern mind separates the self from the world, gradually differentiating us from it. However, in so doing the modern world has become disenchanted, to use Max Weber’s (1946, p. 139) term, merely inert matter available for our utility and domination. By contrast, in one way or another, a spiritual worldview locates the individual in a multidimensional and, taken a step further, sacred universe, it reenchants the world, returning us as part
10
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities. . .
195
of a living universe. Cultural historian Thomas Berry (2000) argues that our evolutionary opportunity is to shift from seeing the world as a collection of objects to experiencing it as a communion of subjects. In addition to a worldview, spirituality is also described as a process of development. It has been considered as the top of the developmental ladder as well as a particular branch or line of development such as cognition. The crest of this process has been called liberation, transformation, enlightenment, awakening, and selfrealization. It is also recognized as integration and wholeness – the more of our self and the world we can integrate into our being – claiming our shadowy parts, expanding the orbit and depth of our compassion – the greater our development. The world’s sacred traditions tell us that the process ultimately unfolds in the direction of love and wisdom or is captured with the enduring depictions of the good, the true, the beautiful; modern language recognizes both self-actualization and selftranscendence as part of this process. Spirituality simultaneously pushes toward creation and communion – paradoxically toward increasing diversity and toward a sense of indivisible, indestructible unity. The psychological is familiar these days, recognized as: habits of mind and action, sense of self and relations, conscious and unconscious processes, neurobiological and socially imprinted animating forces, the rhyme and rhythm of feelings, and the way our bodies and minds mingle and manifest in and with one another. Trauma and secure early attachment, biology and conditioning, social relations, culture, and circumstances, all shape our psyche. The process of opening to the world and to ourselves requires both the psychological and the spiritual; when viewed together, these can often seem paradoxical. The psychological develops our will, and the spiritual asks us to be willing. The psychological strengthens our sense of self, and the spiritual asks us to be selfless. The former helps us differentiate and individuate, and the latter invites us to lose our self-separateness. Without their integration, we can have trouble getting out of our own way and never embody the values or other potentials that serve self and society. It is here that the need to develop various psychospiritual capacities is justified. These inner powers – capacities – open consciousness and thus enable us to engage the world deeply. The world opens and is revealed to us to the extent that we can open and receive it. This is a kind of physics of the unfolding mind. Again, we could have this discussion without invoking the word spiritual, but naming it opens a space for depth, open-ended emergent possibility, ethicality, and consideration of ways of knowing. Against a backdrop of machine learning, mechanistic instrumentality as well as consumerism and materialism our holistic, human nature is served with ways of knowing that stay open, alive, and embodied. The greatest power of using this concept is to carve out space for the implicit, the unseen and unknown, metaphor, meaning, profundity, wonder, subjectivity, imagination, diversity, and possibility so that we can move deeply into the mystery of consciousness with resonance and rationality, and not settle for a tidy simulation of human being.
196
T. Hart
Capacities Just as there have been plenty of worthwhile values-oriented approaches, there are thoughtful capacities-focused approaches. In the context of education, some have referred to these as non-cognitive skills emphasizing such things as perseverance and grit as opposed to exclusive emphasis on academic knowledge and skills (e.g., Tough, 2013). The large umbrella of social–emotional learning is a prime example of capacities-based orientation and has been taken up in a wide variety of worthwhile initiatives. For example, The Roots of Empathy program (Gordon, 1999) based out of Canada is designed to address the need for civility and care by emphasizing a single core gateway capacity through a novel approach to empathy training in elementary schools that brings mothers and their newborns into the classroom. The Passageworks Institute in the United States is explicit about core values while emphasizing relational skills marked by rites of passage in community and derived from Kessler’s (2000) work, The Soul of Education. CASEL, Consortium for Social Emotional Learning (2021), provides a collaborative network emphasizing five primary capacities: self-awareness, social awareness, self-management, relationship skills, decision-making. There are initiatives emphasizing other types of capacities. For example, the field of Contemplative Teaching and Learning which, from early years to university, focuses centrally on the value of intentionally shifting awareness in particular ways toward developing interior qualities. This may involve approaches such as the use of silence, mindfulness, various meditation methods, reflection, and service. Functional goals typically include helping students to find internal calm, counteracting the influence of such things as buzzing technology and reactivity borne of trauma or chaos, as well as opening the possibility of fresh ways of seeing the world, useful in everything from relationships to classroom work. At its most instrumental, this recognizes that mindset is an important precursor for learning academic skill sets. For example, an ability to downregulate an agitated emotional state may enable more effective learning. Two hubs for this type of work are the Association for Contemplative Mind in Higher Education (2021) and the Contemplative Science Center (2021) at the University of Virginia, which emphasizes K-12 schooling. Of course, there have been plenty of progressive initiatives for a very long time, but Holistic Education, a broad umbrella for “whole-person” learning, has emphasized a wide range of capacities and values. In general, this orientation emphasizes what it means to nurture full humanness, from academic skills to spiritual considerations, frequently recognized as physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual domains. The recently renewed Holistic Education Review (2021) provides a center for a broad array of relevant perspectives. Elsewhere, I have organized and operationalized psychospiritual capacities around the enduring ideas of the Good (Heart), the True (Wisdom), the Beautiful (Presence), and, Creation (Voice/Expression). Those qualities of the Heart include compassion, empathy, feeling, connecting; Wisdom involves discernment, possibility, guidance, clarifying; Presence requires sensing, focus, witnessing, opening, and
10
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities. . .
197
Voice draws from originality, imagining, will and willingness, and calling (Hart, 2014b). The Learning for Well Being Foundation (2021) identifies nine core capacities: Relaxing, Listening, Observing, Inquiring, Reflecting, Embodying, Empathizing, Subtle Sensing, Discerning Patterns. This work is geared for both public and private schooling initiatives and consistent with a psychospiritual perspective, for example, invoking the term “soul.” For the most part, these capacities and qualities, like our senses, are considered innate – natural compassion, curiosity, and so on. But like our senses they may be occluded by our experience; we may lose easy access to a sense of peace or sense of unconditional love, for example. Or instead of being covered over, like the senses, they may remain undeveloped, unrefined, and unexplored – never really blossoming into their full, nuanced potential. For example, our first and most frequent invocation to students is often to “pay attention” but unless we consider what attention is and what the various ways and means to deploy, sustain, open, and focus alongside recognizing the impact on attention of: trauma and drama, motivation and emotion, neurology and technology, we may not be developing the capacities needed for the agency that enables not only learning and success but also the flexibility and power to manifest values. This is where the work of psychospiritual capacity building lives.
Consciousness and Cognition The main activity of schooling is thinking. Yet there is plenty of evidence and argument that thinking is a more complex and integrated process than conventional assumptions and practice has implied. An enriched understanding of consciousness and cognition supports the development of various capacities that in turn scaffold values. In the field of cognitive psychology, front-edge theory is referred to as 4e Cognition – enacted, embodied, extended, embedded. Rather than passively receiving the world, there is constant interaction between mind, body, and environment; enacted implies that we shape the world we see, a more constructivist approach we might say. Extended suggests that consciousness stretches out beyond the body–mind into the environment. Embedded recognizes that we exist within a context, embedded in culture and locale. Embodied tells us we know through our bodies. This is too superficial a depiction, of course, but it does give a sketch of a theory of mind that challenges the prevailing Cartesian dualism and the detached, self-generating consciousness that remains a dominant superstructure for educational theory and practice. If our mind, our consciousness, our thinking process is enacted, embodied, extended, and embedded, then the challenge is to reunite body and mind, world and self in a new integration. This opens up thinking beyond a self-contained, abstract activity and thus invites capacities for recognizing and drawing from a wider and interconnected process.
198
T. Hart
Another angle of understanding the mind is the emerging field of interpersonal neurobiology. Siegel (2016) offers a definition of mind as an “emergent, selforganizing, embodied, and relational process that regulates the flow of energy and information.” This last aspect of “relational” adds an important dimension to knowing that has been largely unrecognized in the model of thinking as individualized information processing. We are always a self-in-relation and the qualities of those relations impact our being and our well-being. Neuroscience recognizes a “social engagement system” (Porges, 2011) that involves a network that includes the Vagus nerve, gut, heart, and brain, essentially providing evidence that we are hardwired for social connection. The renewed interest in Attachment Theory first articulated over 50 years ago (Bowlby, 1988; Ainsworth & Bowlby, 1991) tracks with the rising recognition of how mind is shaped by connections with others. That is, sound early attachment – attuned care, communication, and responsiveness from primary caregivers – engenders the development of capacities that shape and enable how we meet the world. Such skills nourished by sound attachment and essential for well-being include the ability to: attune to others, balance emotions, respond flexibly, consider moral awareness, empathize, and draw from bodily intuitions. It is easy to recognize how such skills can serve and enable particular values such as care for others or a sense of peace or balance. Beyond the impact of early attachment, it appears that even if attentive warmth and care were lacking in early years, those same capacities can develop as an outcome of attuned care from another person such as a teacher, friend, therapist later on in development. What may be even more interesting is that it appears that if we are able to attune effectively to our own interiority through contemplative practice, we can build those same capacities (see, e.g., Siegel, 2010). Still another aspect of an expanded view of thinking is that of creativity, a high end of cognition. Werner (1957) recognized that enriched thought is not simply higher abstraction but what we might better term integration. He introduced the concept of microgenesis, in which during each interaction with an idea or an object we recapitulate the same developmental sequences that characterize development through the lifespan. In response to a task, we may first have a sensory-motor reaction, then a vague, global bodily sense, then a feeling, and maybe eventually a crisp idea. He argues that it is this incorporation of and flexibility through these other layers – microgenetic mobility – that enriches and vitalizes cognition. For Werner, the ability to access or “regress” to this more “primitive” processing – vague hunches, gut feelings, other bodily sensations, intuitions, and pre-conceptual images, actually engenders greater potentials. Many approaches to cultivate contemplative and creativity-oriented capacities recognize the need to get out of our own habitual ways of thinking. Werner concluded that “The more creative the person, the wider their range of operations in terms of developmental level, or in other words, the greater their capacity to utilize primitive as well as advanced operations (p. 145).” A variety of phenomenological accounts of scientists, artists, and psychotherapy clients suggest that their process of breakthrough and insight often emerge in a fashion that supports Werner’s ideas and thus makes a case for bringing those gut feelings, vague imaginings, and the like back to the process of learning if we consider creative
10
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities. . .
199
thought as important not only for scholastic achievement but especially for the individual and collective challenges our world faces. Over the past 50 years, there has been increasing evidence and argument that thinking is a more embodied process than our common modernist, brain-exclusive model has implied. Approaches to embodied cognition (e.g., Damasio, 1999; Merleau-Ponty, 1962; Varela et al., 2017) opens thought beyond an exclusively skull-encapsulated activity. In the 1980s, neuroscientist Candace Pert found something in the last place a good brain scientist would expect to find it at the time. Her research uncovered neuropeptides and their receptor sites, presumed to exist only in the brain and considered central to thinking, in the gut. It begged the question of whether the gut and perhaps other parts of the body were capable of thinking too. As Pert (2002) concluded, “I can no longer make a strong distinction between the brain and the body” (p. 16). Today, we recognize that there is a highly complex, bidirectional gut–brain system, referred to as the Enteric Nervous System, impacting affect, motivation, and higher cognitive functions including decision-making (Mayer, 2011). The knowing body also extends beyond just the gut. For example, according to the Radical Active Cognition (REC) model, “the hand [is]. . .an organ of cognition” (Hutto & Myin, 2013, p. 47). “According to REC, there is no way to distinguish neural activity that is imagined to be genuinely content involving (and thus truly mental, truly cognitive) from other non-neural activity that merely plays a supporting or enabling role in making mind and cognition possible.” (p. 12) We also know that the heart, the biggest electromagnetic generator in the body, plays an influential role in our human experience (e.g., Heartmath, 2021). Most traditions talk about opening the heart in some way, hinting at a way of being and knowing that is non-categorical, non-calculative, embodied, and interconnected. Many traditions consider the heart as the center of knowing, and of course, the metaphor of the heart is so central to human experience and implies the centrality of emotion, relation, care, desire, and more. Though the modernist era has tended to isolate thinking as an individual, abstracted, brain process, contemporary understanding reveals this as wholly incomplete. We are beginning to put our parts back together: mind and body, gut and brain, hand and head, which exist not separate from one another as Descartes implied, not even as connected as early mind-body medicine understood, but as a complex, interactive unity (Dreher, 2003). As such the capacity of interoception to attune to bodily “felt sense” (Gendlin, 1982) provides essential source for more robust cognition and with it a greater understanding of self and world. In addition to becoming more attuned to the body, embodiment means integrating the abstract and the concrete, idea, and action through hands-on activity and in the context of our daily life (Hart, 2017). Contemporary evidence and theory for mind and thought as relational, embodied, emergent, and fundamentally more dynamic than machine learning, provides a more accurate representation of how our minds work, and thus underscores the value of
200
T. Hart
developing capacities to access enriched and expanded sources of knowing and being, relevant both for the individual navigating the world and for effectively developing values in others.
Two Ways of Knowing A central underpinning of the capacities (and values) themselves is the way we know. It is not just what we know but especially how we know that drives understanding, values, and actions. One additional way to frame an understanding of consciousness and capacities is through two fundamental ways that the mind attends to the world. There are myriad variations to be sure and certainly plenty of other ways to slice this rhetorically, but this may be useful today for understanding how ways of knowing underpin and engender particular values. One way we will call categorical. This knows the world through abstraction, through separating it from us, through taking apart to understand. In a sense, everything is reduced to parts, to lowest units that are differentiated, cataloged, calculated. It reaches its apex in metaphor of computer zeros and ones. Categorical awareness narrows in to focus on detail and seeks precision, objectivity, and presupposes certainty. It simplifies and represents, proceeds linearly and sequentially, generalizes, and calculates value. Schooling tends to emphasize this way of knowing. The other knowing is through contact instead of category. Its style is direct, relational, embodied, and recognizes wholes and connections. This way of attention enables a broader view, one connected with the world and the body, scanning for changes in the environment. This knowing picks up implicit meaning and metaphor and is able to read faces and other cues of individuals instead of simplified, predetermined, and generalized categories. Knowledge through contact is evolving, implicit, and indeterminate since it always exists in relationship to something else and is not ever fully graspable. (Hart, 2014a). Iain McGilchrist (2009), drawing from a vast body of neuroscientific and phenomenological data, makes a compelling case that these ways of knowing have neurological substrates corresponding to the anatomically distinct hemispheres of the brain. Though logic, language, creativity, and most other complex functions involve interaction across brain and body regions, the evidence supports the idea that left and right hemispheres of the brain, generally speaking, process differently. They are involved with two fundamentally different ways of relating to the world. The left largely enables that categorical, narrowed, separate, discriminative focus while the attention of the right is broad and flexible, able to recognize connected wholes as opposed to the left’s individual parts. These seem perfectly designed to complement one another and both ways of knowing are essential to human understanding. The problem is that their essential partnership has come unhinged. One of McGilchrist’s primary insights is that categorical consciousness does not have the capacity to integrate the more contact-full way of knowing. By its very
10
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities. . .
201
nature, it cannot process or value in wholes or draw material from the body and senses so readily. On the other hand, the right is largely integrative and naturally incorporates the data from the left and is thus positioned to serve as the dominant driver of consciousness. Because of the powerful rise of categorical consciousness reinforced through objectivism and reductionism and the education that both derives from and reinforces it, the consciousness associated with the right has lost its primacy; the left is running the show. Inevitably, the show it can see is limited, an abstracted or virtual view of the world but one assumed to be real and complete. The result is what Leonardo da Vinci warned about 500 years ago; he called it an abridged or “abbreviators” approach to knowledge. da Vinci warned that this abbreviators way of knowing “does damage to knowledge and to love” (Capra, 2007. p. 12). He began to see that the flourishing openness of the early renaissance mind was being conscripted and restricted by a narrowing of thinking; Philosopher Stephen Toulmin (1992) argues that from the sixteenth to the seventeenth centuries there was a particular turning away of earlier Renaissance values. The intellectual fashion became more rigid and dogmatic and reason itself became narrower, no longer respecting context or appreciating diversity to the same degree. Through the domination of this way of knowing, in Rene Descartes’ (1994) words, “[we have rendered] ourselves the lords and possessors of nature” (p. 45). But in gaining that power we risk losing something else. As powerful and valuable as this is – and there is absolutely no denying its influence and worth – we are recognizing the limits and unintended consequences of this way of knowing. It tends to leave us and the world fragmented, out of context, and out of balance. There are other accounts of the dual nature of mind that fall roughly along the same lines. For example, we hear reference to masculine and feminine aspects of knowing and being. In Chinese philosophy, two distinct ways of being are represented as the familiar yin and yang, dependent and embedded in one another. In ancient yogic theory, two channels of energy – Pingala and Ida – spiral up the spine, and when in balance combine to open a third channel of energy – sushumna. The point is that these general distinctions are recognized as fundamental aspects of consciousness across traditions and times. Ultimately, the most important consideration is not what these functions are called or where they are identified anatomically. The essential significance is in recognizing the distinct ways that we attend to the world and just how that shapes what we see and how we behave. Education, along with most attempts to improve it, is embedded in an operating system and an implicit meta-value that validates one aspect of knowing but has devalued the other side. However, this other knowing moves us, gives us context, it may even transform us but we cannot measure or manipulate or manage it in the same way and thus, in a modernist backdrop, it has been largely overridden. The challenge for this age is not just about more information and faster connections, more differentiation and domination, but to find a way to bring together the bits and the bytes in living the integrated life in a world of global interconnection so that we, as da Vinci warned, stop doing injury to knowledge and to love. If our
202
T. Hart
education and our consciousness are to be a match for this century, this is where the trail of knowing leads. The greater the external technology, the greater the need for internal technology – inner capacities and qualities intertwined with values, to help navigate and occupy human space, lest it be occupied by something else, drawn downstream by marketing wizards, constant electronic stimulation, titillating distraction, consumerism, or other tokens for our attention. Scaffolding the development of values involves rebalancing these ways of knowing, these other capacities of being. We have focused on the function that takes things apart, that meets the world at arms-length, that works off categories and abstractions, that calculates value, and assumes certainty. We also want and need to meet it up close and in person, to sense it in our bodies, to recognize wholes and not only parts, to feel awe and mystery, to be moved, find context, meaning, and beauty, so that the bits and bytes make sense. We do not need to just categorize our life; we need to enter it. Core values show us a doorway, capacities help us to move through it. A values-oriented approach and a core capacities approach are complementary, intertwined, and can bolster one another. Our collective and individual thriving requires a worldview – values – appropriate to the times but we also need a world presence, we might say – the powers of being and doing in the world so that we might live out the values we hold dear. And that presence is powered by supportive community and worthy aspirations on the outside and the depth and power of psychospiritual capacities on the inside. Our flourishing as individuals and as community requires certain “real powers of body and soul to be a match for reality” as M.C Richards says in the epigram that beings this chapter. These are the inner arts and inner technologies essential to place a claim on the meaningful life, helping us to find our way.
References Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethological approach to personality development. American Psychologist, 46, 331–341. Association for Contemplative Mind in Higher Education. (2021). https://www.contemplativemind. org/ Berry, T. (2000). The great work: Our way into the future. Random House. Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. Taylor and Francis. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. Routledge. Buber, M. (1970). I and Thou (W. Kaufman, Trans.). Charles Scribner’s Sons. Capra, F. (2007). The science of Leonardo: Inside the mind of the great genius of the renaissance. Doubleday. CASEL. (2021). Consortium for social emotional learning. https://casel.org/ Contemplative Science Center. (2021). https://csc.virginia.edu/ Damasio. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
10
Consciousness, Culture, and the Place of Psychospiritual Capacities. . .
203
Descartes, R. (1994). A discourse on method: Meditations and principles. J. M. Dent. (Original work published 1637) Dreher, H. (2003). Mind-body unity: A new vision for mind-body science and medicine. Johns Hopkins University Press. Gendlin, E. T. (1982). Focusing. Bantam Books. Gordon, M. (1999). The roots of empathy: Changing the world child by child. The Experiment. Hadot, P. (1995). Philosophy as a way of life: Spiritual exercises from Socrates to Foucault (Ed. A. I. Davidson, Trans. M. Chase). Blackwell. Hart, T. (2014a). The integrative mind: Transformative education for a world on fire. Rowman & Littlefield. Hart, T. (2014b). The four virtues: Presence, heart, wisdom, creation. Atria. Hart, T. (2017). Embodying the mind. In J. P. Miller & K. Nigh (Eds.), Holistic education: Embodied learning. Information Age Publishing. Heartmath. (2021). https://www.heartmath.org/research/science-of-the-heart/ Holistic Education Review. (2021). https://centerforholisticeducation.org/?page_id¼1022 Hutto, D. D., & Myin, E. (2013). Radicalizing enactivism: Basic minds without content. MIT Press. James, W. (1982). The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature. Penguin. Kessler, R. (2000). The soul of education: Helping students find connection, compassion and character at school. ASCD. Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice. Harper & Row. Learning for Well Being Foundation. (2021). https://www.learningforwellbeing.org/ Maslow, A. (1962). Toward a psychology of being. Van Nostrand. Mayer, E. A. (2011). Gut feelings: The emerging biology of gut–brain communication. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12(8), 453–466. McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary: The divided brain and the making of the Western world. Yale University Press. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. Humanities Press. Penn, W. (1945). as cited in Aldous Huxley, The perennial philosophy. Harper & Row. Pert, C. B. (2002). The wisdom of the receptors: Neuropeptides, the emotions, and body mind. 1986. Advances in Mind-Body Medicine Consciousness, 18(1), 30–35. Porges, S. W. (2011). The polyvagal theory: Neurophysiological foundations of emotions, attachment, communication, and self-regulation. W. W. Norton. Richards, M. C. (1989). Centering in pottery, poetry, and the person (2nd ed.). Wesleyan University Press. Siegel, D. J. (2010). Mindsight: The new science of personal transformation. Bantam Books. Siegel, D. J. (2016). Mind: A journey to the heart of being human. W. W. Norton. Tillich, P. (1951). Systematic theology (Vol. 1). University of Chicago Press. Tough, P. (2013). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character. Houghton Mifflin. Toulmin, S. (1992). Cosmopolis: The hidden agenda of modernity. University of Chicago Press. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (2017). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. The MIT Press. Weber, M. (1946). Class, status, party. In H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. Oxford University Press. Werner, H. (1957). The concept of development from a comparative and organismic point of view. In D. B. Harris (Ed.), The concept of development. University of Minnesota Press.
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
11
Kristja´n Kristja´nsson
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Selfhood: History and Conflicting Conceptualizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Self-Esteem as an Educational Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Growth Mindsets as a Self-Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concluding Remarks: Is Self-Realism an Option in the Present Day? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
206 207 211 213 215 217
Abstract
Values education has come a long way during the last three decades. Increasingly, educators agree that schools should transmit values rather than merely teach about or clarify values. Trends such as character education and social and emotional learning have replaced Kohlberg’s cognitive-developmental approach, and “the self” has emerged as an independent source and focus of value. Nevertheless, values education continues to be a divisive field. After a brief review of recent trends, I turn attention to the self, tracing its history back to Aristotle and the Stoics, with stopovers in Descartes and Hume, until this construct reached its current anti-realist zenith as “self-concept” in social psychology and education. I offer the discourses on self-esteem at the turn of the century and the still ongoing discourse on “growth mindsets” as examples of the topicality, pervasiveness, and appeal of the self-concept construct as it relates to education. I finally ask what would have to change in educational theory if we returned to a more realist view of selfhood, and/or accorded the construct a more modest role in educational theorizing than seen, for example, in current “identity politics.”
K. Kristjánsson (*) University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_11
205
206
K. Kristja´nsson
Keywords
Values Education · Self · Identity · Kohlberg · Aristotle · Descartes · Hume
Introduction1 During the last three decades or so, drastic shifts have occurred in approaches to the nature and role of values education. For one thing, it is hardly called into question any more that schools need to transmit values, as distinct from simply teaching about values. Wolf-cries of “indoctrination” have lost their bite, or been silenced by society’s need to impose at least a minimal structure of common “core values” upon an increasingly fractured and heterogeneous populace. Minimalist justifications of values education in schools (e.g., Hand, 2018), which would have been heaven-sent for values educators in the 1980s–90s, now feel like relics of a bygone age, surplus to requirements; for why harp on the obvious? For another thing, values education tends to be understood less than before in terms of a particular school subject; more in terms of a general value-imbued enrichment of students’ learning experiences pertaining to every school subject, through which values are “caught” and learned to be “sought,” rather than simply “taught.” In practical terms, this means placing values at the center of the school’s ethos and hoping that values and teaching quality form a “double helix” of academic and personal achievement (see, e.g., various articles in Lovat & Toomey, 2007, where this new trend was already in evidence). If we focus more specifically on values education qua moral education, we have also come a long way since the 1980s. In 1985, Teachers College Press published an overview of “contemporary approaches to moral education” (Chazan, 1985). The approaches ranged from Durkheim’s socialization view and Kohlberg’s Kantianinspired cognitive-developmental approach, to Wilson’s rational utilitarianism, value-clarification models, and the views of those who reject any formal moral education whatsoever. Writ large, none of those approaches would count as “contemporary” in today’s climate. The anti-moral-education guard has been reduced to a few scattered mavericks, the idea of the mere clarification of existing values has more or less imploded, and the aspirations of those who simply wanted moral education to “apply” insights rubberstamped by this or that abstract moral theory (be it Kantian or utilitarian) have taken a downward turn, to be replaced by more agent-centered and context-sensitive hands-on approaches. Today’s manual of “contemporary” approaches would be likely, therefore, to include chapters on character education (inspired by virtue ethics, as retrieved by late twentieth-century thinkers), positive education (inspired by positive psychology, which did not originate until the beginning of this century), social and emotional learning (inspired by the ideal of emotional intelligence from the end of the twentieth century), as well as care ethics, 1
The beginning of this chapter and some if its subsequent conceptualizations draw upon my chapter ‘Valuing the Self’ in the first edition of this Handbook. However, more than half of the present chapter is comprised of new material. For a more detailed take on the historical and conceptual nuances of selfhood in philosophy, psychology, and education, see Kristjánsson (2010).
