Should the curriculum for educators of adults include a study