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
207
citizenship education, human rights education, peace education, and so forth. The recommended methods would include service learning, habituation, and role modeling of moral exemplars, alongside an increased emphasis on the arts, emotion education, metacognitive reflective/critical thinking, and practical wisdom (Kristjánsson et al., 2021). Can one trace a pattern in those shifts and turns? Perhaps the general pattern is (happily, in the present view) away from the theoretical toward the practical and (more regrettably, in the present view) away from the social toward the personal, although the recent emphasis on citizenship or “civic” education and the focus on environmental values, such as sustainability, mitigate that latter trend somewhat. This pattern goes hand in hand with another latter-day shift in approaches to education in and about values, broadly understood, which will form the linchpin of the remaining discussion. We can call it the “inward turn”: the exaltation of selfhood (usually referred to simply as the self or even identity) from a mere subject of value – a value-recorder if you like – to an object of value: an object to be prized and valued independently, esteemed, respected, nourished, and protected. Without first valuing oneself or one’s “self,” as the theory goes, one cannot learn to value other things. This assumption may not seem novel; even Aristotle posited that other-love presupposes an ability to love oneself (1985, pp. 252–256 [1168a5–1169b2]).2 In recent times, however, the idea of selfvaluing has assumed a life of its own, taking on new forms and dimensions, with significant ramifications for values-educational practice. In the following section, I trace the historical trajectory motivating this new selffocus and some of the conceptual complications that it involves. This exploration is then followed by two sections in which I give examples of how the self-discourses of late have impacted upon educational practice: on the one hand, the focus on selfconcept (or, more narrowly, self-esteem), and on the other hand, the emphasis on so-called “growth mindsets.” I end with some reflections on how historical vicissitudes in thinking about selfhood have motivated today’s “identity politics” and “cancel culture.” I also speculate about if and how possible moves away from the idea of young people’s essentially fragile and fluid self-concepts, back to an older, more realist, and modest conception, might manifest themselves in the educational arena.
Selfhood: History and Conflicting Conceptualizations Philip Larkin’s often-cited quip that “sexual intercourse began in nineteen-sixtythree [. . .] between the end of the ‘Chatterley’ ban and the Beatles” first LP’ is insightful albeit not entirely historically accurate.3 The same goes for the common contention that the concept of “selfhood” or “the self” emerged only in early-modern 2
Almost all the contemporary approaches to values education, such as character education, positive education, social and emotional learning, and citizenship education, trace their origin back to Aristotle, some way or another, albeit to different books in his corpus (Nicomachean Ethics, Rhetoric, Politics). This explains the pride of place given to his views in this chapter. 3 This is taken from Larkin’s poem ‘Annus Mirabilis’, see, e.g., https://www.wussu.com/poems/ plam.htm
208
K. Kristja´nsson
times in connection with the concern for subjectivity that characterized the Renaissance and subsequently the Enlightenment period. What is true is that term “selfhood,” as a noun referring to an entity with distinct ontological-cum-psychological features, describing what a person is “really deep down” as an individual, came into use only from the seventeenth century onwards (Taylor, 1989). Its emergence coincided with the proliferation of new normative constructs such as “autonomy” and “authenticity” that, similarly, had an origin in much older ways of thinking but were not fully developed until the dawn of modernity. Plato and Aristotle would for example have found it difficult to make sense of the contention that Greta Thunberg has taken an autonomous decision to be – and found her authentic voice as an – environmental activist, although both theorists were deeply concerned with finding the general purpose (telos) of human life. That said, Aristotle, for one, theorized profusely about the characteristics of “oneself” in ways that are amenable to translation into modern self-talk. For example, he referred to his close personal friend as “another himself” (1985, p. 246 [1166a30–33]; cf. pp. 260 and 265 [1170b6–7; 1172a32–34]) in a way that could lend itself to a conceptualization, not available in antiquity, of “interdependent selfhood” (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Even more explicitly and presciently, Aristotle made a distinction between people by dividing them into four categories: Some people are (morally) worthy of great things, and others are not; and some people know to which of those two categories they belong, and others do not. The possible combinations of those two criteria (objective worthiness and self-knowledge) then create four possible character types that Aristotle analyzed; and he concluded that those who are objectively worthy, and realize it, form the ideal type (1985, pp. 97–104 [1123a33–1125a35]). Without engaging in unreasonable conceptual acrobatics, it would be possible to convert this distinction into a modern-looking one between “self” and “self-concept/identity” (see below). Most conspicuously, Aristotle identified a personality type, much discussed in modernity, of the person who suffers because of an unreasonably low view of her own worth, which he called “pusillanimity” (nowadays known more widely as “low self-esteem”). However, here is where the analogy with modernity comes to an abrupt end; the view – so entrenched in modernity – that maybe who one is deep down is nothing but the idea of who one is (namely the sort of anti-self-realism that I define presently) would have been utterly foreign to Aristotle. Later, the Stoics came up with the idea that what matters for the good life is not what really happens to you (which you can do very little about, according to their deterministic metaphysics), but rather what approach you take to the goings-on in your life. Stoicism has been experiencing a revival in modern times (Sherman, 2021), especially through its current incarnation as cognitive behavioral theory, with a focus on resilience as a survival skill. However, like Aristotle, the Stoics did not frame their teachings in terms of a distinct self-theory. Somewhat paradoxically, the period of early-modern philosophy involved both the creation of the modern concept of selfhood and its deconstruction. Metaphysically speaking, Decartes’s “cogito ergo sum” identified a distinct novel agency at the core of human personhood. Descartes took Aristotle’s faculty of accurate selfknowledge, so to speak, to an un-Aristotelian extreme by making all knowledge dependent upon self-knowledge. Also contrary to Aristotle, he considered the self to
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
209
be a simple, single, permanent, non-material entity, immediately accessible to introspection at any moment, the experience of which undergirds the only certainties we can ever have in life. Locke then identified the core of selfhood in the continuity of self-consciousness over time, and various other Enlightenment thinkers made substantive use of this new self-construct as representing the very locus of individuality (Taylor, 1989), which had suddenly become such a prized commodity. However, Enlightenment empiricism, especially as represented by David Hume, turned out to be self-defeating with respect to this newly found construct of the self. Introspection reveals, according to Hume, no singular, substantive unity in the plurality of impressions that comprises consciousness. The alleged “self” is nothing but “a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement.” However, strong our natural propensity to imagine that flux of impressions as emanating from an underlying, unchanging unity, the idea is nevertheless fictitious – a figment of the imagination without intellectual basis. Substantive selfhood requires something “invariable and uninterrupted,” but there is simply no such substance beneath all the difference in what his contemporaries called “the self” (Hume, 1978, pp. 251–255). It would take me too far afield from the topic of the present chapter to continue to trace this history of the professed realities (or unrealities) of selfhood. Suffice it to say here that already, post-Hume, we had all the ingredients of the four main positions on the self that have continued to compete for allegiance into the present era. Let us call them hard self-realism, soft self-realism, soft anti-self-realism, and hard anti-self-realism (see Kristjánsson, 2010, Chap. 2, for the full details). All positions presuppose that, conceptually at least, it is possible to distinguish between a realist objective self versus self-concept or identity (in a psychological sense) as the set of our conceptions about, and attitudes/feelings toward, this self. Think of the realist self as the hard furniture in the room of our psyche and self-concept as a mirror in which this furniture is reflected. To simplify the positions somewhat, hard realists hold that only the objective self (the furniture) ultimately matters for selfhood: morally, psychologically, and educationally. What we happen to believe about the self will hinder or helps true self-understanding, but it does not really change who we are. Self-knowledge denotes, for the self-realist, harmony between one’s self and self-concept; self-deception denotes disharmony or discrepancy. For instance, I may consider myself strong willed and really be strong willed, or I may consider myself weak willed and really be weak willed. In either case, I could be said to possess selfknowledge. Alternatively, I may consider myself strong willed but really be weak willed, or consider myself weak willed and really be strong willed. In either case, I would be self-deceived. According to soft self-realism, the objective self exists, but so does self-concept, and qua mirror in the room it is also part of the furniture it mirrors. This is basically the old Aristotelian picture projected above: The flourishing well-adjusted agent (morally, psychologically, and epistemologically) both has a solid well-formed self and an accurate mirror in which to view it. This position may seem to create a vicious regress: What mirrors the mirror if that is also one piece of the furniture in the psyche? To respond to this quandary, complex responses are required about how the self-concept is Janus-faced, both inward and outward-directed, with part of it
210
K. Kristja´nsson
looking at and evaluating the rest of the furniture, but another part being part of the furniture that it mirrors. This solution is typically couched in terms of the double role of the so-called self-conscious emotions, such as pride and shame, as being part of both self and self-concept (Kristjánsson, 2010, Chap. 4). However, elaborating upon the intricacies of that philosophical position are outside the current purview. Seen through the prism of anti-self-realism, the so-called furniture in the room is just a chimera. There is nothing stable and solid to be found there (as noted by Hume). All there is to what we call selfhood is just the collection of conceptions we have about it, namely our self-concept, which then includes various sub-aspects such as self-esteem, self-confidence, and self-respect,4 depending on our contextdependent inward perspective. You are simply who you think you are: the mirror. A soft version of this view accepts its main premise but adds the caveat that the reflections in the mirror can be deemed better or worse depending on their internal coherence. Thus, a consistent and coherent self-narrative is better than an incoherent, haphazard one, at least for the pragmatic reason that the former is easier to live by. For a complex set of historic-ideological reasons, which involved the demise of various forms of essentialism and realism within ontology and ethics, anti-self-realism – originally of the soft kind but later, with the upsurge of postmodern ontologies (Gergen, 1991), of the hard kind – became the dominant paradigm within social science (Pajares & Schunk, 2002). This is especially true of fields such as social psychology and most of modern mainstream education discourse; personality psychologists, however, still stick to some variety of self-realism, based on the existence of more or less fixed personality traits (most notably, the Big-Five). William James was the first psychologist to study the self systematically, and it was he who created the notion of global self-esteem (see next section). Interest in the self, as in other “internal constructs,” took a dive in psychology during the heyday of behaviorism from the 1930s–1950s. Humanistic psychology, however, “rediscovered” the self, and it has since been the object of acute academic and public attention. The anti-self-realist construct of self that is so dominant, for example, in contemporary educational discourse is rarely called by that name. It is simply referred to as “identity”; hence, the rise of recent “identity politics” where the anti-realist assumptions are extended to things such as sex as self-ascribed gender, or your race as whatever racial designator you happen to identify with, rather than anything having to do with your genetic make-up. The complex philosophical assumptions undergirding this view of selfhood are rarely invoked, however. At best, this pattern of thinking is assembled under the somewhat vague umbrella term “attribution theory.” According to that theory, people tend to act in line with the attributes they consider themselves as possessing, whether or not they actually possess those attributes, and the explanations which they like to give of their own behavior (see, e.g., Dweck, 1999, for educationally salient applications, as explained in a later section). Self-realists will question whether self-respect is really part of self-concept – that it can be shoehorned into this particular psychological construct. The problem there is that self-respect is not essentially a belief concept. Although the belief that one can do things makes one self-confident, the belief that one has strong self-respect does not make one self-respectful, any more than the belief that one is a good driver makes one a good driver.
4
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
211
Anti-self-realism goes hand in hand with a paradigm of young people as essentially fluid and fragile beings. On the positive side, this paradigm has led to a much deeper appreciation of the powers of the attitudes that we harbor toward young people and of the attitudes about themselves that they gradually internalize. Moreover, it has heightened interest in, and sensitivity to, the malleability of young people’s selfhoods and their faculty to choose and take on new values, roles, and identities. In that sense, this paradigm has been educationally liberating. On the other hand, it has also turned out to be liable to illiberal excesses, often referred to through opprobrious terms such as “snowflake generation,” “cancel culture,” and “wokeness.” I return to some evaluations of current anti-self-realism in education in the final section of this chapter. However, first it will be instructive to offer a couple of brief examples of how it has played out in educational theory and practice.
Self-Esteem as an Educational Value What is the scientific status of self-concept? Have psychologists succeeded in locating something singular in the prodigious plurality of sundry notions that nest around the self of everyday experience? If by that we mean whether or not they have identified a natural-kind concept, the answer is obviously no. If the claim is the more modest one, however – that they have specified a cluster concept with reasonable defining features, general intuitive appeal, and at least some prima facie explanatory force in making sense of everyday human experiences – I think we should give the psychologists the benefit of the doubt. Notice that this acceptance of conceptual serviceability does not imply that self-concept in general or some particular facets of self-concept, such as global self-esteem, can automatically be granted a powerful mediating influence on human behavior. The common claim that a “positive” self-concept is fundamental to educational achievement, psychological health, and rewarding relationships amounts to no more than a slogan in the absence of empirical investigation. What propagated the sudden groundswell of interest – among psychologists and educationists – in people’s beliefs about themselves in the second half of the twentieth century? Two explanations are true but trivial. This interest coincided with certain research paradigms within psychology and it harmonized with dominant themes in the folk psychology of the period. Yet these explanations merely move the question up one level: What motivated the appeal of those paradigms and of this folk psychology? One possible explanatory route is that of a conspiracy theory; the selfmantra is then seen as part of an explicit or implicit conspiracy by self-help gurus, quack therapists, and unscrupulous politicians to feather their own nests. This is essentially the explanation given in Furedi’s Therapy Culture (2004) and in Rose’s earlier diagnosis of “psy culture” (1996), inspired by even more sinister and wideranging Foucauldian musing about “technologies of the self” and how those are used to exercise power over the masses (Foucault, 2020). Yet it fails as an explanation to the extent that it does not account for the origin of the great need that “psy culture” or “therapy culture” seem to have met. Recall that many other ideas were also up for grabs at the time, but it was the one about the dangers of a vulnerable self-concept that sold.
212
K. Kristja´nsson
My own preferred explanation is not as juicy as the conspiracy ones. I think the halo effect of self-concept, in its various incarnations, was mainly caused by its professed power to exert a positive influence on young people. The greatest torchbearers of the ideal of “boosting self-esteem,” for example, have been practically minded psychologists and well-meaning educators, concerned with finding ways of improving young people’s mental health and educational achievement. The vast majority of psychological and educational studies conducted under the banner of self-concept during the last 50 years or so have actually been about one facet of it only, global self-esteem – defined as the ratio of one’s perceived achievements, across the whole of one’s life, to one’s aspirations – and its expected correlations with various educational and socio-moral factors. The initial hypothesis was that high global self-esteem is positively correlated with (and even causally connected to) educational achievement and pro-social behavior, hence the urgent need to enhance self-esteem at school and in the home. I take it that readers are aware of the grandiose claims that were made in the name of this overarching hypothesis (see, e.g., Branden, 1969) and the copious research that has been conducted to establish such correlations. Warning signs had long been raised within social science circles, by both educationists and psychologists, about the dangers of allowing students to acquire self-esteem on the cheap (learning to esteem that which is potentially unworthy of esteem), and about the small step from high self-esteem to self-obsession, selfcenteredness, and plain old selfishness (Damon, 1995; Stout, 2000; Pajares & Schunk, 2002). Yet few people took those warnings seriously until fairly late. We can take comfort in the fact that psychology has proved to have quite an ability to self-correct: to deconstruct its own constructs when they fail to pass the test of empirical serviceability. This is essentially what happened in the early part of this century with the notion of global self-esteem, at least as far as its educational ramifications are concerned. As amply demonstrated in a 2003 meta-analysis, satisfaction with the global ratio of one’s perceived accomplishments to aspirations has few educational correlates, positive or negative. Academic performance does not require students to love and esteem themselves in general. More surprising, perhaps, is the fact that very high global self-esteem is, if anything, connected to anti-social and risky behavioral tendencies rather than pro-social and healthy tendencies – perhaps because of the sense of invulnerability that it evokes in people who think of themselves as close to perfection (Baumeister et al., 2003). This much-cited metaanalysis more or less killed off the interest in global self-esteem in mainstream psychological circles. Someone could complain that the obsession with global selfesteem has wasted enormous resources on a fool’s errand, given the 11,313 abstracts in PsycINFO 1985–2006 that dealt with or included a reference to the concept. But the methodological point is simply that an intuitively appealing idea – the idea that one’s global estimation of one’s successes has a significant impact on educational achievement and general behavior – has turned out to be untenable. The only way to learn that was through careful scientific experimentation. And there, William James’s construct of global self-esteem proved enormously useful, if not useful in exactly the way that James and most subsequent theorists had predicted. Simultaneous to, but mostly independent of, the decline in self-esteem research in psychological circles in the first decade of the twenty-first century, lively discussions
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
213
took place about the concept among philosophers of education. Although that discourse is now a bit dated, it is still worthy of readers’ attention (Cigman, 2001, 2004; Smith, 2002, 2006; Kristjánsson, 2007; Ferkany, 2008). The upshot of the philosophical discussion was that the healthiest kind of self-esteem would be the reasonable/accurate one that Aristotle recommended in his prescient version of what we would nowadays label soft self-realism. Yet there is a sad twist to this whole story of the demise of what has been called the “self-esteem industry.” Educators have been rather slow at taking notice of developments in educational psychology and educational philosophy, and a quick Google search of the webpages of many kindergartens, primary, and secondary schools in the U.K., for instance, still brings up the cursed and discredited educational value of “boosting self-esteem,” as if nothing has happened in academia since the 1980s. Every cloud has a silver lining; and although the educational value of high selfesteem turned out be close to zero (or even in some cases a minus number), this finding cannot be generalized to the whole of self-concept. Another facet of selfconcept is what Bandura (1997) calls “perceived self-efficacy,” but simply means, in less academic parlance, domain-specific (as opposed to global) self-confidence: for instance, one’s self-confidence in being able to master a new language in the future. This notion is logically distinct from self-esteem, be it global or domain-specific. There is no contradiction in believing firmly in one’s ability, if one tries hard enough, to succeed at learning a new language even though one has little self-esteem as a foreign-language speaker here and now. Conversely, one may lack confidence in further ventures at language learning, although one is pleased with one’s current ability at speaking a foreign language. Bandura’s research seems to have shown that self-esteem and self-confidence are not only logically but also empirically distinct. Indeed, considerable empirical research supports Bandura’s original armchair hypothesis that one’s confidence as, say, a maths student does predict achievement in such related areas as maths tests, although confidence in one domain does not extend into other domains (Bandura, 1997). In sum, self-concept has, since the middle of the twentieth century, acquired prominent status as a target not only of values education narrowly understood but the cultivation of education-enhancing values more generally (especially though developing self-esteem and self-confidence in various guises). In this section, I have tried to unravel some of the complexity of these particular facets of self-concept, as well as exploring contrasting opinions on their uses and usefulness.
Growth Mindsets as a Self-Theory One of the most popular educational theory of late – interestingly among practitioners no less than academics – is Carol Dweck’s theory of growth mindsets. She defines it as a “self-theory” (Dweck, 1999) and rightly so; it is a fairly elaborate antiself-realist theory (see further in Kristjánsson, 2010, Chap. 10). Underlying Dweck’s theorizing is a social-cognitive approach to motivation and self-regulation, according to which people’s self-beliefs and values create meaning systems (“implicit theories”), within which people define themselves and operate,
214
K. Kristja´nsson
leading different individuals to react in radically different ways to identical situations. In particular, people’s self-concept (via self-beliefs about the extent of their ability to control situations and personal capacities) influences their motivations to engage in personal change. Some of those meaning systems are psycho-socially adaptive, others maladaptive (Dweck, 1999, pp. xi, 138, 144). More generally, Dweck’s methodological framework is part of the earlier-mentioned attribution theory in psychology, which assumes that people act in accordance with the attributes they consider themselves to possess. Dweck’s findings indicate that one can divide people into two groups according to the implicit self-theories they embrace. People with an “entity view” consider their personal attributes to be fixed, stable, and resistant to change. People with an “incremental view,” on the other hand, consider their attributes to be relatively malleable and amenable to change. “Incremental theorists” relish challenges and are “mastery-oriented”; they like to master tasks that are one increment more difficult than the ones they have accomplished so far. “Entity theorists” are, in contrast, saddled with a disabling self-view that feeds on a diet of easy successes. They are constantly worried about the level of their fixed positive attributes and need repeated verifications of their abilities. They are “performance-oriented”: like to repeat earlier performances over and over again, but are suspicious, if not positively scared, of new challenges. The entity view thus creates emotional vulnerability and learned helplessness. Most parents and teachers think it is important to praise children. Dweck puts a damper on the valorization of praise. What we need to do is to praise effort rather than ability. If we praise ability – by telling children that they are talented or gifted, for instance, or even worse, by offering vacuous unsubstantiated praise – we inculcate in them an entity theory: “Try to appear smart, do not risk making mistakes.” Instead, praise should be specific and directed at mastered tasks. This is, in Dweck’s view, particularly true in the case of girls, who already get too much approval for just being “good”; boys are by nature more risk-oriented and receive more praise for effort – which helps them later in life. Similar to praise, criticism should be item-specific, for if you criticize children for global characteristics, you instill in them a sense of contingent self-worth (1999, Chaps. 15 and 16). Using praise and blame constructively is thus a major factor in cultivating an incremental self-concept, amenable to positive self-change. Dweck does not explicitly reject objective truth about who we are deep down. She places little stock, however, in the difference between fact and fiction when analyzing our attributes; what matters is how we perceive of them (as static or dynamic). She has no patience with the fact that one’s IQ score is, as a matter of fact, relatively stable and reliable; or that personality traits, such as those explored in Big-Five research, and self-constituting emotional dispositions tend to show little fluctuation. If one expresses those truths in response to her questionnaires, one will simply be deemed to have a maladaptive mindset. In general, she does not distinguish clearly between the view that some of our attributes are difficult to change (which is no doubt true) and that some of them are impossible to change (which is probably false). Both views will fall under the rubric of a damaging “entity theory.”
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
215
My aim in invoking Dweck’s theory here as an example is not to pass any definitive theoretical judgments about it (cf. however, Kristjánsson, 2010, Chap. 10). I am simply presenting it as a case in point about the current pervasiveness and appeal of anti-self-realism in education. It would have sounded bizarre to someone like Aristotle, for example, that simply the way you phrase you praise of children’s educational process can have a lasting influence on how they understand themselves and exert an equally lasting influence on any future progress they can make. I cannot avoid noting here that two recent meta-analyses of Dweck’s theory have identified mixed results, at best; and where a positive effect has been recorded, it was weak (Sisk et al., 2018). When I have conveyed this message to teachers – who typically hold Dweck in very high regard – their typical response has been that it is no wonder growth-mindset interventions do not lead to (further) positive outcomes. Teachers have, namely, taken Dweck’s message on board to the extent that they are already overwhelmingly growth-mindset educators, and the effect that any new intervention can have is, at best, to gild a pre-existing lily. This response may indicate that the anti-realist mindset theory has reached the status of being virtually irrefutable by any academic evidence. More generally, it seems to signify that antiself-realism has truly become bred into the bones of contemporary educators.
Concluding Remarks: Is Self-Realism an Option in the Present Day? A lone survivor of the war between self-realists and anti-self-realists has been the ideal of self-understanding, which seems to be touted equally within both camps. Although few educators would take exception to the claim that self-understanding is a fundamental education value, we should recall that this claim is not incontestable. Renowned writers such as Henrik Ibsen and Eugene O’Neill have toyed with the idea of self-deceptions and unrealistic pipe dreams as “vital lies” that enable the average person to avoid self-contempt and existential despair. Like blinders on a horse, self-deceptions may help us move forward unhampered by distress. Although there may at times be some truth in the Rousseauean dictum that an educator has no more right to tell students things that they do not want to hear than not to tell them things that they want to hear, I would argue that the general point about people’s need for self-deceptions underestimates the enticement and self-transformative value of objective truth, as well as people’s capacity to cope with distress when truth turns out to be unsettling. It is no coincidence that “informed consent” and truth-telling have become ground rules in the health sector. Even John Stuart Mill, that uncompromising advocator of happiness as the ultimate moral goal, wrote a long chapter in On Liberty (1972) entirely in praise of truth and its value in human life (and the disvalue of trying to suppress it). It is true that young children are not always ready to hear the truth about everything, including themselves. However, I see no reason for educators to shirk from seeing self-understanding as a valid general aim of education in general and values education in particular.
216
K. Kristja´nsson
Yet, once again, there is a complication here that relates to different self-theories. Self-realists read self-understanding as being about the true correspondence between self-concept and one’s true underlying self, with the former tracking the latter correctly. Anti-self-realists have a more difficult task in making sense of the idea of a discrepancy between the two, and the resulting self-alienation, because they do not believe in any underlying self that can be tracked correctly or incorrectly. Alienation for them becomes, unlike alienation in Marxist or early-modern theories, not alienation from who you really are, but rather some sort of alienation within the self-concept – which appears paradoxical from the standpoint of hard anti-selfrealism but does make sense within a soft anti-self-realist model, such as Bruner’s (2004). The anti-self-realism that is so pervasive in contemporary educational discourses can only be understood against the backdrop of a more general paradigm of the vulnerable, fragile child (Walker et al., 2015) – or what is sometimes referred to derogatively as the “student as a snowflake.” If the ontological assumptions motivating the so-called culture wars of late are traced back to their roots, those wars are waged between self-realists and anti-self-realists. “Woke-ness” can be defined, then, as acute sensitivity to challenges to people’s own professed self-concepts (qua “identities”) and to any “oppressive” and “offensive” suggestions to the effect that those identities might not track correctly the underlying self. That said, recent polls in the U.K., at least, have indicated that the majority of ordinary people do not understand the word “woke” and that an even larger majority have no interest in the “culture wars.” Nevertheless, those continue to be waged within academic circles and among the chattering classes at a level of fierceness which indicates that neither camp would be open to something like an Aristotelian soft self-realist conciliation, according to which both self and self-concept matter, psychologically and educationally. My main worry about the current culture wars is the effect they are having on a wider range of educational agendas than those commonly pursued under the label of “values education” on a narrow understanding. The most pernicious influence is on traditional discourses about social justice as an educational value: a value written into the mission statements of many university-level education departments. Rather than being about the promotion of the common good, and equitable access to it, “social justice” has been turned into a synonym for “identity politics” of various narrowly circumscribed kinds – losing sense of the big political picture (Arthur et al., 2021). This has been to the detriment of the interests of people both on the left and the right of the political spectrum. The most radical consequence of the culture wars about self and identity has been the narrowing down of discursive spaces on university campuses: A “cancel culture” motivated by voices who typically self-define as “liberal” but would make the liberal philosopher par excellence, John Stuart Mill, turn in his grave. The self-realist versus anti-self-realist debate, which began as a fairly obscure academic debate in the early Enlightenment period, has thus taken on new proportions in recent times that inform any approach to the idea of schools and universities as sites of values and education into values. I, personally, yearn for a time when slightly less attention is paid again to
11
Values, Education, Self, and Identity
217
questions of self and identity – but more to a wider range of socio-political issues having to do with unequal access to educational opportunities – and when, at least, a soft self-realist position is not automatically taken as an indication of a reactionary standpoint on values. Meanwhile, the tentative answer to the question posed in the title of this final section must be negative. Self-realism does not seem, for the time being at least, to be an option in the current discourses about values in education. What would have to happen for that to change? As noted earlier, there does not seem to be much appetite in educational circles for Aristotle’s golden-mean soft self-realist position. It is controversial whether there is much that individual theorists, or even whole schools of thought, can do about this current state of affairs. There is something in the spirit of the times that calls for an inward gaze at a fragile self in flux. We will probably have to wait for this era to end before the discourses on values in education can return to a more classic, more realist, and more conciliatory approach.
References Aristotle (1985). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans). Hackett Publishing. Arthur, J., Kristjánsson, K., & Vogler, C. (2021). Seeking the common good in education through a positive conception of social justice. British Journal of Educational Studies, 69(1), 101–117. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman & Co. Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1–44. Branden, N. (1969). The psychology of self-esteem: A new concept of man’s nature. Nash Publishing. Bruner, J. (2004). Life as narrative. Social Research, 71(3), 691–710. Chazan, B. (1985). Contemporary approaches to moral education. Analyzing alternative theories. Teachers College Press. Cigman, R. (2001). Self-esteem and the confidence to fail. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(4), 561–576. Cigman, R. (2004). Situated self-esteem. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38(1), 91–105. Damon, W. (1995). Greater expectations: Overcoming the culture of indulgence in our homes and schools. Free Press. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press. Ferkany, M. (2008). The educational importance of self-esteem. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(1), 119–132. Foucault, M. (2020). Power: The essential works of Michel Foucault 1954–1984. Penguin. Furedi, F. (2004). Therapy culture: Cultivating vulnerability in an uncertain age. Routledge. Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. Basic Books. Hand, M. (2018). A theory of moral education. Routledge. Hume, D. (1978). A treatise of human nature (L. A. Selby-Bigge, Ed., 2nd ed., ed. by P. H. Nidditch). Clarendon Press. Kristjánsson, K. (2007). Justified self-esteem. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(2), 247–261. Kristjánsson, K. (2010). The self and its emotions. Cambridge University Press. Kristjánsson, K., Fowers, B., Darnell, C., & Pollard, D. (2021). Phronesis (practical wisdom) as a type of contextual integrative thinking. Review of General Psychology, 25(3), 239–257.
218
K. Kristja´nsson
Lovat, T., & Toomey, R. (Eds.). (2007). Values education and quality teaching: The double helix effect. David Barlow Publishing. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. Mill, J. S. (1972). Utilitarianism, liberty, representative government. E. P. Dutton & Co. Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Self and self-belief in psychology and education: An historical perspective. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement (pp. 5–22). Academic. Rose, N. (1996). Inventing our selves: Psychology, power, and personhood. Cambridge University Press. Sherman, N. (2021). Stoic wisdom: Ancient lessons for modern resilience. Oxford University Press. Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological Science, 29(4), 549–571. Smith, R. (2002). Self-esteem: The kindly apocalypse. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 36(1), 87–100. Smith, R. (2006). On diffidence: The moral psychology of self-belief. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40(1), 51–62. Stout, M. (2000). The feel-good curriculum: The dumbing down of America’s kids in the name of self-esteem. Da Capo Press. Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of modern identity. Harvard University Press. Walker, D. I., Roberts, M., & Kristjánsson, K. (2015). Towards a new era of character education in theory and in practice. Educational Review, 67(1), 79–96.
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
12
Derek Sankey and Chris Duncan
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Notion of Value-Embedded Learning (VEL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VEL and the Australian Values Education Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . From Values to Value and Back Again . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VEL Is Not EVT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Value, Emotional Salience, and the Learning Brain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wellbeing, Homeostasis, and Interoception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Bayesian, Predictive Brain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VEL, the Embodied, Embedded, Predictive Brain and Educational Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
220 221 222 223 224 224 226 227 228 231 232
Abstract
Over the past 15 years or so, there has been a growing and pervasive sense within brain science that we are standing on the cusp of a major paradigm change that puts notions of “value” and “wellbeing” at the very core of self-organizing brain dynamics. At the close of the twentieth century, the work of Gerald Edelman laid the foundations, with his insistence that neural processing is guided by a selective process that is attuned to recognize value and salience. Value is thus biologically imposed in the brain, by the brain. Building on this foundation, Karl Friston has been a leading voice, in a growing chorus of voices, advocating the notion of a Bayesian predictive brain, while Antonio Damasio and Lisa Feldman Barrett have emphasized the centrality of the biological processes of homeostasis and interoception, concerned with wellbeing. These potentially transformative insights are providing a very new understanding of humans as thinking, feeling, D. Sankey · C. Duncan (*) The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_12
219
220
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
learning, acting beings. This chapter explores these new ideas and indicates how they are incorporated into the notion of value-embedded learning (VEL), which emphasizes how value and emotional salience are embedded in student learning and wellbeing, and how that is applied in educational brain science research. Keywords
Value-embedded learning · Brain science · Predictive brain · Interoceptivity · Student learning · Student wellbeing
Introduction Here is a question. When, in the fullness of time, human beings create artificial brains on a par with the complexity of human brains, will these “brains” necessarily be imbued with value and emotional salience, and able to make value choices? Notice, this question is not asking whether it is possible or desirable to program moral values into artificial intelligence machines, or whether it is possible to build and program a “moral choice machine” (Schramowski et al., 2020), it is not a question about computer programming at all. Rather, it is a fundamental question about how human brains work and what it means to be human. Whether, for example, value and emotional salience are playing a necessary role in brain functioning and whether this has something to say about the nature of emotional wellbeing and the moral values we espouse. If so, moral values are not simply a sociocultural construct, as some would insist, but are also biologically grounded (Churchland, 2011) and an emergent property of highly complex brains (Sankey & Kim, 2016). It also suggests that human wellbeing and flourishing are somehow inscribed into how brains work (Damasio, 2018). Could it be, for example, that human brains necessarily exhibit a selective value bias (Edelman, 1987; Friston et al., 1994), which directly or indirectly provides a necessary (though not sufficient) foundation for human moral values? Is human brain functioning inherently directed toward wellbeing and flourishing (Barrett, 2017a; Damasio, 2018) and is it also fundamentally predictive with continuous feedback, moment by moment (Clark, 2015), so not “reactive” as conventionally believed? And, if human brain functioning is necessarily imbued with value and emotional salience, as that initial question on artificial brains intimates, then perhaps it is time to reformulate Alan Turing’s test for artificial brains, his “imitation game.” Not, as Turing proposed, whether artificial brains exhibit intelligent behavior on a par with human actors, but whether, in order to be on a par with human brains, artificial brains should unambiguously exhibit an emergent ability to make value choices that are not programmed-in, but emerge as a product of their complexity. Within the context of education, these preliminary thoughts and questions about the way brains work have important implications for how we account for human learning and development, including moral learning and development. We have elsewhere referred to the notion that learning and development are imbued with
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
221
value and emotional salience as value-embedded learning (VEL) (Duncan et al., 2021). In this chapter, we endeavor to bring these various ideas into a collective whole. We start with education and with learning and development, as we begin to unpack the concept of VEL. We then work our way toward the cutting-edge notion of the interoceptive, predictive brain with feedback, which forms the bedrock of VEL, before returning to the application of VEL in brain imaging educational research.
The Notion of Value-Embedded Learning (VEL) To come straight to the point, the concept “value-embedded learning” entails “a philosophically non-reductive and biologically plausible account of the dynamic relationship between value, salience, and emotion in the learning process, and how value might best be ‘afforded’ in the learning environments of classrooms and schools” (Duncan et al., 2021, p. 8). The notion that learning (and development) is fundamentally imbued with value and emotional salience, that it is value embedded, provides an alternative to conventional “motivation theory” and “Expectancy value theory” in education that are products of cognitive psychology, but are now displaying shelf-life fatigue (Duncan et al., 2021). VEL is posited on the claim that there is a dynamic relationship between value, salience, and emotion in the learning process, that most if not all learning that occurs in schools and classrooms is inherently value embedded and it is also deeply affected by the nature of the learning environment and what that affords the learner (Gibson, 1979). As the American National Academy of Sciences has observed, since the start of this millennium, “researchers have continued to make important discoveries about influences on learning, particularly sociocultural factors and the structure of learning environments” (NASEM, 2018, p. 1). The core assumption of VEL is that all learning occurs in the brain and that brains are inherently embodied (Immordino-Yang, 2016), meaning that they are biologically integrated into the body. They are also physically, socially, and culturally embedded (Kim & Sankey, 2022). Thus, if we are to understand learning and development, both generally and especially in educational contexts, “it’s a brain in a body in a world that matters” (Smith, 2009, p. 82). In keeping with a dynamic, complex systems account of learning and development, VEL is philosophically nonreductive (Thelen & Smith, 1994; Kauffman, 2008), it offers an emergentist account in which the whole organism is more than the sum of its parts. In the processes of learning and development, the “whole system acquires qualitatively new properties that cannot be predicted from the simple addition of those of its individual components” (Gazzaniga, 2011, p. 134; Sankey & Kim, 2016). Novelty arises from complexity in dynamic, emergent, nonlinear, selforganizing, “dissipative systems” (Prigogine, 1997, p. 66) that exist far from thermal equilibrium. The emergence of novelty is evident in the dynamic patterns of gene activities in developing organisms (Kauffman, 1995), the behavior of ant
222
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
colonies, the functioning of human brains (Solé & Goodwin, 2000), and the “conscious experience that we refer to as ‘mind’ or the self” (Kim & Sankey, 2010, p. 88). VEL also provides a biologically plausible account of learning, in which social and cultural factors involved in learning constantly intermingle with neurobiological processes occurring in the brain. Needless to say, if one chooses to maintain that moral values are a purely human, social, and cultural construct, invoking issues of brain functioning when discussing moral values will likely appear irrelevant, especially if raised in the context of education (e.g., Smeyers, 2016). For some philosophers even the notion that learning occurs in the brain will be anathema. As one anonymous journal reviewer told us quite recently, “The idea that learning occurs in a brain and is necessarily the product of a brain is reductionist, pseudo-scientific and false. . . learning is not an activity of a brain, but of a person, mediated by a teacher and often in a classroom in the company of other persons.” Ironically, this dualist separation of the learning person from their brain was made in support of the antireductionist stance of VEL, though VEL does not invoke dualism.
VEL and the Australian Values Education Program The emphasis in VEL on the relationship between value, emotion, and learning is not entirely new. The seven-year Australian Values Education Program (AVEP, 2003–2010) had led the way. AVEP not only developed a National Framework (DEST, 2005) through which all Australian schools could model and teach values in a planned and systematic way, it also assembled a broad spectrum of evidence that what it called “values pedagogy” (Lovat et al., 2011a, b) improves the “whole educational endeavour of the school” (Lovat et al., 2011a, p. 179) and increases “academic diligence” (Lovat, 2017, p. 93) and student wellbeing (Clement, 2010). AVEP also adduced evidence to support the role that emotion, sociality, and moral development play in the development of cognition. Learning in schools is not just a cognitive endeavor, partitioned from the affective domain of social and emotional development, moreover, it needs to take place in a “morally ambient” learning environment. AVEP was thus echoing Reid’s (1986) insight that teaching needs to forge closer connections between the “propositions” of knowledge and the “disposition” of the learner (Reid, 1986). Furthermore, it argued this should be underpinned by “a disciplined approach to the application of neuroscience to educational practice” (Lovat et al., 2011a, p. 46), applying insights garnered for neuroscience without the distortion of neuromyths. The relationship between cognition and affect, and between learning, emotion, and student wellbeing identified in AVEP are also appropriated into the concept of VEL, as is the importance of the learning environment. However, whereas AVEP recognized the relevance of neuroscience to educational practice, in VEL it is operationalized into practice, in brain imaging research, where it provides a conceptual framework for interpreting neuroscientific data that is garnered, for example, in studies using the electroencephalogram (EEG) in school-based research, as
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
223
discussed shortly. VEL also emphasizes the need for a nonlinear account of learning and development, in contrast to conventional linear stage theories that have predominated in education. It also narrows the focus from values in education and the teaching of moral values, as in AVEP, to the essential role that “value” plays in academic learning and wellbeing. In doing so, it emphasizes the relationship between value, salience, and emotion in the learning process (Edelman, 1987, 1989; Thelen & Smith, 1994).
From Values to Value and Back Again The conceptual shift from “values” in AVEP to “value” in VEL fully acknowledges that these two terms are conceptually different, though there are clear overlaps, not least in that both are directed to what matters. Values may take various forms (environmental values, religious values, and national values) but can broadly be defined as “guiding principles, beliefs, sensitivities, held and displayed by individuals or groups in respect to how they relate to and deal with others and the world” (Sankey & Kim, 2016, p. 118). It should also be emphasized that, insofar as this chapter is concerned with “moral values,” it is not concerned with moral norms or rules. Normative morality is a human social construct, whereas moral values such as care, compassion, and empathetic concern are rooted in evolutionary biology (De Waal, 2009; Churchland, 2011) and massively predate humanity. Moral values are “more fundamental than rules” (Churchland, 2011, p. 9), and “need not involve rules, though they sometimes do” (p. 10). Churchland (2011) charts the emergence of moral values in evolutionary time, arguing that they originated with the biological necessity to care for self, without which no organism could survive. Within the brain, care is modulated by the peptide oxytocin, which is a very basic and evolutionarily very old peptide. In some creatures, including birds and early mammals, care for self was extended to care for offspring, a threat to offspring becomes a threat to self. One can readily witness that each year, in the care afforded by mother ducks to their ducklings. Over time, care for self and young was extended to mates and other members of the close community. This widening of care, from self to others, requires trust, which is also modulated by oxytocin in the brain. Churchland views trust as a value, but we suggest trust is not itself a value but rather “the precondition for a social life. Without trust, a caring, sharing, considerate, compassionate, empathetic social life would be impossible” (Sankey, 2016, p. 184). The values that individuals espouse are valued, they matter, they have value, and that means they will have been instantiated in the brain as part of a dynamic relationship between value, salience, and emotion in the learning process. Neurobiologically, therefore, there is a close relationship between “value” and “values.” Brains work by making value choices by selecting what is salient and meaningful and this necessarily involves feelings and emotions. This pattern of interplay between value, salience, feelings, and emotions occurring in the normal functioning of the brain is harnessed in the process of making moral choices. It is entailed in what
224
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
we mean by empathy, the ability to morally situate ourselves in the predicaments of others and to do so with care and a compassionate concern for their wellbeing.
VEL Is Not EVT Having emphasized the role that “value” plays in learning, it is important to briefly pick up a point made earlier and differentiate the concept of VEL, grounded in dynamic systems theory and neurobiology, from the notion of “expectancy value” in psychology (Duncan et al., 2021). Expectancy value theory (EVT) has been the dominant explanatory construct in studies of motivation in learning since the late 1950s (Wigfield et al., 2019). EVT presupposes a theory of mind that is rational and computational (Byrnes, 2001), where the “value” a student “expects” to derive from a learning task is cognitively mediated by a detached, disembodied mind. The notion of an embodied and embedded brain in VEL therefore stands in stark contrast to the cognitive and computational underpinnings of EVT, with its linear, modular view of mind and the separation of perception, cognition, and action. Central to this shift is a move away from a notion of the mind comprising schemas and representations that mirror the world, toward the dynamics of brain plasticity and the notion of a Bayesian brain that is predictive with continuous feedback, which functions primarily to maintain wellbeing. That shift, we suggest, begins to provide a biologically plausible account of brain function, in contrast to the Cartesian, mechanistic, and dualist (hardware/software) account that has underpinned cognitivism.
Value, Emotional Salience, and the Learning Brain The first substantive steps in understanding how brains work biologically were taken at the start of the twentieth century, particularly the pioneering work on brain cells by Spanish neuroanatomist Santiago Ramón y Cajal (1979–1930), whose first job was a barber and then a cobbler. In the 1930s, a Canadian schoolteacher and school principal Donald Hebb (1904–1985), who became disenchanted with the strictures of the school curriculum in Quebec, turned to neuroscience and added important detail on the synaptic functioning of brain cells (neurons). Hebb’s postulate continues to provide the basis of current neuroscience research. Most learning that occurs in schools is Hebbian learning. Without direct empirical evidence (that only came in 2009), Hebb postulated: When an axon of cell A is near enough to excite a cell B and repeatedly or persistently takes part in firing it, some growth process or metabolic change takes place in one or both cells such that A’s efficiency, as one of the cells firing B, is increased. (Hebb, 1949, p. 62).
In short, Hebb is suggesting that a persistent and repeated stimulus is required to induce change and plasticity (hence learning and memory) in the brain. That is why
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
225
“practice makes perfect,” as all good teachers know. In 1987, the pioneering work of Gerald Edelman added seminal detail to Hebb’s original insight. Some connections are strengthened and form a myriad of neuronal pathways in the brain, while other connections wither and are pruned, which Edelman argued results from a process of neuronal group selection (similar to Darwinian natural selection) with its focus on change within evolving populations. Edelman noted that the profound complexity of the human brain results from the massive population of neurons (some 86 billion in each human brain) and the resultant possible firing patterns that affords, a number so large it’s unimaginable. Experiences that are accorded value, that resonate with salience and meaning are strengthened at the synapses, whereas those that are not valued are weakened and may eventually perish (Edelman, 1987). Little wonder, then, that we learn and remember best what we find meaningful and value, though that may be positive or negative (e.g., when witnessing terror, resulting in what is now diagnosed as post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD]). Edelman’s Theory of Neuronal Group Selection (TNGS) comes with important clarifications. First, the “evaluative” process driving selection is primal. The brain is sensing preferences at a very basic level, for example, nutrients are good and should be absorbed, toxins are bad and should be avoided, even bacteria are making these primal value choices (Kim & Sankey, 2009). They are indicative of what Kim and Sankey identify as a predilection to value inherent within the natural world (Kim & Sankey, 2009). Also, the brain’s sensing of value is mostly subconscious, so it is not consciously deliberative as in the notion of “expectancy value,” in conventional motivation theory. Moreover, Edelman’s notion of selection, based on value and salience, is incorporating feeling and emotion into the thinking and learning process, which is in stark contrast to the Cartesian notion that human rational thought is a supremely logical process and the brain is essentially a “logic machine” – a notion which guided early cognitivist attempts to produce artificial brains. That project was doomed once it became clear, in the last decade of the twentieth century, that logic cannot capture the real processes of human thought – our brains are nested in the world around us and our feelings and perceptions play a crucial role in the dynamic dance of human cognition (Devlin, 1997). And, whether we are ready to admit it or not, human rationality is necessarily laced with emotion (Damasio, 1994). The Cartesian and Enlightenment notion of the objective, detached, scientific thinker, devoid of emotion had finally hit a rock. Nevertheless, there remained the possibility (for some an ardent hope) that the human brain is employing superior cognitive processes (“executive functioning” no less) that somehow turn our base perceptions into higher-order intelligent functioning, which subsequently direct our distinctly human behaviors. Andy Clark calls this the three-stage “passive, input dominated view of the flow of neural processing” (Clark, 2015, p. 2) and he suggests it is fundamentally flawed. Notice the specter of a superior Cartesian logic machine lurking in the background of the passive, input-dominated account of brain functioning espoused by cognitivism. Basically, this cognitivist three-stage account is starting the wrong way around, elevating our conscious human experience and belief in the
226
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
superiority of human intelligence (as exemplified in the Turing Test for AI, noted above), when we would do better to focus on the main evolutionary function of the “embodied brain” and what it is actually doing.
Wellbeing, Homeostasis, and Interoception Our conscious experience is so important, so precious, we are lost without it. And, because consciousness is so obviously associated with the brain (it is lost in coma, for example), it is easy to assume that the main function of the brain is directed toward consciousness and conscious learning. But it isn’t, consciousness is a by-product of complexity (Kim & Sankey, 2010) and the primary function of the brain is monitoring the body condition, ensuring all is kept in metabolic balance, maintaining what is called homeostasis (Damasio, 2018), through a process called interoception (Barrett, 2017a, b; Damasio, 2018). In other words, the main business of the brain is ensuring survival and wellbeing; homeostasis “ensures that life is regulated within a range that is not just compatible with survival but also conducive to flourishing” (Damasio, 2018, p. 25). The main purpose of interoception is surveillance, conducting “a massive snooping and reporting job whose goal is to let the brain know what is going on elsewhere in the body so that it can intervene when needed and appropriate” (Damasio, 2018, p. 57), and that requires a learning brain that develops as it learns. It also requires a feeling brain, feelings “provide important information about the state of life, but feelings are not mere ‘information’ in the strict computational sense” (Damasio, 2018, p. 104). Rather they manifest as conscious experiences, we experience feelings of contentment or discontent, apprehension or assurance, anxiety or calm, wellbeing or ill-being as a moment-bymoment streams of evaluations (valuings) of how we are and how things are in our world – our sense of wellbeing. Feelings are baseline experiences and should be distinguished from emotions that are more complex states, such as disappointment, fright, anger, or disgust, which are not experienced continuously but arise in response to specific events, musings, or memories, for example. Nevertheless, feelings and emotions are interrelated. Feelings are a product of interoception, the embodied brain’s surveillance system, and interoception is also “one of the core ingredients of emotion, just as flour and water are core ingredients of bread” (Barrett, 2017a, p. 56). Without being consciously aware of it, the brain is constantly busy, monitoring heartrate, breathing, hormonal balance, and so forth, and it is highly responsive to perceived internal imbalances and perceived external threats. Our senses are on high alert, and what we consciously experience as feelings and emotions are a result of that ongoing subconscious surveillance, day and night. The brain is sensing, perceiving, but not randomly, it knows what it is looking for based on what it has previously experienced – fluctuations of heartrates are deviations from past heartrate. Based on previous experience the brain is busily predicting what is to be expected and will only act when it senses a deviation from what is expected. The question arises whether this process is restricted to the brain’s internal
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
227
surveillance, or does it provide a clue to how the brain is working when perceiving the external world? In other words, is sense perception (sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell) performing a massive surveillance job, informing our predictive brain about what is going on in the world?
The Bayesian, Predictive Brain According to the “passive, input dominated view of the flow of neural processing” (Clark, 2015, p. 2), mentioned above, perception provides the brain with information from the environment which is then processed in higher cognitive regions of the brain and subsequently directs action. This suggests a relatively “slow” brain, too slow perhaps to respond to immediate danger as it deliberatively processes and sorts out random perceptions. It also suggests that the brain is passively waiting to receive a stimulus from the outside world that will trigger appropriate neurons into action. This is what the nerve calls in our muscles are doing, waiting to be stimulated, but nerve cells in the brain are different from those in muscles. They do not need an external stimulus to trigger a reaction, rather the brain’s vast array or neurons and neuronal networks are constantly signaling to each other in busy conversation, a process known as intrinsic brain activity. “These neural conversations try to anticipate every fragment of sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch that you will experience and every action you will take” (Barrett, 2017a, p. 59). Prior to the arrival of an input signal from our perceptual senses, “proactive, predictive systems in the brain” (Kim & Sankey, 2022) are already “predicting its most probable shape and implications . . . all they need to process are any sensed deviations from predicted states (known as prediction errors) that thus bear much of the information-processing burden, informing us of what is salient and newsworthy within the dense sensory barrage” (Clark, 2015, p. 2). Over the past 15 years or so a growing number of brain scientists investigating how the brain works, especially those who are interested in creating artificial brains, have advocated that the notion of the predictive brain will provide the breakthrough they have been looking for. One such is Karl Friston, at University College, London, who suggests that the brain makes Bayesian probabilistic inferences about the world that it is perceiving, a kind of “best guess” informed by past experience. Friston says that “to understand the Bayesian brain one needs to understand connectivity and the distributed processing that it supports” (Friston, 2012, p. 1231). He begins by asking a question, “why does the brain have (axonal and synaptic) connections? Many other functionally specialised organs like the liver or blood do not have a delicate connectivity, so why does the brain?” (Friston, 2012, p. 1231). From the point of view of the Bayesian brain, he says, the answer is quite straightforward. Connectivity is supporting distributed processing, which is making Bayesian inferences about the causes of its sensations. To do that, it “must have a model of the causal relationships (connections) among (hidden) states of the world that cause sensory input. It follows that neuronal connections encode (model) causal connections that conspire to produce sensory information” (Friston, 2012, p. 1231).
228
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
Friston is referring to Bayesian statistical modeling, so not the kind of “representations in the mind” advocated by cognitivism. Briefly, Thomas Bayes (1701–1767), a contemporary of Isaac Newton, produced a theorem to calculate the probability of a given event, based on a prior knowledge of factors or conditions that might be related to the occurrence of that event, and “how probabilities are to be changed in the light of new evidence” (Chalmers, 1999, p. 175). So, the brains of “naturally intelligent systems (humans and other animals)” are doing surveillance, keeping a constant watch and making Bayesian predictions “trying to predict streams of sensory stimulations before they arrive” (Clark, 2015, p. 2). Prediction loops in the brain are on constant lookout for prediction error, which the brain then corrects, either by “updating top-down predictions to bring them into alignment with the incoming data, or by updating the incoming data to bring it into alignment with the top-down predictions” (Williams, 2018, p. 121).
VEL, the Embodied, Embedded, Predictive Brain and Educational Research Bayesian predictive processing is providing a “new integrative framework for understanding perception, action, embodiment, and the nature of human experience” (Clark, 2015, p. 21). Barrett goes so far as to say we are “in the midst of a revolution in our understanding of emotion, the mind and the brain – a revolution that may compel us to radically rethink such central tenets of our society as our treatments for mental and physical illness, our understanding of personal relationships, our approaches to raising children, and ultimately our view of ourselves” (Barrett, 2017a, p. xv). Not surprisingly, therefore, this “revolution” in brain science, and the corollary of the Bayesian brain as “hypothesis testing” (Friston, 2012, p. 1231), has fundamentally important implications for the role of feedback in formal learning contexts such as schools. If the human brain is indeed an organ of continuous correction and “disambiguation,” signaling matches and mismatches, then these “sensory [feedback] exchanges with the environment” (Friston, 2012, p. 1233) appear to be the primary and critical modes by which students in schools learn to check and recalibrate their prediction errors, or their “generative model of the world” (Williams, 2018, p. 15). In terms of the interrelationship between value and learning, these “sensory exchanges with the environment” are inherently “tuned” and “valenced” by what Barrett describes as the “salience network,” a network of “degenerate neuronal groups” subconsciously detecting and selecting “which prediction errors to pay attention to . . . and therefore worth the cost of encoding and consolidation” (Barrett, 2017b, p. 12). We can employ the notion of “latching onto the world” to sense the “deviations from predicted states” (Clark, 2015, p. 2) as a consonant metaphor for the “affordant” role the school learning environment plays in the testing and minimization of error predictions, or in other words, in learning. The model of the Bayesian predictive brain, that repositions perception as active and continuous inference, promises an integrative framework to understand cognition and mind in terms of
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
229
the dynamic functional integration of the human brain: those processes of top-down error prediction and bottom-up sensory perception which selectively collaborate to make the qualia of experience “valuable” (Hebb, 1949; Edelman, 1997), “meaningful” (Freeman, 2000), and continuously “inferential” (Friston, 2012). If Barrett is correct in her assessment, cited earlier, that we are already in the midst of a revolution that will change our scientific understanding of how human brains work “and ultimately our view of ourselves” (Barrett, 2017a, p. xv), it will surely result in major changes in how we understand student leaning and development in education and, importantly, how we understand the students themselves as functioning brains that are inherently imbued with value and emotional salience. Within education, every teacher appreciates that feelings and emotions pervade schools and classrooms and have multiple manifest causes arising from the flow of daily interpersonal exchanges. However, emotions may also arise within and from the process of learning itself. We all know that we learn through trial and error, that mistakes are often a springboard to learning success, but how often in schools are classrooms safe places to be wrong (Sankey, 1999), safe, not only for students to be wrong but also for teachers to be wrong? To what extent is error celebrated in most classrooms, to what extent is it deemed to be failure? And, if it is failure, how is that impacting student wellbeing? And, much more pointedly, what is happening in the brains of students that are inherently imbued with value and emotional salience, when faced with error, if error is taken to be failure? Take, for example, the role of assessment in education. There is a lot of talk about “assessment for learning,” but one seldom, if ever, hears about “assessment for failure.” Yet, for very many students, educational assessments induce strong feelings of perceived failure and can lead to considerable anxiety, which clearly impacts their sense of wellbeing. One well-known cause of anxiety in schools is related to the learning and assessment of mathematics. Previously, it has been believed that “mathematics anxiety” develops in junior high school or at the end of primary school, more recent studies show that math anxiety emerges as early as the first years of primary schools (Ramirez et al., 2013). Generally, and internationally, there is a correlation between maths anxiety and maths performance, though in countries with the highest mathematics performance (i.e., Shanghai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Korea), mathematics anxiety displayed by 15-year-old students is above the level of OECD average (OECD, 2013). However, beyond using this kind of data to record the extent of anxiety in learning and assessment, little is known about how these feelings are occurring in the brains of students when undergoing assessments, and indeed when involved in the totality of learning in schools. In order to access that kind of data, researchers need to get into schools with brain recording technology, and also the conceptual and methodological tools that can probe the brains of students as they learn and when they are engaged in assessment tasks. One such school-based study (Duncan, 2021) using the electroencephalogram (EEG) was conducted as a doctoral research project within the research team led by Minkang Kim at The University of Sydney, Australia, in 2020. It involved a total of 49 Year 9 (15-year-old) students completing a NAPLAN mathematics task. (NAPLAN is an annual assessment of the literacy and
230
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
numeracy skills of every Australian student in Years 3, 5, 7, and 9.) The study aimed to operationalize the concept of value-embedded learning by comparing two types of error feedback. Students in the experimental group received immediate feedback to incorrect answers that was value embedded (immediate, salient, and future focused), whereas in the control group students received error feedback that was nonvalue embedded (immediate, factual, and neutral). The detailed and technical EEG data from this study is beyond the scope of this chapter but, basically, the finding suggest that value-embedded feedback appears to have measurable effects on students’ emotional reorientation to subsequent questions. The immediate response to negative feedback (error) occurs within 200–300 ms of receiving feedback, which means it is prior to conscious appraisal, but the process of reorientation in the face of error is conscious (from around 600–1000 ms). A significant difference between the experimental and control groups was consistently recorded, in both early subconscious detection of error and late phase of conscious appraisal and regulation of emotions. These tantalizing findings suggest that modulating prediction error is key to creating value-embedded learning environments. With regard to error feedback, the findings have two clear implications for how changes to the structure and salience of feedback afforded in learning and assessment environments might enhance student learning. The first is that value-embedded feedback could (arguably should) be employed in national assessment regimes and general assessment practices, as part of the summative assessment process – thus blurring the distinction between summative and formative assessment. Second, error feedback in everyday classroom environments could be more appropriately timed and valenced than is often the case. In short, developing attentive policy and practice stances to the “management of error” in school settings requires an overarching and neurobiologically informed strategy, in order to better connect instructional practices with the emotions triggered by feedback from error. Clearly, however, more research is urgently needed that employs the twin notions of value-embedded learning and the interoceptive, predictive brain in educational contexts, to better understand the affordant role that value and emotional salience are playing within the context of student learning and assessment in schools, and how they impact student wellbeing. To summarize: This chapter has explored the role of value and emotional salience in how brains work and how, in educational contexts, that is captured in the notion of value-embedded learning. As human beings we function as highly complex, selforganizing, embodied brains, embedded within multiple physical, social, and cultural environments that variously impact our wellbeing. Through a continuous, predictive sensing and feedback process called interoception, the brain constantly monitors the internal state of our being in order to achieve metabolic balance or homeostasis, necessary for human survival and also human flourishing. It is now increasingly recognized that these same predictive processes of interoception and the maintenance of homeostasis are operating in how we perceive, comprehend, and act in response to the external world. Human wellbeing and flourishing are thus inscribed into how human brains work. The moral values we hold, which inform our moral decision-making, are similarly
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
231
instantiated in the brain as part of a dynamic relationship between value, salience, and emotion in the learning process. Brain cells (neurons), unlike other cells in the body, are massively interconnected and this allows brains to learn and develop. Connections between neurons are variously strengthened or weakened as a result of a selective process that is driven by perceive value and emotional salience. Experiences that are accorded value and that resonate with emotional salience are strengthened at the synapses, whereas those not valued are weakened or pruned. Given the role of value and emotional salience in brain function, within evolutionary history moral values likely arose when care for self was extended to offspring and then to mates, kin, and eventually others, which required trust. If so, care and trust provided the evolutionary foundation for the emergence of moral values, in some animal species and eventually humans.
Conclusion Now back to our initial question: In light of what has been discussed in this chapter, when human beings create artificial brains on a par with the complexity of human brains, will these “brains” necessarily be imbued with value and emotional salience and able to make value choices that are not programmed-in, but emerge as a product of their complexity? The quick answer is that, at this stage, we simply don’t know, but if human brains are using proactive interoceptive, Bayesian predictive processes, with error feedback, as described in this chapter, much of that can be replicated artificially, at least in principle. The basic requirement is a system of connectivity that, to cite Friston again, “is supporting distributed processing, which is making Bayesian inferences about the causes of its sensations” and, to do that it requires “a model of the causal relationships (connections) among (hidden) states of the world that cause sensory input” (Friston, 2012, p. 1231). So far, so good, but what about notions of “value” and “salience” within the predictive process? Again, the answer is positive, and for this we can return to Gerald Edelman and the work on what is now called neurorobotics that was conducted at The Neurosciences Institute in La Jolla, California, which Edelman directed. An informative account of the innovative work on neurorobots at The Neurosciences Institute is provided by Jeffrey Krichmar (2018). During the last decade of the twentieth century and the first decade of this century they produced a series of progressively complex robots (Darwin I–Darwin XII), which had anatomical features that resembled biological neural networks that mirrored the role of selection, driven by value and salience, in the brain. These robots learnt from experience and produced goal-directed navigational behavior without being preprogrammed. For example, Darwin X (Ten) was a brain-based device with a “highly detailed model of the hippocampus and surrounding areas that supported spatial and episodic memory” (Krichmar, 2018, p. 5). The robot’s task was to navigate a dry maze similar to the kind of water maze used with rats. Krichmar recalls that “Similar to a rat, the robot was able to create routes to the hidden platform. During its experience, place cells emerged in the simulated hippocampus. He also notes “What made this work special was the
232
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
sheer size of the network (100,000 neurons and 1.5 million synapses), which had to run in real-time” (Krichmar, 2018, p. 5). As noted above, novelty emerges from complexity in dissipative systems that exist far from thermal equilibrium. The emergence of “place cells” in the simulated hippocampus in Darwin X replicated those produced by evolution in the hippocampus of rats, though it is surely significant the complexity of Darwin X with 100,000 neurons hardly compares with the brains of rats that have some 21 million neurons. The key point is that “there is plenty of evidence that artificial organisms can be designed so as to operate intelligently and even surpass the intelligence of the human organism” (Damasio, 2018, p. 202). But our initial question was not about intelligence, it was asking whether artificial “brains” will necessarily be imbued with value and emotional salience, and able to make value choices? Or to put it another way, will increased complexity in artificial brains eventually lead beyond the replication of intelligence to the emergence of moral values as place cells emerged in Darwin X and as conscious self-awareness emerged in evolution, in some “higher” species, such as apes, dolphins, elephants, and humans? Damasio suggests that a “robot with homeostatic features would be a step in that direction” (Damasio, 2018, p. 208), but what he sees as missing is the central role that feelings and emotions play in human brain functioning. He also points out that “there is no evidence that . . . artificial organisms, designed for the sole purpose of being intelligent, can generate feelings just because they are behaving intelligently. Natural feelings emerged in evolution, and they have remained because they have made live or die contributions to the organisms lucky enough to have them” (Damasio, 2018, p. 202). And, there’s another related problem, the predictive, interoceptive homeostatic brain is focused on the survival and wellbeing of its “self,” whereas moral values and moral decision-making are directed toward the plight and wellbeing of others. If Churchland is correct in what was said, above, the key to that transition was a long march in evolutionary history when the survival imperative to care for self was extended first to care for offspring, then care for mates, and, in many species, care for other members of the close community and eventually others. Care for self is thus the beginning, not the end of human moral values. A homeostatic, interoceptive, predictive artificial brain might replicate conscious self-awareness and, if it is endowed with a selective bias toward value and salience, that might well provide a necessary basis for replicating human values. But unless that leads to the emergence of feelings, emotions, and empathetic concern for others that allow it to conceive and act on value choices, would we (should we) really be willing to concede that it is functioning on a par with human brains?
References Barrett, L. F. (2017a). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Barrett, L. F. (2017b). The theory of constructed emotion: An active inference account of interoception and categorisation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(1), 1–23.
12
Value-Embedded Learning and the Interoceptive, Predictive Brain
233
Byrnes, J. P. (2001). Minds, brains, and learning: Understanding the psychological and educational relevance of neuroscientific research. Guilford Press. Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called science? (3rd ed.). Open University Press. Churchland, P. (2011). Braintrust: What neuroscience tells us about morality. Princeton University Press. Clark, A. (2015). Embodied prediction. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds.), Open MIND: 7(T). MIND Group. https://doi.org/10.15502/9783958570115 Clement, N. (2010). The first pillar of the student wellbeing pedagogy: The neuroscience research. In R. Toomey, T. Lovat, L. Clement, & K. Dally (Eds.), Teacher education and values pedagogy: A student wellbeing approach (pp. 15–31). David Barlow Publishing. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Putnam Books. Damasio, A. (2018). The strange order of things: Life. Feeling, and the making of cultures. Vintage Books. De Waal, F. (2009). The age of empathy. Nature’s lessons for a kinder society. Harmony Books. DEST. (2005). National framework for values education in Australian schools. Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_ resources/framework_pdf_version_for_the_web.pdf Devlin, K. (1997). Goodbye Descartes. Wiley. Duncan, C. (2021). The nature, efficacy and affordances of value-embedded learning (Doctoral thesis). The University of Sydney. Duncan, C., Kim, M., Baek, S., Wu, K., & Sankey, D. (2021). The limits of motivation theory in education and the dynamics of value-embedded learning (VEL). Educational Philosophy and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2021.1897575 Edelman, G. M. (1987). Neural Darwinism: The theory of neuronal group selection. Basic Books. Edelman, G. (1989). The remembered present. New York: Basic Books. Freeman, W. J. (2000). How brains make up their minds. Columbia University Press. Friston, K. J., Tononi, G., Reeke Jr., G. N., Sporns, O., & Edelman, G. M. (1994). Value-dependent selection in the brain: Simulation in a synthetic neural model. Neuroscience, 59(2), 229–243. Friston, K. (2012). The history of the future of the Bayesian brain. NeuroImage, 62(2), 1230–1233. Gazzaniga, M. S. (2011). Who’s in charge?: Free will and the science of the brain. Harper Collins Publisher. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin. Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behaviour: A neuropsychological theory. Wiley. Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016). Emotions, learning, and the brain. W. H. Norton. Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kauffman, S. (2008). Reinventing the sacred; A new view of science and religion. Basic Books. Kim, M., & Sankey, D. (2009). Towards a dynamic systems approach to moral development and moral education: A response to the JME special issue, September 2008. Journal of Moral Education, 38(3), 283–298. Kim, M., & Sankey, D. (2010). The dynamics of emergent self-organisation: Reconceptualising child development in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4), 79–98. Kim, M., & Sankey, D. (2022). The science of learning and development in education. Cambridge University Press. Krichmar, J. (2018). Neurorobotics – A thriving community and a promising pathway towards intelligent cognitive robots. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 12, 42. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbot. 2018.00042 Lovat, T. (2017). Values education as good practice pedagogy: Evidence from Australian empirical research. Journal of Moral Education, 46(1), 88–96. Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011a). Values pedagogy and student achievement: Contemporary research evidence. Springer. Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011b). Values pedagogy and teacher education: Reconceiving the foundations. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(7), 59–72.
234
D. Sankey and C. Duncan
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/ 24783 Prigogine, I. (1997). The end of certainty: Time, chaos, and the new laws of nature. New York: The Free Press. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). PISA 2012 results. Ready to learn: Students engagement, drive and self-beliefs (Volume III). Paris: OECD. Ramirez, G., Gunderson, E. A., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2013). Math anxiety, working memory and math achievement in early elementary school. Journal of Cognitive Development, 14(2), 187–202. Reid, L. A. (1986). Ways of understanding and education. Heinemann. Sankey, D. (2016). The neurobiology of trust and schooling. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 50(2), 183–192. Sankey, D. (1999). Classrooms as safe places to be wrong. In The fifth UNESCO ACEID international conference, Bangkok, 13–16 December 1999. SEAL (2007), https://www.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/18171 8/DFE-RR049.pdf Sankey, D., & Kim, M. (2016). Cultivating moral values in an age of neuroscience. In C. W. Joldersma (Ed.), Neuroscience and education: A philosophical appraisal (pp. 111–127). Routledge. Schramowski, P., Turan, C., Jentzsch, S., Rothkopf, C., & Kersting, K. (2020). The moral choice machine. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 3, 36. https://doi.org/10.3389/fria.2020.00036 Smeyers, P. (2016). The attraction and rhetoric of neuroscience for education and educational research. In C. W. Joldersma (Ed.), Neuroscience and education: A philosophical appraisal (pp. 34–52). Routledge. Smith, L. B. (2009). Dynamic systems, sensorimotor processes, and the origins of stability and flexibility. In J. Spencer, M. S. C. Thomas, & J. L. McClelland (Eds.), Toward a unified theory of development: Connectionism and dynamic systems theory re-considered (pp. 67–85). Oxford University Press. Solé, R., & Goodwin, B. (2000). Signs of life: How complexity pervades biology. New York: Basic Books. Thelen, E., & Smith, L. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. MIT Press. Wigfield, A., Turci, L., Cambria, J., & Eccles, J. S. (2019). Motivation in education. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 443–462). Oxford University Press. Williams, D. (2018). Predictive processing and the representation wars. Minds and Machines, 28(1), 141–172.
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s Spiritual Relationships with the Natural World
13
Lauren Foley, Amy Chapman, and Lisa Miller
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spirituality’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Developmental Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Community’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Spiritual Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nature’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Spiritual Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nature’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Developmental Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Existing Field of Environmental Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Current Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 1: Mapleton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 2: Tabiona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cross-Case Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Human Subjects Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CSE Private School Fellows Report Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
236 238 238 239 239 240 241 242 242 243 243 249 256 259 260 260 260 262
Abstract
The overall aim of this multiple-case study is to better understand how K-12 independent schools (“schools”) in the United States support the development of ecological values in students. Specifically, this study examined how schools cultivate a connection between children and adolescents (“students”) and the natural world (“environment”) by exploring the interplay between this connection and (1) the school community (“community connectedness”) and (2) personal sense/belief about spirituality. The aim is guided by key research questions, L. Foley (*) · A. Chapman · L. Miller Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_13
235
236
L. Foley et al.
which include the following: (Q1) How do schools in the United States cultivate a connection between students and the natural environment? (Q2) Why do schools cultivate a connection between students and the natural environment? (Q3) What is the interplay between the natural environment and the school community? (Q4): What is the interplay between the natural environment and personal sense/ belief about spirituality? The proposed study will conduct a secondary analysis on data previously collected as part of a parent study. Representative data from 2 of the 20 schools in the parent study will be analyzed for the purposes of this multiple-case study. Emergent themes and results from cross-case synthesis will be explored as they relate to environmental education that is spiritually formative as a component of overall healthy development. Keywords
Spirituality · k-12 education · Adolescents · Environmental education · Values
Introduction Healthy development in childhood and adolescence lays the groundwork for wellbeing and thriving in adulthood (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 2019). In this context, healthy development means building the necessary cognitive, emotional, and social skills to become a healthy prosocial adult (Casey, 2019). Numerous factors known to promote healthy child and adolescent development have been well documented in the literature and include components such as sufficient sleep (Paruthi et al., 2016; Kopasz et al., 2010), proper nutrition (Hollis et al., 2020; Bryan et al., 2004), exercise (Rasmussen & Laumann, 2013; Hills et al., 2007), and play (Ginsburg, 2007). Within this field of developmental science, scholars have also examined the phenomenon of spirituality and its role and impact on child and adolescent developmental processes (Roehlkepartain et al., 2006; Miller, 2015; Erikson, 1968). Empirical research suggests that spirituality promotes healthy child and adolescent development, with early childhood considered to be a period of spiritual emergence (Benson et al., 2003; Coles, 1990). This emerging spirituality becomes particularly salient during adolescence, where it plays a significant role in identity formation and development (Lerner et al., 2006), which is the main developmental task of this period (Levy-Warren, 1996). Although spirituality is an innate human capacity (Hay et al., 2006; Benson et al., 2003; Newberg & Newberg, 2008), it has to be nurtured and developed throughout the course of life (Fowler, 1981; Lerner et al., 2006; Kendler et al., 1997; Koenig et al., 2008). Spirituality is often conceptualized as an awareness within the individual of a sense of connectedness between the self and the rest of the world, including other people and the environment (Skamp, 1991). Given its role in healthy development, it is important to understand how spirituality can be cultivated in children and adolescents. Thus, a vast body of research has examined the factors and processes that influence spiritual development in youth (King et al., 2014; Benson et al., 2012). One factor that has been identified as influential in the development of
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
237
personal spirituality in children and adolescents is the environmental context of the child or adolescent (Benson, 2006), or the community of which they are a part. Specifically, connectedness to community (referred to herein as “community connectedness”) has been identified by some as a key component of spirituality for youth (de Souza & Hyde, 2007). One place where youth can experience community connectedness is through the school that they attend (Rowling, 2008). Adapted from the definition by Dove and colleagues, community connectedness within the school, for the current study, is defined as how school systems cultivate and promote networks and students’ feelings of belonging within the school community (2018). Another influential factor in the development of personal spirituality is exposure to and contact with nature (Schein, 2014; Kellert, 2006). Direct experiences with nature can invoke feelings of wonder and awe (Hart, 2006; Shiota et al., 2007), which for children and adolescents can be gateways to spiritual experience (Hart, 2006). Not surprisingly, schools, which have historically been communities that support the development of the whole child, offer many opportunities for students to engage and be in relationship with nature, as many schools view nature as an integral component to whole child education. The cultivation of this relationship with nature within the K-12 school setting is addressed, to date, through the field of environmental education (“EE”) (Smith & Knapp, 2011). EE refers to education taking place in a natural or classroom environment, that teaches students about the environment and its challenges, with the aim of instilling attitudes and actions promoting environmental sustainability (Barrable, 2019). EE programs today vary in form, but can include single-day programs, facilitated by an external vendor, or multiple-year programs that are assimilated into the school curriculum and include elements from both the classroom and the outdoors (Wheeler et al., 2007). Similarly, EE can also take the form of after school programs that are facilitated by nonprofit organizations. The majority of existing EE programs today successfully teach students about nature, through focusing on ecological education, environmental stewardship, youth, and community development; however, very few EE programs actually teach students how to be in relationship with nature. For instance, although environmental stewardship is a type of relationship between students and the natural world, most EE programs approach environmental stewardship through an anthropocentric, or human-centered view, toward the relationship between humanity and the natural world (Hoffman & Sandelands, 2005). From this perspective, interest in preserving the environment is for the sole purpose of serving the interests of mankind (Bourdeau, 2004). The type of relationship that EE programs should be trying to cultivate between students and the natural world is aligned more with how many indigenous peoples view themselves in relationship to nature. This indigenous perception of ecology is referred to as kincentric ecology. At the core of this model is the belief that humans “live interdependently with all forms of life” (Salmon, 2000, p. 1331). Through this lens, individual health (spiritual, physical, social, and mental) is dependent on harmonious living with the natural world (Salmon, 2000). Consequently, approaching EE through a similar lens of interconnectedness and interdependence should also foster the spiritual development of children and adolescents and simultaneously help cultivate community connectedness within the school.
238
L. Foley et al.
Given what currently exists in the field of EE today, there is room for expansion in ways that are spiritually supportive. Many standard EE programs are unsuccessful in cultivating a true relationship between students and the natural environment because they fail to meet the developmental needs of the child or adolescent, specifically the need for individuation and identity formation, spirituality, and connectedness to community. The developmental needs of children and adolescents need to, and can, be addressed, as the linchpin of EE. For children and adolescents, this means learning about themselves as part of nature and through relationship with nature. This study will examine two K-12 EE programs where students come to know themselves in deep relationship with nature through a process of spiritual development, community formation, and immersion in the outdoors. The formation of strong bonds, both in community (Desrosiers et al., 2011; Kelley et al., 2007) and in nature (Trigwell et al., 2014), lays the groundwork for the development of personal spirituality. It is hypothesized that through this transformative personal journey, nature will become a part of the student’s personal and spiritual identity, and eventually, the student will come into a felt awareness that nature is home. Ultimately, the deep developmental growth of the child and adolescent may occur through the discovery process of an EE program, which occurs as the child and adolescent comes to know themself as part of nature. The overall aim of this multiple-case study is to better understand how K-12 independent schools in the United States support the development of ecological values in students. Specifically, this study examined how schools cultivate a connection between children and adolescents (“students”) and the natural world (“environment”) by exploring the interplay between this connection and (1) the school community (“community connectedness”) and (2) personal sense/belief about spirituality. Emergent themes and results from cross-case synthesis will be explored as they relate to environmental education that is spiritually formative as a component of overall healthy development.
Background Spirituality’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Developmental Processes Of particular importance is how spirituality relates to the broader developmental work of childhood and adolescence. In this context, spirituality is defined as an inner sense of relationship to a higher power (i.e., God, nature, spirit, the universe, the creator) that is loving and guiding (Miller, 2015). Foundational to this understanding is the belief that children are born with an innate capacity for spiritual connection (Wane et al., 2011). The evidence for this intrinsic human capacity lies in human biology (Benson et al., 2003). More specifically, there is a vast body of research and theory that argues that the human brain is structured to support human engagement in religious and spiritual experiences (Joseph, 2001; d’Aquili & Newberg, 1993; Newberg & d’Aquili, 2000). Similar to other lines of development, this emerging spirituality can be nurtured and supported by people and by the surrounding environment (Koenig et al., 2008; Button et al., 2011). If nurtured and supported in childhood, spirituality can prepare
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
239
the child for the essential developmental tasks of adolescence including individuation, identity development, emotional resilience, character development, and the pursuit of meaningful work and healthy relationships (Miller, 2015). Adolescents are trying to determine their place in the world and how they relate to it (Erikson, 1968; Hamman & Hendricks, 2005). One of the main developmental tasks of this period is identity formation (Levy-Warren, 1996; Erikson, 1968). Identity formation occurs through the context of relationships (Nawaz, 2011), as adolescents work to establish their individual (Erikson & Erikson, 1998) and spiritual identities (Templeton & Eccles, 2006) while simultaneously learning how to form mutually satisfying and fulfilling relationships with peers, friends, and family (Collins & Laursen, 2004). Through this process of relational development and community formation, adolescents learn how to be both independent and one in community. During this critical period of identity development, spirituality has been conceptualized as providing a relational system offering the adolescent security and reduced anxiety, a meaning system to address the adolescent’s existential questions and an identity-motivation system organized around spiritual goals and values (King & Roeser, 2009).
Community’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Spiritual Development In examining the factors that contribute to spiritual development in youth, a vast body of literature has emphasized the important role of a sense of connectedness to community (de Souza & Hyde, 2007; Rowling, 2008). The significant role of community in spiritual development is not a novel idea. In describing the link between community and spirituality, Dokecki, Newbrough and O’Gorman reference how, in indigenous populations, spirituality is experienced in and through relationships with people and nature and also informs the indigenous view of community, which includes their people (past, present and future generations) and the land that they inhabit (2001). Dokecki and colleagues continue to argue that spirituality provides the foundation for community (2001). One salient community for children and adolescents, that has also historically played a significant role in child and adolescent development, is the school (Roeser et al., 2000). Youth spend more time in school than in any other environment (Monahan et al., 2010). The school community offers the people and place for youth to experience connectedness through relationships with peers and adults within the school community (Monahan et al., 2010). Not surprisingly, schools have also been conceptualized as sites of spiritual development for youth (Revell, 2008; Adams et al., 2016).
Nature’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Spiritual Development Another significant factor that contributes to the spiritual development of youth is nature (Schein, 2014; Louv, 2008). Exposure to and contact with nature can be spiritually formative for both children and adolescents (Louv, 2008). For instance,
240
L. Foley et al.
playing in nature can elicit feelings of wonder in children (Schein, 2014). Fuller argues that the experience of wonder is one of the defining elements, and principle sources, of spirituality (2006). Nature can also provide experiences of transcendence (Bethelmy & Corraliza, 2019) by evoking a sense that there is something greater than the individual (Louv, 2008). In his research examining the spiritual experiences of children, Hoffman found that many transcendent childhood experiences occurred in nature (Hoffman, 1992). The transformative power of nature and its role in spiritual development can be further understood through Johnson’s (2002, p. 29) essay in the International Journal of Wilderness, where he identifies six spiritual benefits of nature: (1) the enduring, (2) the sublime, (3) beauty, (4) competence, (5) experience of peace, and (6) self-forgetting. In describing how nature evokes each of these transformative experiences, Johnson begins by explaining that through nature humanity encounters the “enduring” and has the opportunity to directly experience those cycles and structures that are ancient and timeless. These direct experiences then open opportunities for humanity to experience power and mystery through the immensity of natural structures like mountains, rivers, glaciers, and the vast ocean. He continues to explain that through their power and ability to invoke awe, these structures can feel almost God-like and allow for the experience of the “sublime,” or the awareness of humanity’s inherent weakness and vulnerability in comparison with the forces of nature and the wilderness landscape. This humbling can then lead to increased presence, as human aspirations, imperfections, and frustrations are in some ways absolved in the grandiosity of the natural landscape. Johnson argues that the experience of “beauty” that is felt in the natural landscape helps to cultivate a feeling of spiritual peace and comfort. Furthermore, the challenges endured in the wilderness, when successfully overcome, can lead to feelings of empowerment, capability, and worth, which result in experiences of “competence.” (Johnson, 2002). Johnson describes the “experience of peace” that is so often felt in the wilderness as a by-product of these aforementioned experiences: Identification with the enduring aspects of nature, minimization of ordinary concerns before nature’s sublimity, physical removal from the sources of everyday anxieties, experience of beauty, feelings of competence, and the attention-focusing effect of the challenges encountered all contribute to the mental calm so often found in wild-nature. (Johnson, 2002, p. 31)
Finally, Johnson explains that all of the aforementioned benefits lead to the final benefit, “self-forgetting” or the ability to, in some capacity, abandon the individual ego and surrender to the natural world (Johnson, 2002).
Nature’s Impact on Child & Adolescent Developmental Processes In addition to its many spiritual benefits, exposure to and contact with nature supports overall healthy child and adolescent development (Taylor et al., 2006). Nature has been shown to support the healthy physical (Fjortoft, 2001) and
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
241
emotional development of children (Louv, 2008). Play in natural environments has been shown to improve motor development in children: a study of kindergarten students who engaged in free play for 1–2 h daily in the forest next to their school showed significantly better improvement in motor ability, especially in balance and coordination, compared to children who engaged in free play for 1–2 h daily on the traditional outdoor playground. These findings show that the physical diversity in a child’s play landscape, offered by a natural environment like a forest, enhances opportunities for a child’s learning and development (Fjortoft, 2001). Further, a study by Wells and Evans found that the presence of nature nearby a child’s home moderated the impact of life stress on the child’s psychological well-being in a sample of 337 rural children in grades 3 through 5. Children with more nature around their home reported lower levels of psychological distress, as measured by symptoms of behavioral conduct disorders, anxiety, and depression (2003). Similarly, research has shown that nature also supports the emotional development of adolescents. A critical component of healthy adolescent development is the ability to self-regulate (Farley & Kim-Spoon, 2014). A study of adolescents in Finland found that many participants preferred to go to natural settings after arguments, setbacks, or after experiencing difficult emotions. These findings suggest that natural environments can serve as places of self-regulation for adolescents (Korpela, 1992). As previously discussed, identity development is another critical task of the adolescent period (Kroger, 2005). Engaging in activities that promote personal and character development contributes to the adolescent’s process of identity formation. Immersion in nature, through participation in outdoor wilderness programs, has been shown to be influential in personal and character development through improving self-confidence, self-esteem, independence, autonomy, and initiative in a retrospective study of youth (Kellert, 1998). For example, in reflecting on their experience participating in an outdoor wilderness program one participant expressed the following: Participating (occurred at) a pivotal point in my life. It gave me the opportunity to take a risk. It strengthened my sense of self. It gave me a feeling of purposefulness, self-respect, and strength that I had never had before. When you have confidence in yourself it affects every aspect of your life (Kellert, 1998, p. 217).
The Existing Field of Environmental Education Given the critical role of nature in overall healthy child and adolescent development, including spiritual development, it is important to understand how schools, a place where children and adolescents spend the majority of their day, help to foster this connection between students and the natural world. In K-12 education, this is addressed through the field of environmental education. The present field of environmental education has been created through the interweaving of various fields of education including nature study, conservation education, outdoor education, and experiential education (Wheeler et al., 2007). Wheeler and colleagues define
242
L. Foley et al.
environmental education as “a learning process that increases knowledge and awareness about the environment and associated challenges; develops the necessary skills and expertise to address these challenges; and fosters attitudes, motivations, and commitments to make informed decisions and take responsible action” (2007).
Method The Current Study The proposed study will conduct a secondary analysis on data previously collected as part of a parent study. Representative data from 2 of the 20 schools in the parent study will be analyzed for the purposes of this multiple-case study.
Data Collection Data were collected by conducting one to two-day site visits to each school. These site visits were curated by a selected faculty member, designated as the school “fellow,” and were designed to showcase the spiritual life of the school. Data collection methods included the following: (1) face-to-face individual interviews and group discussions (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2015) with key school personnel (including teachers, faculty, staff, and parents); (2) general observations (Angrosino, 2007) (including but not limited to, classes, student groups/activities, faculty meetings, campus life, school culture, and extracurricular activities); and (3) desk review of reports and documents (Creswell, 2016), (including organizational documents, such as strategic reports; and public documents, such as publications, blogs, videos, and articles). When the school site visits were complete, each fellow was asked to submit 22 qualitative multi-part questions, in the form of a report, on the spiritual life of their specific school (see Appendix A). Data Analysis Phase I. Purposeful sampling methods (Emmel, 2013; Patton, 2002) were used to select two schools from the original sample for inclusion in the present study. Cases were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) the first author and lead researcher attended the site visit and/or visited the school prior to the site visit; (2) the school was identified by the first author, in consultation with the faculty advisor, as having environmental education programming embedded within the overall curriculum; and (3) the school had a sufficient number of references, more than 14 combined, coded as either “nature” or “nature consciousness” from the original qualitative data. The codebook defined nature as “exposure to outdoors or other natural environments” (Ryan et al., 2010) and defined nature consciousness as “schools facilitating opportunities to form deep, lived relationships with nature and with all life.” Based on these criteria, the schools selected for the current study included Mapleton and Tabiona. Phase II. The data analysis, relevant to the current study, involved three primary stages: (1) managing and organizing the data; (2) reading data and memoing for emergent ideas; and (3) describing and classifying codes into themes (Creswell &
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
243
Poth, 2018). At least two coders coded each text document using NVivo qualitative analysis computer software. Given the exploratory nature of the parent study, data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2014; Corbin & Strauss, 2015). Researchers first employed open coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998; Glaser, 2012) to identify and define the concepts that emerged in the data. Later, selective coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) was utilized as the transcripts were reread and selectively coded for data relating to new codes that were developed. Following these two rounds of coding, the research team came to unanimous consensus on the emergent themes through regular, detailed discussions about the meaning of the data (Saldaña, 2021; Sandelowski & Barroso, 2006). Phase III. A multiple-case study design (Yin, 2018) was selected as the qualitative approach to inquiry (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Sandelowski & Barroso, 2006) for the current study.
Findings Case 1: Mapleton School at a Glance Mapleton is an independent, co-educational, 9–12, nonsectarian boarding, and day school located on the East Coast. Mapleton serves 310 students, of which 16% are students of color and 30% receive financial aid. There are 80 faculty members, of which over 80% hold advanced degrees. The average class size is 12. The student-toteacher ratio is 4:1. Environmental Education at Mapleton Environmental education at Mapleton is conceptualized through the lens of environmental stewardship, community service, and, ultimately, spirituality. As two of the school’s core values and as integral components of its mission statement, the ethos of the school is embedded in environmental stewardship and community service, which, for Mapleton, are lived expressions of spirituality. One faculty member describes this when writing about the school’s mission statement, which includes environmental stewardship and service: “. . .the mission is a lived experience of spirituality.” She continues, Ours is a lived mission in which spiritually supportive practices are woven into the fabric of our culture and pedagogy. Therefore, spirituality, as expressed through curiosity about all life, deep knowing, respect for one another, self-giving, and gratitude, is at the core of our community practice. Students, faculty and all other stakeholders experience this through programs and curricula. . ..The intention is to create welcome and inclusivity across all constituents, so that the lived experience of Mapleton’s mission continues to be open to all and binds us as a broader, interconnected community.
At Mapleton, environmental stewardship and community service are not limited to a specific class or auxiliary program, but rather are through lines that run through everything the school offers, including curricula, programs, student life, discipline,
244
L. Foley et al.
community service, and community building initiatives. There are four notable programs that are fundamental to the school’s environmental education programming: the community service program, the zoo, the farm, and the recycling program; however, this portrait of Mapleton will focus primarily on the on-campus zoo, as it is a unique component of the school’s approach to environmental education.
Connections to the Greater Community through Nature Mapleton teaches the values of community and service by requiring all students to actively engage in community, primarily through service. Student engagement with the natural world often occurs through these service opportunities. Four community service periods are scheduled into the weekly schedule. To fulfill their service requirement, students have the opportunity to engage in more than 45 services that primarily serve the Mapleton campus and community; however, during their first year, students are required to work one season each at the on-campus zoo, the recycling program, and at the on-campus farm to fulfill this community service commitment. The community service curriculum is intentionally designed to provide students with foundational experiences in environmental stewardship. For instance, in describing why the school requires all freshmen to complete a rotation at the zoo, the farm, and the recycling program a faculty member said the following: And the idea was that these were three sort of founding principles about stewardship of the natural world that kids were able to get through here without ever experiencing prior to that. And we said boy just seems like they ought to at least experience this. They might not like it, they may do it once and they may run. But at least we’ve introduced them to the idea. And so that began about five years ago and that is true for all our freshman. So they come in and they do these three rotations.
Beyond this requirement, one-third of the student body chooses to continue work in each of these three settings. The hope is that through community service students will have the opportunity to experience responsibility and take leadership opportunities. Although many schools have a community service requirement for graduation, the structure of Mapleton’s program, which orients service toward the school community, allows for students to form relationships with peers, faculty, and staff and thus helps to facilitate feelings of connectedness to the school community.
Building Relationships with Animals The zoo, which is located on the Mapleton campus, was founded in the 1930s. At that time, the zoo served two objectives, to provide an environment where students could take care of animals, and through that process, provide a setting where they could simultaneously learn biology. The zoo houses more than 150 animals and eight endangered species and provides opportunities for students to work directly with wildlife. The zoo has been accredited by the AZA (Association of Zoos and Aquariums) since the 1980s and maintains a full-time zoo staff of adult faculty, in addition to the students who work there.
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
245
Expanding beyond its initial objectives, the zoo now exists as part of the school’s science program, community service program, and as part of the overall curriculum of the school. The purpose of the zoo is to foster (within its students) an appreciation for wildlife, cultivate stewardship of the natural world, and encourage service to others through engagement with living animals, through affiliated academic classes, and through research. Student responsibilities at the zoo include animal husbandry, or caring for a specific animal or a group of animals; preparing animal diets; assisting with zoo maintenance; and assisting with the creation of new exhibits. Students are also exposed to veterinary medicine. Throughout the course of 1 year, a student will be assigned to three different animals to gain breadth of experience with the animals at the zoo. Through their work at the zoo, students gain firsthand experience engaging in wildlife conservation work, including work with endangered species. One of the most important aspects of this work is providing the setting for students to form real connections with the animals. One faculty member describes this in further detail: What I believe and what I’ve been pushing for years . . .. that to truly get students to buy into stewardship and conservation of the natural world they’ve got to make a connection somehow. And in today’s world that connection is harder and harder to form. Students do spend more time learning about nature on the internet and on all these various shows that present wildlife. Beautiful cinematography, don’t get me wrong, but it’s not the same as being in the same room with an animal that just pooped and you’ve got to shovel it up. Or an animal that’s sick and dying, or an animal that just gave birth and everything’s rosy and it’s great. Those are connections that get formed between a person and another living being that really make the difference.
Through hands-on experience, students learn about the natural world and are able to connect to it in an authentic and profound way. For example, as part of their husbandry, students are responsible for feeding their animal(s) twice daily, including on the weekends, and maintaining their animal’s living environment. These experiences can also be spiritually formative for adolescents as they provide opportunities for students to experience power and mystery, that can accompany witnessing birth and death; awe; peace; beauty; competence; and self-forgetting (Johnson, 2002). An effort is made to cultivate connectedness between the student and the animal that they are responsible for in various ways, one of which is equating the comforts of the animal’s living environment to the comforts of the student’s living environment. One faculty member who works at the zoo describes this process: Well, usually I pitch it this way: I say, “Look, you’re going to go home to your room tonight. I’m going to have taken all your bedding away and I’m going to spray water on your bed, and by the way you don’t get any clothes tonight. You’re just going to have to go to sleep tonight on your wet bed. And I want you to think about how that’s going to feel. . ..you’re not going to feel very happy about that, right? So, I want you to think every time you leave, does my animal have a fresh bed of hay? Is everything clean?” All those things that we want them to do. But instead of just saying, “Here’s the list of what you do, now do it,” giving them a reason to understand why it’s important to do it from their perspective. They want their nice
246
L. Foley et al.
cozy pajamas. They want the heat to be on. They want the bed to be soft. There’s things that they can understand in that sense because we’ve put it in their terms.
This authentic connection between students and animals is partially formed through giving students’ real responsibility. Allowing students to be responsible for these animals provides them an opportunity to engage in meaningful and impactful work. The lens of environmental stewardship and community service is also used to further strengthen this connectedness between students and the greater community of life. For instance, the zoo educates students around the cyclical events of birth and death in a unique way. Every year, the zoo broadcasts a live great blue heron nest to the public: We broadcast a live great blue heron nest that happens to nest in the middle of the zoo and have for the last. . . since 2009. Last year, everything is going gangbusters. We’re four hatched eggs into it and one unhatched egg. The parents are doing their job feeding the babies. We just during the day watched a nice feeding. Everything’s going great. We have a chat room so there’s lots of viewers. About 2:00 in the morning on camera, because we have infrared light so the camera can see, the herons can’t, so that’s fine. A great horned owl swoops in, knocks the mom off the nest, comes back a little while later, kills all the babies and eats them. So horrific for the watchers. Really really upset, really terrible. Of course, it’s the end of our little show that we’re putting on. So we’re working through a lot of telling people, “You have to understand this is nature. These are not our herons. It’s not our owl. This is Mother Nature. It’s just playing out before our eyes.” Normally, Mother Nature plays out behind the scenes and we don’t always see it, but this is real life, this is what happens. And one viewer got it right, or understood at least. She said, “This really is sad but if we were watching a great horned owl nest and mom brought this food back, we would think that’s the best mom going out there.” That food had to come from somewhere.
The viewing of the great blue heron nest allowed students, and members of the local community, to learn about the duality of nature, nature’s life cycle, and food sourcing through an immersive experience. Furthermore, this broadcasting, and the zoo’s other broadcastings, are community wide events: Our various broadcasting cameras are definitely used a lot “in-house” as well as being broadcast to the greater audience on the web. Footage is most significantly used in the Animal Behavior class, but it is available to everyone and is used at different times depending upon teacher interest, curriculum, and something interesting going on other than the usual on the camera feed. Nature can be harsh and sometimes those moments provide the biggest opportunities to teach. For example we have had siblicide in Great Blue heron nests and this is often the first time students have ever heard of such a thing. It’s actually pretty common in nature, but television often gets sanitized down.
The idea that students had the opportunity to discuss this and other events with their peers and teachers, and also within the context of their classes, helped to foster a sense of connectedness to the school community. This practice also illustrates how environmental education at Mapleton is a through line, occurring both inside and outside of the classroom environment.
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
247
For Mapleton, part of fostering a connection between students and the natural environment, and part of assisting students in understanding the duality of nature, comes through conversing with students around these topics. One faculty member, from the zoo, describes this approach in further detail: Our class is community service but we see students in a lot of different avenues, so depending on our situation and what we’re doing, we have the ability to talk to students about this stuff. It just depends on the students and their interest and when you see them. Fortunately, we can sometimes get them to have really deep conversations about all of those things.
These conversations not only educate students but can also help to foster school community and individual spirituality through a relational approach. For example, Dokecki et al. (2001) reference how, in indigenous populations, spirituality is experienced in and through relationships with people and nature and also provides the foundation for community. Similarly, deep conversations between faculty and students around environmental topics provide opportunities for relationships to form between students and faculty members and provide a setting for students to explore their personal relationship with the natural environment. This relationship with the natural environment is further explored through the care of zoo animals. These relationships, with faculty and with zoo animals, are the building blocks of community at Mapleton. Ultimately, through their work at the zoo, students are provided with multiple opportunities to engage in meaningful work that is authentic and are placed in an environment that cultivates leadership, responsibility, curiosity, stewardship, service, and spirituality.
Connectedness to Community The zoo, and the lens of environmental stewardship, is also utilized to cultivate connectedness to community through creating opportunities for students to feel valued through hands-on work outdoors. Zoo Squad is an optional offering for students who want to further engage with the zoo or for students who want a PE alternative. Through intentional activities, designed for students to experience both challenge and success, students are able to experience what it means to feel like a valued member of the community: So we have something in the afternoons called Zoo Squad, which is a sports alternative. We tend to see students that are either very interested in the zoo, or are but, sort of odd balls that don’t quite fit in the traditional sports program. You know they’re not big team players, or they’re not really skilled athletes. And so we inherit a lot of those students. And that little rail fence there, was built by a couple of students and I, who, the students really had no idea what they were going to do, how they were going to build a fence. But I said, “No, we’re gonna build a fence and it’s gonna look okay.” As we were going and building the fence, they got more and more confident, and really in the end, they were quite proud of their accomplishment. But we do a lot of hands on stuff like that with the kids, who this is their first experience at it. And so it kind of gives them a place to hang their hat, and to feel there’s something that they can show off.
248
L. Foley et al.
Aside from being a sports alternative, Zoo Squad provides opportunities for students to overcome challenges within wilderness settings and experience feelings of competence, which can be spiritually formative (Johnson, 2002) for youth.
Spiritual Connections in Nature Stewardship is further reinforced through the physical campus of Mapleton, which provides many opportunities for student engagement with the natural environment. As one faculty member stated, “No doubt, our 800-acre campus, with marshlands, woods, fields and streams, is itself an ever-present gateway for environmental awareness.” Simply immersing students in the natural environment helps to build connections between students and nature. One faculty member describes why Mapleton prioritizes this immersion in nature for its students: I think a lot of times we fail at getting people out into nature enough, which is one of our bigger initiatives with 9th graders. We have put together really a good program, at the very least to force them out into nature. A small percentage of them are there all the time anyway so that’s easy. But a bigger percentage of them, and seemingly a growing percentage, really have never been out in nature. They’ve never gone just watching birds. They haven’t been out in the dark where there’s no manmade lighting. We force them to do that. In their bio classes, they get in the marsh and get sopping wet and dirty and collect samples. And they’ve never done that. None of them.
Aside from engaging in the opportunities that nature provides (such as bird watching and collecting samples), the school prioritizes immersion in nature for its students to help cultivate a connection between students and the natural environment. This immersion in nature often helps to cultivate an awareness of the impermanence of the natural environment, knowing that it could disappear if it is not taken care of by human beings. The school attempts to foster this awareness of impermanence through cultivating authentic connections between students and the natural world. For example, at the zoo, students form real relationships with animals who are endangered, and thus, students are forced to acknowledge nature’s impermanence each day through their work with endangered species. One faculty member describes his own experience of feeling this awareness of impermanence, which he also hopes to foster in his students: Just being out in nature again is like being in the zoo. You draw connections to nature that you know could go away. We have two dogs; we’re constantly walking them in the woods and fields. It’s a gift. It’s really a beautiful space, and to have that space go away would be a sad thing.
Immersion in the natural environment, experienced through Mapleton’s campus, also allows for experiences of awe and wonder, which can be gateways to spirituality (Hart, 2006). One alumni describes her experiences of awe when she is reflecting about her time at Mapleton: “I am thankful for a campus and surrounding landscape that is so exquisite, it still takes my breath away.” When a current student was asked about her favorite places to go on campus to find peace, she noted:
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
249
There are so many of them. I really love Smith Hill, especially at sunrise. . ..It’s a hill just kinda down the road. You can just kinda see it as you drive off of campus. But the view from up there during the sunrise is really beautiful, because you kinda see the sunrise over the mountains, but also kinda reflected on the marsh area. So it’s really beautiful.
She continued, “Just being on the cross-country trails is really nice, just taking a walk on them through the woods is really relaxing.” These examples illustrate the awe, wonder, and experiences of relaxation and peace that are often found through student engagement with and immersion in the natural environment, which are all influential in the formation of individual spirituality.
Summary Mapleton fosters a connection between students and the natural environment through programs and curricula in order to cultivate environmental stewardship; to foster connectedness to community, including the school community, the local community, and the greater community of life; to instill values of service; and to provide opportunities for students to develop individual spirituality. For Mapleton, environmental stewardship is a lived expression of spirituality and the natural environment provides opportunities for students to experience awe, wonder, beauty, peace, and competence, as well as provides a setting that fosters connectedness to the school community. Ultimately, these experiences help nurture individual spirituality as students come to view themselves as interdependent parts of the greater community of life.
Case 2: Tabiona School at a Glance Tabiona is an independent, co-educational, 9–12, nonsectarian boarding, and day school located on the West Coast. Tabiona serves 259 students, of which 51% are students of color and 29% receive financial aid. There are 60 faculty members, of which 73.5% hold advanced degrees. The average class size is 11. The student-toteacher ratio is 6.5:1. Environmental Education at Tabiona Environmental education at Tabiona is conceptualized through the lens of outdoor education. Outdoor education is embedded within the school’s philosophical approach and mission statement. Philosophically, the school’s founder sought to educate students around how to live for their own greatest good and for the wellbeing of their fellow citizens. To this end, they believed that a valuable education should teach self-reliance, concern for others and the principles of honor, fairness, kindness, and truth through a rigorous academic curriculum that is augmented with challenging activities in outdoor and wilderness settings. This philosophy informs the school’s mission, which seeks to train young men and women in the art of living through augmenting the school’s rigorous academic program with lessons learned from taking care of a horse and from experiences in the wilderness.
250
L. Foley et al.
There are two notable programs that are fundamental to the school’s environmental education programming: an animal program that focuses specifically on horses (herein referred to as “the Stallion Program”) and the Outdoor Program, which includes week-long camping trips at the beginning and end of every year. The school’s environmental education programming is further strengthened through the school’s proximity to wilderness settings, through its physical campus, through the school’s faculty and staff and through the school’s academic curriculum.
Building Relationships with Animals Tabiona’s Stallion Program is an essential component that underlies the school’s approach to fostering a connection between students and the natural environment. In describing the Stallion Program, one faculty member said the following: One of the most unique aspects of the Tabiona experience is our Stallion Program. Every freshman is required to ride throughout their first year, and in so many ways, this program captures a great deal about our culture. We seek to create a culture of adventurousness, comfort with risk-taking and failure, and respect for nature and the Tabiona community.
The Stallion Program at Tabiona is required of all freshmen, although many students choose to continue riding throughout their 4 years at Tabiona. The majority of students have never ridden before they arrive for their first day of school. For example, one student, who played on Tabiona’s baseball team, reflected on the experience of learning how to ride at Tabiona with no previous experience: I had never ridden, so I didn’t really know how it was going to work. I was kind of diving headfirst into the unknown, if you will. But it was great. The teachers really help you digest all of the knowledge that is thrown at you and a huge part is that my best friends and I were going through the same exact thing, and that made it a lot easier.
During the first week of the fall semester, all freshmen are paired with a horse and they are required to ride and care for their horse for the entirety of freshman year. Student responsibilities regarding their horse include mucking their horses’ stall before class in the morning, learning riding skills and riding their horse in the afternoon, and feeding their horse every evening. At the beginning of the year, students learn to ride through partaking in organized riding lessons before crafting an individualized training regimen, which is tailored for each student to prepare them for the school’s annual horse event. The school’s annual horse event is one of the school’s central traditions where Tabiona students, including freshmen and many upperclassmen, compete in various horse races including barrels and poles, the rescues race, ring spearing, and the silver dollar pick-up. Students are celebrated and cheered on by current Tabiona families, alumni, and school visitors as well as faculty and staff. In many ways, Tabiona’s Stallion Program is designed to foster connectedness to community. In describing the overall sense of community at Tabiona, one student said the following:
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
251
If you ask anyone involved with Tabiona what the most special part of Tabiona is, chances are they will probably say something regarding the community. A student body that is welcoming and close-knit, a faculty that is directly involved with the student body, and a network of alumni through generations all are a testament to this strong community.
The Stallion Program helps to cultivate the peer-to-peer relationships that help form the foundation of this community. One student describes her experience as a freshman in the Stallion Program by saying that the Stallion Program “is quite the bonding experience for the freshmen class. . .throughout the year, freshmen learn a lot from each other and from their horses about perseverance, responsibility, and patience.” For example, when a student oversleeps, it is common that one of their peers will wake them up after noticing that their stall is not clean. There is a felt sense that the students are in the experience together. Another student describes the “bonding” that is experienced through the school’s riding program: Riding is usually said to be an individual sport, and at most places it is, but at Tabiona, riding is a bonding experience that culminates at the school’s annual horse event, when we all race each other and go through obstacle courses. Seeing the difference between the timid and inexperienced freshman we were in November and the confident and skilled riders that raced in May was a triumphant and fulfilling experience. I felt so proud of us all.
This sense of camaraderie around riding is felt among the entire freshmen class and can be motivational for many students when faced with the challenge of riding. One student describes this: “Learning to ride was a difficult, frustrating, and often emotional journey. . .what motivated me to get back on my horse were my fellow freshmen, who had fallen off their horses just as I had and gotten right back on.” This example illustrates how experiencing challenges in nature, alongside your peers, can not only foster connectedness to community but also teach character strengths such as resilience, perseverance, and grit. Horse Packing is another component of Tabiona’s Stallion Program where this sense of community continues to be fostered through horse camping experiences, where small groups of students and adults pack up their horses and burros with supplies and leave for a long weekend in the backcountry. Each freshman student goes on a weekend horse packing trip during their first year. During this experience, students learn the proper knots, techniques, and safety protocols for packing a horse or burro for a multi-night trail ride. Additional opportunities for student horse packing trips occur throughout the year. In describing one of these horse packing experiences, one student said the following: The entire freshman horse camping program leads to the freshmen learning again that, hey, it doesn’t matter who I am, what background I come from, we’re all in this together, we’re going to smell after a few hours on these horses, but that’s where most of the fun comes in.
This student’s reflections illustrate how in many ways nature is an equalizer, stripping students of typical identifiers, such as race, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation, which in turn provides an environment for authentic connection,
252
L. Foley et al.
which is an essential component of community. Furthermore, students are again provided an opportunity to connect with the natural world. To this end, students also learn about relationships through their experience riding horses, not just about their relationships with their peers but also about their relationship with their horse. One student described this: “My horse taught me that I shouldn’t be down when I make mistakes and that this a team effort. She taught me that relationships matter.” Often, horse riding and wilderness trips merely provide the setting for which students can form meaningful relationships, with each other, with their teachers, and with nature. A faculty member describes the interconnected relationship between the school’s environmental education programming, a sense of community and spirituality: “Implicitly, our Outdoor and Stallion Programs both foster spirituality in the sense that they emphasize the value of community and an intimate connection with nature.” At times, spirituality is felt through the relationships that form within the community. As described by one faculty member, As an educator at Tabiona, a “deep way of being” is to look into the eye of a student you’re working with and feel that you’re really communicating. That you’re in the act of both listening and being listened to. That you’re sharing in that sense of awe of the universe. Sometimes the “universe” isn’t the great starfield in the sky but instead the human spirit we all share. Tabiona has a “spirituality” of relationships.
This deep relationality contributes to a sense of connectedness to community and illustrates how the school’s environmental education programming influences how community members understand and perceive relationships.
Spiritual Connections in Nature At Tabiona, students often find spirituality through their experiences in the natural environment, whether that is through engagement with nature by means of required outdoor activities, through experiencing the school’s physical campus, through learning about the natural environment in the classroom, or by feeling in relationship and in community with their peers and/or teachers while in nature. In describing what students at Tabiona believe about spirituality’s place in education, one faculty member wrote the following: In general, if spirituality is a “deep way of being where one feels connected to all life and has awe and reverence for the universe,” then our students say that they most often find a sense of spirituality in being immersed in the natural beauty of Tabiona’s campus, through the Stallion Program, and during camping experiences. But while an appreciation and reverence for nature is an obvious element in any Tabiona education, our students also find a “connection to all life” in the way that we foster a close-knit community among the wide variety of people on campus (students, faculty, staff, faculty children, etc.). Finally, as limited as we are by the so-called “Tabiona bubble,” students are also very mindful of all the “life” that is happening beyond their gates and strive to bring awareness of those things to campus. Many of our clubs try to raise awareness about the experiences of people across the country and around the globe. . ..The majority of our students (75+%) also engage in some form of community service during their time at Tabiona, and in doing so, honor the connection between all humans and show concern for the needs of others. It seems to me
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
253
(as a former student and current teacher), that our student body has valued all of these elements of their education for a long time and continue to think that these experiences have an essential role to play in their development.
This immersion in, and connection with, the natural environment is further reinforced through the physical campus of Tabiona. In describing the physical campus of Tabiona, and how its proximity to nature impacts the climate of the school, and permits student engagement with the natural environment, one faculty member said the following: In [name of city], it is sunny just about every day of the year, and our literal climate certainly affects the more metaphorical “climate” of our school. All our classrooms and dorm rooms have exterior doors and all-school assemblies are held in an outdoor amphitheater; thus, our students spend a large portion of their time physically outside. This, combined with the fact that students are required to participate in a sport every day after school, means that our students live relatively healthy, active lives immersed in the outdoors. Our campus lies at the edge of [the forest], and this proximity to wilderness (and our immersion in it through riding and camping) lends the whole campus an air of natural ruggedness.
Furthermore, through the experiences of the Stallion and Outdoor Programs, students continue to be regularly immersed in nature and, consequently, are invited to form a relationship with the natural environment and through that relationship, cultivate individual spirituality. One faculty member describes this when she says the following: An emphasis on spirituality is primarily evident in our close connection with the natural world (horses and mountains, etc.), our strong emphasis on community and our values-based education. Our Stallion and Outdoor Program requirements, as well as our location on the edge of [the forest], ensure that a student is often immersed in the natural world and invited to develop a relationship with and reverence for nature.
Tabiona has many advantages over other schools in regard to proximity to greenspace; however, in many ways, it is the adults at the school that help to foster connectedness between students and the natural environment and assist in creating spiritually formative experiences for the students. To this end, the school also aims to cultivate and/or strengthen a relationship between its faculty members and the natural environment. Not surprisingly, the faculty and staff at Tabiona share a love for the outdoors. As one faculty member stated, “Many of our faculty have a deep connection with the natural world, a respect for the planet/universe, and an interest in honoring our connection with all of humanity.” This is not accidental, as the school’s hiring process intentionally recruits those with this profile and also those who care about community. This same faculty member continues: To some extent, our unique faculty “requirements” ensure this. The requirement that all faculty members camp with our students deters some applicants and attracts others, but in part because of this requirement, the adults that do accept a position at Tabiona either already have or quickly cultivate a love/awe/reverence of the outdoors. Secondly, the requirement
254
L. Foley et al.
that teachers be fully immersed in dorm life ensures that the faculty who come to Tabiona care deeply about investing in community.
Aside from the requirement that faculty camp with students, professional development for new faculty is intentionally designed to instill and strengthen the connection between new faculty members and the natural environment. New faculty training includes a backpacking trip as part of new hire professional development. One faculty member describes this: “For new faculty, the week is especially intense. . ..PD actually begins the previous week with a 4-day backpacking trip in the [mountains], and then continues with all kinds of meetings/ trainings related to life at Tabiona.” For Tabiona, cultivating a connection between students and the natural environment begins with cultivating this same relationship with its faculty. Students can also experience spirituality in the classroom through learning about the natural environment. One student, who had become very involved in the school’s Astronomy Program, said the following in reflecting around spirituality’s place in education at Tabiona: In astronomy, you learn how expansive the concept of time is which makes you realize your place in time is a very small point. But you get an appreciation for everything that has come before and everything that will come after. This is highlighted in astronomy, but you then think about it in other classes too. For example, when I’m worried about something, I see these things as not as important in the grand scheme of things.
This example illustrates how fostering a connection between students and the natural environment can also occur through curricula, within the classroom, and how this connection can simultaneously lay the groundwork for students to develop spirituality. This student is experiencing what Johnson (2002) would refer to as the “sublime,” as she becomes acutely aware of her place in the vast universe, and as her worries are in some ways absolved in what she perceives to be the grandiosity of time and the universe. In reflecting on this same question, another student focused on the physical campus of Tabiona: There’s something about this valley. It makes me want to. . .well I’ve gone to church somebut every time I go onto the field before a football game, I become spiritual. There’s just an energy here that’s weird. Quite honestly, there’s just something here. At the football field, I say the Our Father and it helps me put my thumb on something because there’s something here. I don’t think there’s something that we do, there’s just something about this valley.
This student is describing two of Johnson’s (2002) spiritual benefits of nature, the enduring and beauty. The enduring is experienced through the student’s immersion in the valley, and engagement with a natural structure that is ancient and timeless. The student experiences the beauty of the valley and becomes “spiritual” which Johnson (2002) would refer to as an experience of spiritual peace elicited by the beauty of nature. Another student, who experienced the beauty of nature through a sunrise during one of Tabiona’s global studies trips, said the following:
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
255
One of my favorite moments was visiting the temples at Angkor Wat at sunrise. Our entire group woke up around 4 o’clock in the morning and shuttled over to the temples in a couple of tuk-tuks, which are like little motorcycle drawn rickshaws. After completing the necessary steps to enter the temple, we arrived at Angkor Wat just in time to see the sun rising behind the temple. We were absolutely mesmerized; just seeing the beautifully carved temples in the awe of the sunrise is something I will never forget. Visiting the temples at sunrise felt so special, and I knew how lucky we were to have experienced it. To me, international travel is not about visiting some place new just to take photos and share them on social media, it is about gaining a deeper understanding of our global community and, perhaps, even a deeper understanding of yourself.
For this student, witnessing the sunrise was an experience that invoked awe, which for Johnson (2002) can be spiritually formative, as it allows for the experience of the “sublime,” or the awareness of humanity’s inherent weakness and vulnerability in comparison to the forces of nature and the wilderness landscape. Furthermore, the student’s reflections illustrate a yearning to learn more about themself and more about the greater community of life. Understanding interdependence and appreciating humanity are both important spiritual concepts. Another student reflecting on spirituality’s place in education at Tabiona said the following: We’re actually centered around spirituality because if you look at the programs we’re known for (horses, camping, rock climbing) we’re really focusing on the connection between you and nature-whatever nature means. You are learning to be part of nature instead of dominating it and learning to become one with the world. . .And also, because we’re small, the community is very personal and you get to know everyone around you-which is spiritual because spirituality emphasizes the connection between minds and souls.
This student’s experience reflects their belief that individual spirituality is fostered by a deep relationship with both nature and community. Furthermore, the student feels that the school intentionally cultivates spirituality, a connection between students and the natural environment, and community through the school’s outdoor programming. One key component underlying the relationship between nature and spirituality is the awe that nature can evoke. In reflecting on her experience partaking in Tabiona’s summer wilderness education program, one student said the following about one of the camping trips she had attended: This program has impacted my life significantly. By being exposed to the natural world in a way that I had never been exposed to it before, I learned how vital being in nature is to humans, especially teenagers. There are two memories from my time there this summer that perfectly enunciate this: The first was probably the second or third day of the trip, we were all playing camouflage (we had just eaten a magnificent lunch). I realized that I was having more fun then, just playing with them, than I had had in awhile, because I seriously hadn’t just played in awhile. Sure teenagers goof off all the time, which of course is fun, but we also get caught up in this seriousness, and the need to feel mature and adult-like. I hadn’t realized how much we needed to just play again, and we were playing outside. Quite literally just running around in the woods, without any distractions from electronics and without needing to feel like we had to fit in someplace. The second memory was on the last day of the trip,
256
L. Foley et al.
when we were back at camp. I was sitting by the stream, looking out at the meadow. The birds were singing, the grass was dancing, the wild flowers smelled sweet, the trees were standing happy and strong, and the mountains were looking as magnificent as ever. I suddenly had a strong urge just to be more a part of it, so I quietly crept across the brook and sat under a willow, distancing myself from the people. It was then that I saw a doe, and her two tiny fawns. They couldn’t see me, but I just sat there and watched in awe. I still think about that day all the time, and truthfully ever since then I’ve had a constant, nagging urge to be back. Being at that place makes me feel whole, and while backpacking and getting dirty may not be everyone’s thing, I honestly believe that everyone needs what it provides.
Experiences of awe can be gateways to spirituality. This student’s reflection illustrates how she experienced awe while immersed in nature, and the value that she believes nature provides for young people.
Summary Tabiona cultivates a connection between students and the natural environment through programs and curricula, specifically the Stallion Program and the Outdoor Program. This connection is further strengthened through the school’s proximity to wilderness settings, including the school’s physical campus. Additionally, the school also invests time and resources in choosing faculty who align with the school’s vision of environmental education. The school invests in its environmental education program because it is a lived expression of Tabiona’s mission statement and the school believes that cultivating and nurturing this connection, between students and the natural environment, is a valuable component of adolescent development. Furthermore, Tabiona believes fostering this connection, between students and the natural environment, to be essential in educating young men and women to reach their full potential and to be good citizens. One faculty member describes how the school’s co-curricular requirements accomplish these ends: Our co-curricular requirements (week-long camping trips at the beginning and end of every year, the freshman horse program. . .) are all a testament to the ways in which we push the students to participate in the activities stated in our mission statement that we believe have value and enable our students to become their best selves.
To this end, the environmental education programming at Tabiona is intentionally designed for students to learn valuable life lessons, to foster traits of good character, to cultivate connectedness to the school community and to the greater community of life, and to nurture student’s individual spirituality.
Cross-Case Analysis Through cross-case analysis, the two cases are examined according to the common themes that emerged as a result of conducting the individual case studies and writing the individual case reports. Four themes were prominent: (1) right relationship with nature, (2) care for creation/service to the natural world, (3) cultivating spirituality
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
257
through nature, and (4) fostering school community through experiences in the natural world. These themes were present to varying degrees across the two environmental education programs.
Right Relationship with Nature Animals Many environmental education programs incorporate animals to some degree. In the cases of Mapleton and Tabiona, the ultimate goal is to cultivate a relationship between the student and the animal(s) and this is primarily accomplished through assigning the student animal caretaking responsibilities. Through animal caretaking the intended aim is that students will form a bond with their animal and will also learn important values such as responsibility, perseverance, trust, respect, and patience. Mapleton and Tabiona intentionally create the setting for students to form real connections with their animal(s) through required programs that give students real responsibility. These programs go beyond ordinary caretaking in that they create the setting for students to learn not only that their animal depends on them, but that they too can also depend on their animal. For Mapleton, students are provided with the opportunity to build relationships with animals through their work at the on-campus zoo. Whether through their responsibilities of animal husbandry, preparing animal diets, assisting with zoo maintenance or through their work in creating new zoo exhibits, students gain firsthand experience engaging in wildlife conservation work as part of a required community service rotation. The students’ various animal caretaking responsibilities provide them with numerous opportunities to build relationships with animals on a daily basis. At Mapleton, the student takes on the role of caretaker in the student–animal relationship; however, these relationships help to inform the student’s worldview. For Tabiona, students are provided with the opportunity to build relationships with animals through the school’s Stallion Program, which is required of all freshmen. Similar to Mapleton, Tabiona students do have certain caretaking responsibilities; however, the relationship between the student and the horse is more of a partnership, where each learns and grows from the other. Through their experiences with their horse students learn about perseverance, responsibility, and patience. Horse Packing is another component of the school’s Stallion Program. Through these experiences, students have the opportunity to form authentic personal relationships with their horses. Students learn the benefits of cultivating an intimate connection with their horse. When this connection is strong, students feel as though they are able to effectively communicate with their horse while riding. They learn that putting energy and effort into their personal relationship with their horse benefits their riding relationship with their horse.
Care for Creation: Service to the Natural World Service to the natural world was a common theme across the two environmental education programs. For Mapleton, the school fosters this service to the natural
258
L. Foley et al.
world through their zoo, farm, and recycling program, which are all required as part of the school’s community service program. The school requires that all students participate in these services because Mapleton believes that stewardship and service to the natural world help to foster a student’s individual spirituality and simultaneously cultivates connectedness to community. This active engagement in community helps students cultivate relationships and learn important values, such as respect, integrity, stewardship, service, and curiosity. The school believes that these things ultimately prepare students to live lives of meaning and consequence. For Tabiona, service to the natural world is primarily cultivated through the school’s Stallion Program. Students are assigned various caretaking responsibilities, which include mucking their horse’s stall before class in the morning, learning riding skills and riding their horse in the afternoon, and feeding their horse every evening. Through the care of their horse, the school hopes to teach students important lessons about life and also aims to cultivate self-reliance, concern for others, honor, fairness, kindness, and truth.
Spirituality In many ways, the two schools utilize their environmental education programs as platforms to cultivate individual spirituality in their students. This is primarily achieved through creating opportunities, within these environmental education programs, for connection, to include connection with self, peers, animals, the natural environment, the school community, the local community, and the greater community of life. Spirituality is conceptualized as a “deep way of being where one feels connected to all life and has awe and reverence for the universe.” Thus, intentionally designing environmental education programs to allow for authentic and meaningful connection, across various constituents, creates a strong foundation that can serve as the gateway to spirituality for children and adolescents. This individual spirituality may be further strengthened when environmental education programs encourage student reflection around their own experience and guide students to become aware of their own emotional response to that experience. In addition to connection, this process of reflection on experience and emotional awareness become critical components of student spiritual development. For Mapleton, the natural environment is utilized as an ideal setting to cultivate individual spirituality in students. This is accomplished primarily through intentionally creating opportunities for deep and meaningful connection, not only through immersion in the natural environment but also through actively working to get students into the natural world, and into meaningful relationships with their peers and faculty members. This helps to cultivate authentic connections between students, the natural world, and those within their school community and provides students with opportunities to experience awe, wonder, and peace. For Tabiona, individual spirituality is cultivated through deep relationship with both nature and community. Students find spirituality through immersion in nature (through the school’s campus and the surrounding wilderness area), through the Stallion Program, during camping experiences, through learning about nature in the classroom, and through the school’s close-knit community. As part of this spiritual
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
259
development, students also learn how to become a part of nature rather than learn how to dominate it. This helps to strengthen individual spirituality as students experience a sense of connectedness between the self and the natural environment as they come to know themselves as one interdependent part of the greater community of life.
Fostering School Community through Experiences in the Natural World For both schools, community was a major component of the environmental education programs. For Mapleton, working at the zoo, the farm and the recycling program were all ways that the individual could meaningfully contribute to their community and also connect with other members of their school community. For Tabiona, the Stallion Program and the Outdoor Program were intentionally designed to cultivate school community through individual relationships and shared experiences in the wilderness. Ultimately, these two schools intentionally cultivated community to provide students with opportunities for deep and meaningful connection to self, others, and the environment. This connection then provided a solid foundation for the cultivation of individual spirituality.
Discussion The results illustrate that the environmental education programs described herein are intentionally designed to meet the developmental needs of adolescents. Specifically, these programs aim to nurture students’ innate spirituality through providing opportunities for connection, to the self, others, and to the environment. These moments of intentional connection simultaneously help to foster connectedness to the school community while assisting in the process of student identify formation and development. Ultimately, students in these programs come to know themselves as part of nature and in relationship with nature. Many environmental education programs are successfully designed to facilitate personal growth and to cultivate a relationship between students and the outdoors; however, these programs often lack the deep spiritual ethos that is at the forefront of the two aforementioned schools. Many programs lay the groundwork for the formation of individual spirituality, through outdoor immersion programming, but could deepen their approach to environmental education if certain concepts from these two cases were integrated into their existing programming. For example, in addition to immersion in the natural environment, these programs could prioritize creating opportunities for students to form meaningful relationships with their peers and faculty members, which may assist in spiritual growth and development as well as foster connectedness to the school community. One potential limitation of the current study is selecting two privileged independent schools as the cases. These schools have greater access to financial resources, student bodies comprised of youth from higher-income households and greater proximity to green space in comparison with many under-resourced and highpoverty schools. Thus, findings from the current study may not be directly applicable
260
L. Foley et al.
to these under-resourced and high-poverty schools, where students face many structural barriers that continue to promote racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to green space (Dai, 2011). Despite these limitations, the results from these two cases are promising and can be utilized by the field of environmental education that occurs within many K-12 school settings. These findings identify critical components that should be included in the design of an environmental education program that aims to be spiritually formative as a component of overall healthy development. These critical components include fostering a personal relationship between students and nature; the cultivation of environmental stewardship through opportunities to provide service to the natural world; developing school community through experiences in the natural world; and nurturing a student’s innate spirituality by intentionally creating opportunities for deep and meaningful connection to self, others, the natural environment and the greater community of life. This framework provides schools with an opportunity to leverage their environmental education programming to assist in student identity formation and development, nurture individual spirituality, and foster connectedness to school community.
Human Subjects Research This research was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Teachers College, Columbia University, study number 21–337
Appendix A CSE Private School Fellows Report Template As Fellows of the CSE, we invite you to engage with the following materials during the upcoming months: (1) the template (described in detail below), (2) addendum items, and (3) the school culture survey. When you attach addendum items, please label them with one or more of the headings listed below (Mission & Philosophy, Strategic Plan, School Culture, Community Building, Faculty & Staff Training, Approaches, and Curriculum). This work plan is designed to support all of the materials that were harvested during the CSE school site visits. If you could return this work plan and all of its components by November 16, 2018, it would be greatly appreciated. We extend our sincerest gratitude for your work on this initiative. CSE Fellows Work Template: I. Mission & Philosophy Mission Please state your mission statement. Please provide examples of how your mission statement is known and lived within your school community.
13
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
261
Philosophy What do students at your school believe about spirituality’s place in education? Please give examples and stories. What do the adults at your school believe about spirituality’s place in education? Please give examples and stories. What do other stakeholders (parents, alumni, board members, etc.) believe about spirituality’s place in education? Please give examples and stories. Strategic Plan Please include any relevant areas of your strategic plan (public overview) and consider sharing any relevant information related to spirituality, ethics, and/or service. Please share any initiatives and priorities related to spiritual development within your strategic plan (directly or tangentially). How well is your strategic plan known and understood by all stakeholders? School Culture Please give a brief description of your school culture and climate. Please describe the predominant place of spirituality within your school culture. Please give relevant stakeholders the attached survey. Please share any anecdotal materials in the addendum that would help us better understand your school. Community Building Please share programs and practices that foster spirituality within your school community. Please feel free to add details and/or attach additional materials in the addendum. Faculty & Staff Training Please describe any formal faculty and staff training at your school and attach relevant addendum items (agendas, handbooks, retreat schedules and activities, service days, professional development policies, and practices). Please discuss frequency of faculty and staff training. Please describe any informal faculty and staff, training/mentorship that occurs at your school if any. Approaches With consideration to the individualized feedback sheet that you received, please include descriptions and relevant addendum items related to key programs, practices, and approaches to the implementation of spirituality in education within your school community. Please share how you directly support spiritual and ethical development in students. How does your school handle conflict and mistake-making? Please add a story or anecdote. Curriculum While many of your courses are spiritual in nature, we are particularly interested in curriculum that is specifically designed with spiritual awareness and growth in students as one of its primary purposes and has a spiritual pedagogical through line.
262
L. Foley et al.
Please offer a brief description of any curricula you include and provide relevant addendum items specific to spiritually infused curriculum (syllabi, unit plans, sample lesson plans, etc.). Please be sure to include courses listed on your school’s individualized site visit sheet. Please ask faculty to share stories (of any length) where they are deeply moved by a spiritual moment, connection, and/or relationship with students. Please disidentify these stories. The purpose of these stories is to help people understand the possibility for spirituality in relationship to education.
References Adams, K., Bull, R., & Maynes, M. L. (2016). Early childhood spirituality in education: Towards an understanding of the distinctive features of young children’s spirituality. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(5), 760–774. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X. 2014.996425 Angrosino, M. (2007). Doing ethnographic and observational research. SAGE. Barrable, A. (2019). Refocusing environmental education in the early years: A brief introduction to a pedagogy for connection. Education Sciences, 9(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci9010061 Benson, P. L. (2006). The science of child and adolescent spiritual development: Definitional, theoretical, and field-building challenges. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. Benson (Eds.), The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 484–497). SAGE. Benson, P. L., Roehlkepartain, E. C., & Rude, S. P. (2003). Spiritual development in childhood and adolescence: Toward a field of inquiry. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 205–213. https:// doi.org/10.1207/S1532480XADS0703_12 Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., Syvertsen, A. K., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (2012). Is youth spiritual development a universal developmental process? An international exploration. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 7(6), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2012.732102 Bethelmy, L. C., & Corraliza, J. A. (2019). Transcendence and sublime experience in nature: Awe and inspiring energy. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 509. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019. 00509 Bourdeau, P. (2004). The man-nature relationship and environmental ethics. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 72(1–2), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0265-931X(03)00180-2 Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE. Bryan, J., Osendarp, S., Hughes, D., Calvaresi, E., Baghurst, K., & van Klinken, J. W. (2004). Nutrients for cognitive development in school-aged children. Nutrition Reviews, 62(8), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2004.tb00055.x Button, T. M., Stallings, M. C., Rhee, S. H., Corley, R. P., & Hewitt, J. K. (2011). The etiology of stability and change in religious values and religious attendance. Behavior Genetics, 41(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-010-9388-3 Casey, B. J. (2019). Healthy development as a human right: Lessons from developmental science. Neuron, 102(4), 724–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2019.03.035 Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE. Coles, R. (1990). The spiritual life of children. HmH. Collins, W. A., & Laursen, B. (2004). Changing relationships, changing youth: Interpersonal contexts of adolescent development. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 24(1), 55–62. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0272431603260882
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
263
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). SAGE. Creswell, J. W. (2016). 30 essential skills for the qualitative researcher. SAGE. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE. Dai, D. (2011). Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene? Landscape and Urban Planning, 102(4), 234–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.landurbplan.2011.05.002 d’Aquili, E. G., & Newberg, A. B. (1993). Religious and mystical states: A neuropsychological model. Zygon, 28(2), 177–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9744.1993.tb01026.x de Souza, M., & Hyde, B. (2007). Spirituality of children and young people: A consideration of some perspectives and implications from research contextualized by Australia. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 12(2), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/13644360701467386 Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). SAGE. Desrosiers, A., Kelley, B. S., & Miller, L. (2011). Parent and peer relationships and relational spirituality in adolescents and young adults. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 3(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/cqsn92 Dokecki, P. R., Newbrough, J. R., & O’Gorman, R. T. (2001). Toward a community-oriented action research framework for spirituality: Community psychological and theological perspectives. Journal of Community Psychology, 29(5), 497–518. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.1033 Dove, M. K., Zorotovich, J., & Gregg, K. (2018). School community connectedness and family participation at school. World Journal of Education, 8(1), 49. https://digitalcommons. georgiasouthern.edu/ecology-facpubs/104 Emmel, N. (2013). Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: A realist approach. SAGE. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis (No. 7). W. W. Norton & Company. Erikson, E. H., & Erikson, J. M. (1998). The life cycle completed (extended version). W. W. Norton & Company. Farley, J. P., & Kim-Spoon, J. (2014). The development of adolescent self-regulation: Reviewing the role of parent, peer, friend, and romantic relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 37(4), 433–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.03.009 Fjørtoft, I. (2001). The natural environment as a playground for children: The impact of outdoor play activities in pre-primary school children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012576913074 Fowler, J. W. (1981). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the quest for meaning. Harper Collins. Fuller, R. C. (2006). Wonder: From emotion to spirituality. University of North Carolina Press. Ginsburg, K. R. (2007). The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bonds. Pediatrics, 119(1), 182–191. https://doi.org/10.1542/ peds.2006-2697 Glaser, B. (2012). No preconception: The dictum. Grounded Theory Review, 11(2), 1–6. https:// tinyurl.com/y3a5dh2z Hamman, D., & Hendricks, C. B. (2005). The role of the generations in identity formation: Erikson speaks to teachers of adolescents. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79(2), 72–75. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.79.2.72-76 Hart, T. (2006). Spiritual experiences and capacities of children and youth. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. Benson (Eds.), The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 163–177). SAGE. Hay, D., Reich, K. H., & Utsch, M. (2006). Spiritual development: Intersections and divergence with religious development. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. Benson (Eds.), The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 46–59). SAGE.
264
L. Foley et al.
Hills, A. P., King, N. A., & Armstrong, T. P. (2007). The contribution of physical activity and sedentary behaviours to the growth and development of children and adolescents. Sports Medicine, 37(6), 533–545. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200737060-00006 Hoffman, E. (1992). Visions of innocence: Spiritual and inspirational experiences of childhood. Shambhala. Hoffman, A. J., & Sandelands, L. E. (2005). Getting right with nature: Anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, and theocentrism. Organization & Environment, 18(2), 141–162. http://www. jstor.com/stable/26162005 Hollis, J. L., Collins, C. E., DeClerck, F., Chai, L. K., McColl, K., & Demaio, A. R. (2020). Defining healthy and sustainable diets for infants, children and adolescents. Global Food Security, 27, 100401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100401 Johnson, B. (2002). On the spiritual benefits of wilderness. International Journal of Wilderness, 8(3), 28–32. https://ijw.org/december-2002/ Joseph, R. (2001). The limbic system and the soul: Evolution and the neuroanatomy of religious experience. Zygon, 36(1), 105–136. https://doi.org/fqd6pk Kellert, S. R. (1998). A National Study of outdoor wilderness experience. Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED444784.pdf Kellert, S. R. (2006). Building for life: Designing and understanding the human-nature connection. Renewable Resources Journal, 24(2), 8–24. https://tinyurl.com/y6cj7ca2 Kelley, B. S., Athan, A. M., & Miller, L. F. (2007). Openness and spiritual development in adolescents. In R. L. Piedmont (Ed.), Research in the social scientific study of religion (Vol. 18, pp. 1–33). Brill. http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/73482/1/42.pdf.pdf#page¼18 Kendler, K. S., Gardner, C. O., & Prescott, C. A. (1997). Religion, psychopathology, and substance use and abuse: A multimeasure, genetic-epidemiologic study. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 154(3), 322–329. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.154.3.322 King, P. E., & Roeser, R. W. (2009). Religion and spirituality in adolescent development. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology: Individual bases of adolescent development (pp. 435–478). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy001014 King, P. E., Clardy, C. E., & Ramos, J. S. (2014). Adolescent spiritual exemplars: Exploring spirituality in the lives of diverse youth. Journal of Adolescent Research, 29(2), 186–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558413502534 Koenig, L. B., McGue, M., & Iacono, W. G. (2008). Stability and change in religiousness during emerging adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 532–543. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0012-1649.44.2.532 Kopasz, M., Loessl, B., Hornyak, M., Riemann, D., Nissen, C., Piosczyk, H., & Voderholzer, U. (2010). Sleep and memory in healthy children and adolescents–a critical review. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 14(3), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2009.10.006 Korpela, K. M. (1992). Adolescents’ favourite places and environmental self-regulation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(3), 249–258. https://tinyurl.com/y2c9c6fc Kroger, J. (2005). Chapter 10: Identity development during adolescence. In G. R. Adams & M. D. Berzonsky (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of adolescence (pp. 205–226). Blackwell. https:// academic.udayton.edu/JackBauer/Readings%20595/Kroger.pdf Lerner, R. M., Alberts, A. E., Anderson, P. M., & Dowling, E. M. (2006). On making humans human: Spirituality and the promotion of positive youth development. In The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 60–72). SAGE. Levy-Warren, M. H. (1996). The adolescent journey: Development, identity formation, and psychotherapy. Jason Aronson. Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. Miller, L. (2015). The spiritual child: The new science on parenting for health and lifelong thriving. Macmillan.
13
The Development of Ecological Values: Cultivating Children’s. . .
265
Monahan, K. C., Oesterle, S., & Hawkins, J. D. (2010). Predictors and consequences of school connectedness: The case for prevention. The Prevention Researcher, 17(3), 3–6. https://tinyurl. com/y49f7osd National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Fostering healthy mental, emotional, and behavioral development in children and youth: A national agenda. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25201 Nawaz, S. (2011). The relationship of parental and peer attachment bonds with the identity development during adolescence. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 104–119. https:// search.proquest.com/docview/904638092/fulltextPDF/4D6C62F88427412BPQ/1? accountid¼41157 Newberg, A. B., & d’Aquili, E. G. (2000). The neuropsychology of religious and spiritual experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 7(11–12), 251–266. Newberg, A. B., & Newberg, S. K. (2008). Hardwired for god: A neuropsychological model for developmental spirituality. In Authoritative communities (pp. 165–186). Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-0-387-72721-9_8 Paruthi, S., Brooks, L. J., D’Ambrosio, C., Hall, W. A., Kotagal, S., Lloyd, R. M., Malow, B. A., Maski, K., Nichols, C., Quan, S. F., Rosen, C. L., Troester, M. M., & Wise, M. S. (2016). Consensus statement of the American Academy of sleep medicine on the recommended amount of sleep for healthy children: Methodology and discussion. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine: JCSM: Official Publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 12(11), 1549–1561. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.6288 Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE. Rasmussen, M., & Laumann, K. (2013). The academic and psychological benefits of exercise in healthy children and adolescents. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 945–962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0148-z Revell, L. (2008). Spiritual development in public and religious schools: A case study. Religious Education, 103(1), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344080701807544 Roehlkepartain, E. C., Benson, P. L., King, P. E., & Wagener, L. M. (2006). Spiritual development in childhood and adolescence: Moving to the scientific mainstream. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. Benson (Eds.), The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 1–15). SAGE. Roeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Sameroff, A. J. (2000). School as a context of early adolescents’ academic and social-emotional development: A summary of research findings. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 443–471. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1002279 Rowling, L. (2008). Linking spirituality, school communities, grief and well-being. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 13(3), 241–251. https://doi.org/dfs8g8 Ryan, R. M., Weinstein, N., Bernstein, J., Brown, K. W., Mistretta, L., & Gagne, M. (2010). Vitalizing effects of being outdoors and in nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.10.009 Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE. Salmón, E. (2000). Kincentric ecology: Indigenous perceptions of the human–nature relationship. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1327–1332. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[ 1327:KEIPOT]2.0.CO;2 Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2006). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer. Schein, D. (2014). Nature’s role in children’s spiritual development. Children Youth and Environments, 24(2), 78–101. http://www.jstor.com/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.24.2.0078 Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & Mossman, A. (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition and Emotion, 21(5), 944–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02699930600923668 Skamp, K. (1991). Spirituality and environmental education. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 7, 79–86. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44656077
266
L. Foley et al.
Smith, T. E., & Knapp, C. E. (Eds.). (2011). Sourcebook of experiential education: Key thinkers and their contributions. Routledge. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques (2nd ed.). SAGE. Taylor, A. F., Kuo, F. E., Spencer, C., & Blades, M. (2006). Is contact with nature important for healthy child development? State of the evidence. In C. Spencer & M. Blades (Eds.), Children and their environments: Learning, using and designing spaces (pp. 124–140). Cambridge University Press. http://faculty.une.edu/cas/szeeman/GK-12/articles/FaberTaylorKuo2006.pdf Templeton, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). The relation between spiritual development and identity processes. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, & P. Benson (Eds.), The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 252–265). SAGE. Trigwell, J. L., Francis, A. J., & Bagot, K. L. (2014). Nature connectedness and eudaimonic wellbeing: Spirituality as a potential mediator. Ecopsychology, 6(4), 241–251. https://doi.org/10. 1089/eco.2014.0025 Wane, N. N., Manyimo, E. L., & Ritskes, E. J. (Eds.). (2011). Spirituality, education & society. Springer Science & Business Media. Wells, N. M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Nearby nature: A buffer of life stress among rural children. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 311–330. https://doi.org/b6wh6j Wheeler, G., Thumlert, C., Glaser, L., Schoellhamer, M., & Bartosh, O. (2007). Environmental education report: Empirical evidence, exemplary models, and recommendations on the impact of environmental education on K-12 students. Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED499818.pdf Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications (6th ed.). SAGE.
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education
14
A Case Study of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues James Arthur and Tom Harrison
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Jubilee Centre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example Project 1: Character Education in UK Schools (2012–2015) (Arthur et al. 2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example Project 2: Youth Social Action and Service (2015–2017) (Arthur et al. 2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example Project 3: Phronesis; Developing a Conceptualization and an Instrument (2018–2020) (Kristjansson et al. 2019) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example Project 4: Cultivating Cyber-Phronesis (2021–) (Harrison & Polizzi, 2021) . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
268 269 271 273 274 275 277 277
Abstract
The chapter focuses on the pioneering work of the Jubilee Centre – an interdisciplinary research center focusing on character, virtues, and values in the interest of human flourishing. Launched in 2012, the Centre promotes a moral concept of character, underpinned by neo-Aristotelian philosophy, in order to explore the importance of virtue for public and professional life. The Centre is a leading international informant on policy and practice in this area and through its extensive range of research projects contributes to a renewal of character virtues in both individuals and societies. The chapter will explore how the Centre has addressed critical questions about character and virtues in education and how it has sought to build and strengthen character virtues in the contexts of the family, school, community, university, professions, voluntary organizations, and the wider workplace. J. Arthur (*) · T. Harrison University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_14
267
268
J. Arthur and T. Harrison
Keywords
Character · Character education · Virtues · Jubilee Centre · Aristotelian philosophy
Introduction International research centers, working on multi-million-pound studies, are not simply formed – they grow out of a sustained period of research and practice. The foundations of the Jubilee Centre were grounded in research undertaken by James Arthur over the last 20 years, much of which was the focus of a chapter in the first edition of this Springer handbook (Arthur & Wilson, 2010). We start this updated chapter by briefly revisiting the research undertaken prior to 2012 as it sets the scene for the research undertaken over the last decade by academics working at the Jubilee Centre. Education with Character: the moral economy of schooling (Arthur, 2003) was the first book in the UK to be dedicated wholly to an understanding of character education for over 50 years. It was the arguments made in this book that paved the way for a sustained period of research on character education in the UK, primarily funded by the John Templeton Foundation (JTF). The first grant from JTF involved a two-year study which led to a report published in 2006: Character Education: The Formation of Virtues and Dispositions in 16–19 Year Olds. The research sought to explore how 16- to 19-year-old students understand virtues and values and what they perceived to be the main influences on the formation of their own character. This led to securing a further grant to run a more ambitious program of research entitled “Learning for Life: Strengthening Character in UK Civil Society,” which was launched in October 2007. Learning for Life was not an official research center, but still employed a number of Research Fellows to assist in carrying out the research in four specific phases of education: (a) The Development of a Character Perspective in Early Years Education; (b) The Continuity of Experience with regard to Values in the Transition between the Primary and Secondary Phases of Schooling; (c) The Character Formation of Young People in Schools 14–16; and (d) Values in Higher Education and Employment 18–24. The research from this phase is collected in the publication entitled Of Good Character (Arthur, 2010) and at the time represented what was the largest study of character education in the UK to date, involving – both formally and informally – responses from over 70,000 participants. The major part of the research involved an extensive empirical investigation – by means of semi-structured group discussions/interviews and semi-structured individual and group questionnaire surveys – of the thoughts on values and character education of young people in different parts of the United Kingdom, across the entire spectrum of formal education and beyond. It therefore covered children of nursery age, the early and later stages of primary education, secondary education, further education, tertiary education, and into employment.
14
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education
269
The Learning for Life research in all cases sought to explore descriptively the current situation with regard to character development in different locations. It also sought to investigate character education through interventions that place a central emphasis on character formation. The research combined qualitative and quantitative methods to investigate and map out the issues in character education in each phase of schooling, as the field was light in this area. The research moved from descriptive to evaluative methods as it assessed the moral education policies in schools. It also employed some prescriptive research by testing our interventions, which introduced new ideas and proposals to address some of the issues that had arisen in character education. The Learning for Life research led on to funding for projects that sought to test the theory in school settings, including the “My Character” project (Arthur et al., 2014a) that examined the idea of “future-mindedness” and the “Knightly Virtues” program (Arthur et al., 2014b) that consisted of a taught program for 9- to 11-year-olds, using selected stories to teach character. The theoretical, empirical, and practical knowledge developed during these phases were fundamental to the JTF making a multimillion pound grant to establish the Jubilee Centre.
The Jubilee Centre The Jubilee Centre was launched at the House of Lords on May 16, 2012. From the day it was established, under the directorship of James Arthur, it set out to be a pioneering interdisciplinary research center focusing on character, virtues, and values in the interest of human flourishing. The Centre’s aim was to promote a moral concept of character, primarily underpinned by virtue ethical theory, in order to explore the importance of virtue for public and professional life. From the outset, the Centre sought to strengthen character virtues by: • addressing critical questions about character; • promoting, through rigorous research, the development of good character in education, business, and society, both in the UK and internationally; • building and strengthening character virtues in the contexts of the family, school, community, university, professions, voluntary organizations, and the wider workplace. It was clear from day one that if the Centre was to achieve these ambitious aims that the worlds of the researcher, practitioner and policymaker need not be three different worlds, but could interact with one another for mutual benefit. It is for this reason that over the last decade the Centre focused on relationship-building with decision-makers within the academy, government, business, and civil society. The starting aim was to alter the prevailing conception of character and virtues education in schools, in higher education, in the professions, and in communities more broadly, across the UK.
270
J. Arthur and T. Harrison
The initial motivation for creating the Centre was to promote, through rigorous research, the importance of character in British society. The approach involved both basic and use-inspired research and primarily involved undertaking systematic studies directed toward fuller knowledge and understanding of character and virtues in public life, with specific application always in mind. However, some elements of the research were motivated by the application of research findings to practice. From the outset, the Jubilee researchers recognized that education is an “applied, multidisciplinary field” and that use-inspired research within it pursues use and influence. Traditional routes for academic publication and dissemination, via publications in peer-reviewed journals, and presentations at national and international academic conferences were prioritized. However, the Centre also had the resources and staff to disseminate to a wider, non-academic audience – an approach that was a central thrust of the activities from the outset. Both the research and practical work was guided principally, but not exclusively, by Aristotelian virtue ethical philosophy, which is concerned with how to live well in a world worth living in. It is about how people acquire and act reflectively on well-chosen habits in order to flourish as human beings. One of the chief aims of the Jubilee Centre was to advance research underpinned by virtue ethical philosophy. Virtue ethics, as an alternative to deontological and utilitarian theory, had been experiencing a resurgence since the publication of Elizabeth Anscombe’s influential article Modern Moral Philosophy (Anscombe, 1958). The revival of virtue ethics within the research, policy, and practice domains was generally optimistic – as it suggested that life can get better and that the individual can achieve coherence and flourishing in life through a search for the common good. Included within this movement were ideas from positive psychology and well-being advocates, and by 2012, there were a number from the political left and right who cited Aristotle as a key influence on their politics of virtue. This all matched the ethos on which the Jubilee Centre was built: that character and virtues can be developed through “the contexts of the family, school, community, university, professions, voluntary organisations and the wider workplace.” From the outset, the Centre believed that virtues such as courage, justice, honesty, compassion, selfdiscipline, gratitude, generosity and humility are critical to individual excellence, contribute to societal flourishing, can be exercised within all human contexts and are educable. The Jubilee Centre was founded on the belief that a new emphasis on these virtue qualities in schools and in professional education was needed. Three defining arguments shaped the work of the Centre. First, that good character has multiple benefits for individuals and society. This first argument reasoned that the virtues which make up character enable us to enjoy rewarding and productive lives and that the more people with good character the healthier our society. Care was taken not to couch this argument in merely instrumental terms, by highlighting the intrinsic worth of a virtuous life. In the professions, it was argued that integrity, as well as knowledge, is vital. It was also reasoned, at the start, that the virtues could be found in all the great faiths, but equally that they are not restricted to religions. The second defining argument stated that character can be taught, learnt, and
14
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education
271
reinforced, and needs to be placed at the heart of education. The key to this argument was making a strong case that character education was about empowering young people, not limiting them. Character Education helped give them the judgment to make the right decisions. The third held that the Jubilee Centre would engage in cross-disciplinary and innovative research, work in partnership with schools and the professions, and promote the importance of good character against a society that had grown increasingly skeptical about the moral integrity of both the professional classes and politicians. At the heart of the Jubilee Centre’s work is the research projects and resulting reports on different aspects of character education. Each research project began with systematic reviews, critically appraising and collating all available relevant studies in character and virtues education, both in Britain and internationally. Each project also started by identifying the practice needs for evidence and worked with practitioners from the outset to refine the research questions. Only after this initial process was research undertaken, often in partnership with practitioners, utilizing a range of research designs, methods, and instruments. Below we provide an overview of four of the many flagship research projects undertaken by the Jubilee Centre over the last decade to demonstrate the breath and impact of the research.
Example Project 1: Character Education in UK Schools (2012–2015) (Arthur et al. 2015) A major focus of the Centre’s research is on investigating the place of character education in schools. The Centre has surveyed pupils and teachers, designed and trialed interventions, and evaluated provision in schools across the UK. Character Education in UK Schools was a three-year project undertaken between 2012 and 2015. It is well understood that schools play a critical role in the formation of young people, shaping the character of their students. However, at the time, not much was known about the current state of play in character education within Britain. The research project represented one of the most extensive studies of character education ever undertaken, including over 10,000 students and 255 teachers in schools across England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales. Research techniques consisted of a mixture of surveys, moral dilemmas, and semi-structured interviews. Over 3 years, the study explored: • The current situation in character education, both in the UK and internationally • How developed British students are with respect to moral character and the extent to which they are able to understand and apply moral virtues, especially those aged 14 and 15 • How teachers in the UK understand their role in terms of students’ moral and character development • What helps or hinders the development of children’s characters according to teachers in UK schools
272
J. Arthur and T. Harrison
The study found that with the right approach, it is possible for many kinds of school to nurture good character: The Centre’s researchers explored the characteristics of the UK schools, whose pupils were, on average, best and least able to respond to a series of moral dilemmas. Different types of schools appeared in both groups, including state and independent, faith and non-faith, large and small, those with high and low percentages of free school meals (FSM), and those with varying Ofsted ratings. The schools in both groups were spread across the UK, showing no real trends in terms of geography or size of school. Findings also showed that a concern for the development of a child’s whole character is central to good education and practice. In interviews carried out by the Centre, over half of British secondary school teachers (54%) and 80% of primary school teachers said that their school already had a “whole school approach to character building.” Furthermore, 59% of primary school teachers believed that their school placed a “very high” priority on moral teaching. However, there are weak links in the education system, which suggest that moral education needs to be prioritized within a greater number of British schools. The Jubilee Centre asked British students participating in this research to respond to a series of moral dilemmas and select the best and worst justifications for their chosen action from a list. Many students taking the moral dilemma tests appeared to approach the dilemmas from the perspective of selfinterest. On average, participating students had less than a 50% match (42.6%) with the preferred responses to the moral dilemmas, as selected by an expert panel. Students struggled to identify why they would take a certain action (justification) more than deciding what that action would be (40.5% match with an expert panel). It was also interesting to note that girls (47%) significantly outperformed boys (37%) when faced with these moral dilemmas. The Jubilee Centre’s findings also contradict some widely held beliefs about the types of activity that build character. For example, contrary to the widely held public belief that sport builds character, British students claiming to participate in sporting activities did not perform better than those who said they did not practice sports when asked to respond to moral dilemmas. However, students who said they were involved in music or choir or drama outside of school performed better than those who said they were not. Overall, this research suggests that there may be gaps in the current system in terms of attempts to develop a child’s whole character, not just their academic skills. For example, 80% of teachers interviewed by the Jubilee Centre stated that the British assessment system “hinders the development of the whole child.” In other words, the current system can hold back the development of a child’s moral character. The majority claimed that exams have become so pervasive in schools that they have crowded out other educational goods. Only 33% of teachers stated that they had specific or additional training in moral or character education, yet 60% stated that they had to teach a subject relating explicitly to the development of the whole child (i.e., citizenship). Some of the key recommendations from the research went on to inform future research and curriculum development projects. The first recommendation was that members of school staff should be trained in developing character, and each school should have at least one teacher (preferably more) who is especially passionate and
14
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education
273
knowledgeable about character education and directly involved with its implementation. This, however, is unlikely to be sufficient without an effective school leadership team that is also concerned with character education. Since the study, the Centre has developed multiple resources to support schools to train their staff in character education, including MOOCs and an award-winning free online CPD. The second recommendation was that schools ought to have a character education policy that will be influential across all staff. We created the Framework for Character Education in Schools (2013, revised in 2017) to help schools fulfill this recommendation. The third recommendation was that because students require more direct help moving from motives of self-interest toward moral orientations concerned with others, this is an aspect of character development deserving of emphasis in schools. Over the last decade, we have created multiple curriculum resources to help students with ethical decision-making – these have been developed for primary, secondary, college, and university levels as well as focusing on particular dimensions of their lives, such as the digital world. The final recommendation was that schools should assess their own efforts toward the development of students’ characters. In response to this, we created a schools’ evaluation handbook for character education (Harrison et al, 2016).
Example Project 2: Youth Social Action and Service (2015–2017) (Arthur et al. 2017) The Centre has conducted several studies into the practice of youth social action and how young people can make acts of service into a lifelong habit. The starting point was that engaging in meaningful social action can have a recognized “double benefit” to both the recipient of the social action and the individual undertaking it, for the positive development of character. The belief was that service to others is an important virtue for children and young people to develop. This study was based on data gathered through a questionnaire with 4518 16–20-year-olds in the UK and supported by life history interviews, about which factors are associated with young people who have made a habit of service. A young person with a habit of service was defined in the study as someone who had taken part in service in the past 12 months and confirmed they would definitely or very likely continue participating in the following 12 months. This research was the largest known study of its kind. Key findings included that young people with a habit of service are more likely than those without a habit of service to: • have started participating in service at a younger age: those who first get involved in service under the age of 10 were found to be more than two times more likely to have formed a habit of service than if they started aged 16–18 years; • be involved in a wider range of service activities and participate in them more frequently; • identify themselves more closely with exemplars of moral and civic virtues;
274
J. Arthur and T. Harrison
• have parents and friends who are also involved in service, and in particular, in the same kinds of activities as them, with friends being a more important influence than parents; • believe they have the time, skills, opportunity, and confidence to participate in service; • have service embedded in their school/college/university environment; • be able to reflect on their experience of service; and • recognize the double benefit of service – that it brings benefits for themselves and others. Since the research was published, the findings helped those in the voluntary sector plan and deliver youth social action programs that supported young people to cultivate a habit of service. The findings also furthered academic understanding in the fields of character and citizenship education about the concept of service and how involvement in service may be measured, as well as enhancing understandings about what constitutes a habit of service.
Example Project 3: Phronesis; Developing a Conceptualization and an Instrument (2018–2020) (Kristjansson et al. 2019) The Jubilee Centre has undertaken sustained research, over the last 10 years, on the Aristotelian concept of phronesis – popularly translated as practical wisdom. According to Aristotelian character developmental theory, young people who have acquired the right moral traits through habituation and role modeling need gradually to develop the intellectual virtue of phronesis, to guide their decision-making; otherwise, their moral life will be fragmented, uncritical, and lacking in intrinsic value. The upsurge of interest in neo-Aristotelian forms of character education has thus led to a renewed interest in understanding the workings of phronesis. At the same time, social scientists, educationists, and professional ethicists have turned their attention to the role that phronesis plays in the education and practice of professionals in fields such as teaching, medicine, nursing, law, and business, as well as to the more general role of phronesis in helping agents to navigate their social worlds. Despite some consensus on the nature of phronesis as an integrative, intellectual meta-virtue, no rigorous measurable conceptualization of phronesis exists, and no psychological instrument has yet been designed to measure it. That said, instruments to measure wisdom more generally may offer some potential overlaps, as well as measures of meta-cognition and critical thinking. However, these tend to be grounded in philosophical assumptions different to those underpinning phronesis. The Centre has sought to address the mismatch between the interest in phronesis and serious attempts to specify and evaluate it. The study was motivated, firstly, by the hypothesis that Aristotle may have been on the right track in suggesting that phronesis bridges the gap between moral knowledge and action in duly developed moral agents (typically referred to in contemporary moral psychology as the “gappiness problem”). No one to date has,
14
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education
275
however, explored this hypothesis empirically. Secondly, that it is incumbent upon Aristotle-inspired psychologists and educationists to take on the task of designing an instrument that measures phronesis and its development, as well as to test the aforementioned hypothesis by seeing how well phronesis predicts moral behavior and how it fares vis-à-vis other candidates. Such instrument design requires the preliminary conceptual work of operationalizing the construct of phronesis. Studies, particularly in recent years, have explored the conceptual contours of phronesis and proposed a new four-componential model based on four functions of phronesis as constitutive, integrative, drawing on a blueprint of the good life and overseeing emotion regulation. Further empirical pilot studies (one conducted with an adult sample and the other with an adolescent sample) have been undertaken to test this model via a newly designed Phronesis Inventory. The studies were conducted to i) investigate whether the proposed phronesis model is a suitable frame through which to investigate the relevant features of morality and their relation to prosocial behavior; ii) discuss and contextualize the new conceptualization and instrument in the context of current research in moral psychology; and iii) ideally pave the way for further practical research and recommend next steps for academics and practitioners interested in phronesis. The findings from the research included a critical review of the literature that established that the proposed four-componential construct of phronesis is well grounded in Aristotle’s own texts and goes beyond them by drawing on research in modern moral psychology. Specifically, it captures the core functions that phronesis scholars have typically considered this virtue to perform. Further findings from the pilot studies found that the hypothesized phronesis model fits the data well. Previously validated measures that were predicted to be good approximations of the components of the phronesis model were found to structurally relate to the predicted latent components in all but one case. Most importantly, the latent components were found to be structurally related to a predicted latent phronesis variable and, promisingly, this variable was found to predict the latent prosocial behavior variable. Furthermore, the findings also suggested that the proposed phronesis model may have validity in both adult and adolescent samples, which has important implications for solving the “gappiness problem.” Research in the center continues to investigate both the four-component model and develop instruments to measure it in various settings and with different populations.
Example Project 4: Cultivating Cyber-Phronesis (2021–) (Harrison & Polizzi, 2021) A particular focus of the Centre’s work in recent years has been on character, virtue, and phronesis in the digital world. For many children, the Internet has improved their lives; it has offered them opportunities for entertainment, work, socialization, and active participation in society. It has also bought new risks for children growing up in the digital age, including, most prominently, privacy constraints, misinformation, identify theft, inappropriate content, online abuse, cyberbullying, and grooming.
276
J. Arthur and T. Harrison
In an age in which children are both the most vulnerable and the pioneers when it comes to using the Internet the Jubilee Centre believed it was important to understand how the technology contributes to or diminishes human flourishing. There has been a broad range of research, from different disciplinary perspectives, that has considered the impact of the Internet on children. Few studies, to date, have adopted a neo-Aristotelian character lens as the theoretical underpinning for their investigations. An initial study with 13- to 16-year-olds and parents collected data to investigate the intersection between character, virtue, wisdom, and being online. Findings from study with 13- to 16-Year-Olds • The virtue that most adolescents wanted most their friends to show on social media was wisdom, with 38% choosing this as one of their top two desired qualities. • Overall, most 13- to 16-year-olds reported that they would react to an abusive post on the Internet in ways that are morally engaged (74%) (e.g., by sending a nice message to the person insulted to check how they feel (19%)) rather than morally disengaged (26%) (e.g., by forwarding it to others in their school (1%)). • The explanations that most adolescents chose in support of their morally engaged reactions were virtue-based (68%) (“because it is the kind/thoughtful thing to do” (37%) as distinct from utilitarian (21%) (e.g., “because the same thing might happen to me” (13%)) or deontological (11%) (e.g., “because of the rules of the social media company” (6%)). Findings from study with Parents • The ability to make wise decisions is the quality that parents in the UK most want their children to show online. 56% of parents chose “making wise decisions” as one of their two top qualities. The second most important quality to parents is showing good manners and respect to others (43%). • Parents in the UK prioritize cultivating character and virtues (44%) over trying to teach children about the consequences of the online actions (27%) or making rules (19%) when managing their children’s Internet use. • While 65% of parents in the UK are happy with the extent which their children’s schools adopt rules to protect their children from online risks, less parents are happy with how their children’s schools teach their children about the consequences of their online actions (60%), and the extent to which they teach about good character, wisdom, and virtues in relation to the Internet (58%). • 77% of parents think that schools should make more efforts to teach about good character, wisdom, and virtues in relation to the Internet. The findings from the study provided the justification for new research into how cyber-wisdom might be educated in 13- to 16-year-olds. This is a research project that is currently being undertaken by the Jubilee Centre in schools across the UK.
14
Transforming the Theory and Practice of Character Education
277
Conclusion In the four examples of research briefly described above, the Jubilee Centre has undertaken significant studies with a large number of participants in a diverse range of settings. What unites all of the research is a focus on how character, virtue, and practical wisdom might be cultivated in the interests of enhancing individual and societal flourishing. Based on these projects and the many others undertaken over the last decade, the Centre has established itself as a leading research resource and has increasingly become a source of solutions for teachers and professionals. It has effectively become the “go-to” center, with thousands of enquires each year and, as a result, many international visits from researchers to the Centre. It is important to stress in the conclusion to this chapter the impact the research undertaken over the last decade (as well as that which preceded it) has had on practice. The intention in all the research projects has been to turn the focus away from producing narrow studies, read only by other specialists. It is for this reason the Centre has run hundreds of workshops, training events, and professional development sessions all over the UK and internationally, attracting thousands of teachers, professionals, and other stakeholders to develop their knowledge and skills. This user-inspired research has sought both to discover new knowledge and to enable society to put that knowledge to beneficial use.
References Anscombe, G. E. M. (1958). Modern moral philosophy. Philosophy, 33(124), 1–19. Arthur, J. (2003). Education with character: The moral economy of schooling. Routledge. Arthur, J. (2010). Of good character. Imprint Academic. Arthur, J., & Wilson, K. (2010). New research directions in character and values education in the UK. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 521–548). Springer. Arthur, J., Harrison, T., Kristjánsson, K., Davidson, I., Hayes, D., & Higgins, J. (2014a). My character: Enhancing future-mindedness in young people – A feasibility study. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. Arthur, J., Harrison, T., Carr, D., Kristjánsson, K., & Davison, I. (2014b). Knightly virtues: Enhancing virtue literacy through stories: Research report. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. Arthur, J., Kristjánsson, K., Walker, D., Sanderse, W., & Jones, C. (2015). Character education in UK schools: Research report. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. Arthur, J., Harrison, T., Taylor-Collins, E., & Moller, F. (2017). A habit of service: The factors that sustain service. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. Harrison, T., & Polizzi, G. (2021). A cyber-wisdom approach to digital citizenship education: Insights from adolescents and parents. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. Kristjansson, K., Darnell, C., Fowers, B., Moller, F., & Pollard, D. (2019). Phronesis; developing a conceptualisation and an instrument. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham.
Promoting a More Sustainable and Inclusive World
15
Wellbeing in a World of Crises Ragny´ Þo´ra Guðjohnsen, O´lafur Pa´ll Jo´nsson, and Sigru´n Aðalbjarnardo´ttir
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Children’s and Young People’s Wellbeing in the Modern World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustainability and Sustainability Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustainability Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Listening to Young Children’s Voices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Perspective-Taking Ability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Children’s and Young People’s Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Emphasis on Democracy and Children’s Rights in Educational Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Measures Taken in Iceland to Ensure Children’s Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Ombudsman for Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rights Respecting Schools and Child-Friendly Municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
280 281 284 285 288 290 290 291 293 295 295 296 298 300
Abstract
In this chapter, we discuss pressing questions regarding sustainable development and children’s wellbeing. We depict two scenarios. One portrays children who are led down a dangerous path of climate change and live under in secure circumstances, experiencing violence, neglect, abuse, and military recruitment. The other depicts parents, schools, social services, societies, and the global community, willing to turn things around by emphasizing children’s human rights and wellbeing in a broad sense. We deal with these issues within an interdisciplinary frame, underlining the meaning of social, psychological, and health threats as well as children’s secure economic conditions. The knowledge of protective and risk factors for children’s wellbeing must guide us during that process. Parents R. Þ. Guðjohnsen (*) · Ó. P. Jónsson · S. Aðalbjarnardóttir University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 T. Lovat et al. (eds.), Second International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing, Springer International Handbooks of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24420-9_15
279
280
R. Þ. Guðjohnsen et al.
and guardians are responsible for upholding children’s rights, caring for their development, and seeking services for them if needed. School practices and leisure activities must embed the Convention on the Rights of the Child, offering children opportunities for democratic discussions and participation. Nurturing children’s values, critical thinking, and perspective taking prepares them for their role in an inclusive, sustainable world. They need space to influence their own lives and society. We conclude with examples of changes in Iceland’s governmental policy and practices, which are steps in implementing the convention. Keywords
Sustainability · Children’s and young people’s participation · Human rights · Education
Introduction In the end, we will conserve only what we love; we will love only what we understand and we will understand only what we are taught. (Baba Dioum, 1968)
In the first decade of the twentieth century, the Swedish scholar and educator Ellen Key (1909) published the book The Century of the Child that would later influence the ideas on the rights of the child. She described “the new century [as being] represented as a small naked child, descending upon the earth, but drawing himself back in terror at the sight of a world bristling with weapons, a world in which for the opening century there was not an inch of free ground to set one’s foot upon” (Key, 1909, p. 2). Key’s publication of the book was a mark of optimism – the twentieth century should become the century of the child. In a way, it did; the century witnessed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) become the international convention with more signatory countries than any other. However, it was also the century when two world wars did not leave an inch of free ground to set one’s foot upon in various regions of the world. The UNCRC (1989) lays out certain principles that should guide people and governments in safeguarding this vulnerable population of children against the cruelty of the world in which they are born. It is also a way of acknowledging the vulnerability and laying out certain principles to guide those in power to make children’s lives better, or rather, to define what it takes to live the dignified life of a child. To lead a dignified life, it is not enough to be protected against the cruelty of the world; the child must also be listened to, have an influence on one’s environment, and take part in the community where one was born, rather than simply being a bystander waiting to grow up. Article 12 of the UNCRC stresses this active role of the child and portrays the child as not simply a weak and vulnerable being but also one who has a mind of one’s own (Lundy, 2013). Now, in the early decades of the twenty-first century, we may wonder whether it will eventually be the century of the child – or perhaps in what sense it might be
15
Promoting a More Sustainable and Inclusive World
281
referred to as such. The challenges that we face are not only those of war and terror that Key (1909) wrote about over a century ago, although present generations are still plagued by such barbarism. On top of this, there are challenges that are, in a way, both more mundane and more horrific. The climate crisis threatens not only peace and stability but may also undermine the very conditions for human life on the planet – without “an inch of free ground to set one’s foot upon” (Key, 1909, p. 2). Dignified life, whether of children or adults, is also threatened by another perspective, namely the encroachment of technology, big data, and international corporations on human autonomy and democracy. These challenges, or rather crises, not only force people to cooperate globally to protect people’s wellbeing, but they also require rethinking about what wellbeing means in the first place. In the face of these crises, the UN (2015) put on its agenda the extensive UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which align strongly with human rights, as well as refer to the importance of strengthening human wellbeing at all levels. Of the 17 goals, the first 10 concern factors that are either constitutive of wellbeing or directly related to it are: (1) no poverty, (2) zero hunger, (3) good health and wellbeing, (4) quality education, (5) gender equality, (6) clean water and sanitation, (7) affordable and clean energy, (8) decent work and economic growth, (9) industry, innovation, and infrastructure, and (10) reduced inequalities (UN, 2019, p. 29). Crucial aspects of the SDGs are the goals toward active participation that are needed to follow upon the other goals, as well as the emphasis on cooperation. In this chapter, we focus on how children’s and young people’s wellbeing and human rights serve as the foundations for the abilities to grow as persons and take part in developing sustainable communities.
Children’s and Young People’s Wellbeing in the Modern World Wellbeing is a multifaceted construct that has been defined and measured in diverse ways, depending on the context in which it is used (Tov, 2018). In their systematic review, Pollard and Lee (2003) have found that children’s wellbeing has been defined under five distinct domains: economic, physical, social, psychological, and cognitive. In each domain, wellbeing is measured with specific indicators that may either be subjective or objective, positive or negative (deficit indicators). An interdisciplinary focus on children’s wellbeing as citizens has become clearer with each passing year, especially now that action is needed worldwide due to urgent and serious challenges related to diseases, climate change, famine, threats to democracy, and wars (Clark et al., 2020; World Health Organization [WHO], 2021a). Economic challenges to children’s wellbeing are staggering; in 2019, it was estimated that 356 million children under 18 years old lived in extreme poverty (World Bank Group, 2020). Although the situation before the COVID-19 outbreak had greatly improved since 1990 (UNICEF, 2016, p. 2), matters have now regressed as poverty rates have risen for the first time in 20 years. Likewise, education gains from the last 20 years were partly wiped out, with the livelihoods of women and
282
R. Þ. Guðjohnsen et al.
young people bearing most of the negative impacts (Fiala et al., 2021; UNICEF, 2021a). Challenges to children’s wellbeing are not limited to the less developed parts of the world. In affluent countries, children’s wellbeing can be endangered as well, with marginalized groups, ethnic minorities, people living with disabilities, and immigrant families being the most vulnerable (UNICEF Innocenti Research Center, 2007). Besides, children suffer more than adults from economic crises (Clark et al., 2020; Fiala et al., 2021; Mood & Jónsson, 2014), and their rights are at risk of being violated due to economic setbacks (Jeans, 2017). This has been evident in the period of the COVID-19 pandemic as the number of children living in multidimensional poverty increased by one million (UNICEF, 2021b). To account for such challenges to wellbeing, UNICEF (2021b) has moved away from a single-dimensional measure of wellbeing to multiple dimensions when measuring child poverty. It does so by referring to children’s actual access to goods and services that are essential for their development and for the advocacy of their rights under the UNCRC (1989): housing, health, nutrition, sanitation, water, and education. Children and young people currently face various global health and wellbeing challenges. It is estimated that two million children under the age of five will die of undernourishment in 2022 (Rauhanen, 2021). Health expenses and health coverage systems vary enormously among countries and regions. This means that different models are used to cover health care costs. Weak health care systems in lowerincome countries force poor households to pay high out-of-pocket expenses for their needed services, leaving them worse off in terms of both finances and wellbeing (Krishna, 2010). Securing universal health coverage in these areas is therefore necessary and guided by human rights principles (Nelson, 2021). At the same time, approximately 23% of the children in more developed countries are classified as overweight or obese (WHO, 2019), often related to negative self-image and body dissatisfaction, as well as psychological distress (Bray et al., 2018). Young people’s changed lifestyles, increasing smartphone use, and less face-to-face communication in higher-income countries have been related to increased odds of stress, poorer sleep quality, and rising prevalence of mental health issues such as depression and anxiety (Sohn et al., 2019). Depression is now being a leading cause of disability among young people worldwide (WHO, 2020). Young people’s substance abuse disorders (UN Office on Drugs and Crime, 2021) also negatively affect their wellbeing and prevent them from being active members of society. Traumatic experiences during childhood undermine the foundations for lifetime wellbeing and productivity (Di Fabio & Rosen, 2018). Several studies have reported harmful effects of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) – such as domestic violence, neglect, or sexual, physical, and emotional abuse – on future health and wellbeing (Felitti et al., 1998; Hughes et al., 2017; Kinner & Borschmann, 2018) as well as school success (Blodgett & Lanigan, 2018).
15
Promoting a More Sustainable and Inclusive World
283
Females are more likely to have higher ACE scores; according to the WHO (2021b), almost one out of four 15- to 19-year-old girls who has been in a relationship has experienced physical and/or sexual violence from an intimate partner. The risk factors for higher ACE scores also include non-white ethnicity, low educational level, and low socioeconomic status. Prevention of childhood trauma is therefore one of the most pressing issues facing the world, as exposure to multiple ACEs is related to a wide variety of negative outcomes that are harmful to wellbeing (Petruccelli et al., 2019). Recently, research has also focused on the relation between ACEs and young people’s dysfunction in society and the fact that these individuals are more likely to get in trouble with the law (Van Duin et al., 2021) and to have problems with finding and keeping employment (Scales et al., 2016). Various protective factors and risk factors are related to how young people fare in their adult lives (Steinberg, 2001). Childhood studies have emphasized the significant role of parental styles and how being raised by parents who are supportive and warm, demand mature behavior, emphasize dialogue, and listen to their children’s voices is a protective factor for their wellbeing (Baumrind, 1991), communication skills, education (good grades), self-esteem, self-regulation, and mental health. It is a preventive factor as well, minimizing the risks of school dropouts and substance use (Aðalbjarnardóttir, 2019). Other parental styles can be risk factors, such as being uninvolved, absent, or indifferent to fulfilling their children’s socioemotional and behavioral needs; setting strict rules and using punishment or imposing no rules at all; and being either too child driven or too parent driven (Aðalbjarnardóttir, 2019; Baumrind, 1991). Schools and teachers also play a significant role in children’s life (e.g., Aðalbjarnardóttir, 2007). For example, a school is regarded as the most stable social institution for children who have lived unstable lives (Spencer, 2006). A school, in cooperation with parents and communities, can serve as a protective factor for children and young people who are refugees by nurturing a more inclusive environment and positive student interactions (Zych et al., 2019). School safety (Kowalski et al., 2014) and a welcoming school climate (Guo, 2016) can therefore be protective measures against bullying. Various intervention programs in schools show promising findings, where students who take part in such programs show more improvements in their competencies and skills than students in comparison groups. The school community’s and the teachers’ opportunities to promote their educational visions are essential in this regard (e.g.,Aðalbjarnardóttir, 2007, 2010; Berkowitz, 2021; Nucci & Ilten-Geer, 2021; Power et al., 1989). Informal educational and leisure activities can also serve as protective factors for children’s wellbeing (Sigfusdottir et al., 2020), as well as other ecosystem elements such as good neighborhoods, social welfare systems and health services as well as culture supporting human rights (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). Considering this and the “need for meeting the human rights of every person within the means of our life-giving planet” (Raworth, 2017, p. 22), we need to keep in mind the whole picture of the child’s wellbeing.
284
R. Þ. Guðjohnsen et al.
Sustainability and Sustainability Education Although the UN SDGs address social issues no less than natural or environmental issues, sustainability education has its historical roots in environmental education, a field of education that became an important item on the international policy agenda with the UN Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972. The Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (UN, 1972), published after the conference, states: Education in environmental matters, for the younger generation as well as adults, giving due consideration to the underprivileged, is essential to broaden the basis for an enlightened opinion and responsible conduct by individuals, enterprises, and communities in protecting and improving the environment in its full human dimension. (Principle 19, p. 5)
Five years later, in 1977, the UN organized a conference specifically on environmental education in Tbilisi, Georgia. The role of education is discussed at length in the Tbilisi Declaration (UN, 1977) – the final report of that conference. Although the concept of sustainability had not entered the scene at that time, the conception of environmental education was broad, including both social and political issues. Environmental education should be integrated into the entire system of formal education at all levels to supply the necessary knowledge, understanding, values and skills needed by the general public and many occupational groups, for their participation in devising solutions to environmental questions. (UN, 1977, p. 12)
The report continues: The ultimate aim of environmental education is to enable people to understand the complexities of the environment and the need for nations to adapt their activities and pursue their development in ways which are harmonious with the environment. In this way, it adds a new dimension to the efforts being made everywhere to improve living conditions. Environmental education must also help create an awareness of the economic, political, and ecological interdependence of the modern world, so as to enhance a spirit of responsibility and solidarity among nations. (UN, 1977, p. 12)
Despite the strong emphasis on the environment and the conference’s explicit focus on environmental education, the final report also highlights the importance of values education: Environmental education . . . should be centered on practical problems and be of an interdisciplinary character. It should aim at building up a sense of values, contribute to public well-being and concern itself with the survival of the human species. (p. 19)
The language changed drastically in a report prepared by the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), Our Common Future (known as the Brundtland Report), with the terminology revised from “environmental education” to “education for sustainable development.”
15
Promoting a More Sustainable and Inclusive World
285
Sustainable Development The phrase “sustainable development” rose to prominence with the publication of Our Common Future (UN World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The concept was defined in terms of a balance between current and future needs of humans: Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (§27)
The concept of sustainable development from Our Common Future was further explained as development that balanced three distinct fields: economy, society, and environment. This is illustrated in a picture where these three fields are represented by three overlapping circles, and the space of sustainable development is located in their intersection (Fig. 15.1). The concept of sustainable development from Our Common Future has been called “weak sustainability” and subjected to various criticisms. One criticism concerns the concept’s focus on needs or even acceptance of current needs as a baseline. This seems to promote the status quo or is at least less revisionary than many think is necessary. Another criticism questions the interplay among the three fields in the concept. People have asked how one might depict the economy as largely outside both society and the environment. Thus, Sterling (2001, p. 32) argues that “socio-economic systems must be regarded as subsystems of the encompassing biophysical system,” leading to a picture where the economy is located within society and society within the environment. The concept of sustainability, as shown in Fig. 15.2, has been referred to as “strong sustainability.” This concept is more realistic and has led to more revisionary views of society and the economy, where the natural capacity of the earth has been incorporated into the fundamental theories in each field. The concept of sustainable development from Our Common Future demarcated a research field that was best described as multidisciplinary. It drew on theories and concepts from different fields, without integrating them or developing new concepts Fig. 15.1 Concept of sustainable development, defined as the intersection of the three fields
Economy
Environment
Society
Sustainable development
R. Þ. Guðjohnsen et al.
286 Fig. 15.2 Concept of sustainable development, defined as development where the economy is within the boundaries of society, and society is within the limits of the environment or nature
Economy Society
Environment
or theories that challenged the classification of the fields in question. Moving toward strong sustainability, the disciplinary boundaries began to be blurred, and concepts and theories from ethics and political philosophy, such as “intergenerational justice” (Broome, 1994; Meyer, 2021), became part of the theoretical landscape. After the turn of the twenty-first century, the field is now better described as interdisciplinary, with the disciplinary boundaries often difficult to detect and new concepts being developed that do not fit in any of the traditional fields. The Stockholm Resilience Center (2016) has presented the 17 UNSDGs as forming a “wedding cake,” where they fit within the structure of the nested circles of strong sustainability (Fig. 15.3). However, strong sustainability might not be robust enough or perhaps not deep enough. Strong sustainability certainly demands a revision of the way we think about both society and the economy, giving prominence to concepts such as natural capital and ecosystem services in economics and calling for radical changes in both production and consumption. The shortcoming of strong sustainability becomes evident when we see that the gross unsustainability of current ways of living concerns not only the production and consumption of goods and the development of infrastructure and social institutions, but also requires a thorough revision of the way we feel and the things we value – and how we value them. The issue here is aptly captured in what Jónsson and Macdonald (2021) refer to as the challenge of conflicting values: The comprehensive, distributed project of aiming for sustainable living on a small planet, densely populated by humans and non-human living organisms, is a project infused with fundamental philosophical questions. It is not about finding a way for many to survive but for all people to lead the good life. It is not about sustaining the way things are at present but about sustaining a different world, one in which everyone has a fair chance of living the good life. This will only be possible if humans learn to live in harmony with each other and the non-human world. Put this way, aiming for sustainability is not only aiming for a moving target, but aiming for a target that we have not yet seen. (p. 8)
15
Promoting a More Sustainable and Inclusive World
287
Fig. 15.3 The UN Sustainable Development Goals, represented as nested circles according to the concept of strong sustainability (Stockholm Resilience Center, 2016)
a
b The limits of nature The good life
The limits of nature
The good life
Fig. 15.4 (a) The concept of sustainability defined as the good life not extending beyond the limits of nature. (b) Unsustainability is represented by the good life crossing the limits in one or more places
Viewing the challenge of sustainability in this way, the concept of strong sustainability –and the corresponding picture of nested circles – does not do justice to what is at stake. The concept that we suggest is simpler by being defined in terms of only two basic concepts: the good life and the limits of nature (Fig. 15.4).
288
R. Þ. Guðjohnsen et al.
This understanding of the concept of sustainability, which we can refer to as “sustainable wellbeing,” and the corresponding pictures of sustainability and unsustainability, laid the foundation of the sustainability policy of the University of Iceland in 2012 (Macdonald et al., 2012). Sustainable wellbeing is simpler than the concept of either weak or strong sustainability as it is defined in terms of only two concepts. However, it is also more complex since the concept of the good life encompasses not only economic and social issues but also moral issues; it is thoroughly normative. The Stockholm Resilience Center’s (2016) interpretation of the SDGs in the form of a wedding cake (Fig. 15.3) represents sustainability as a transdisciplinary field of practice and research. Sustainable wellbeing (Fig. 15.4) goes further in integrating the diverse aspects of sustainability, resulting in a transdisciplinary field where a new holistic approach is being formed.
Sustainability Education Already in Our Common Future, strong emphasis is placed on education as a means of achieving sustainable development. In the foreword to the report, Gro Harlem Brundtland writes, “The changes in attitudes, in social values, and in aspirations that the report urges will depend on vast campaigns of education, debate and public participation” (UN World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, Chairman’s Foreword and §107 of the overview). Although the emphasis is strong (the word education is mentioned 78 times in the report), it is usually framed in instrumental terms and in ways that Sterling (2001, pp. 14–15) refers to as first-order learning. Due to the current educational paradigm, Sterling maintains that such education is too unsustainable: So, while ‘education for sustainable development’ ha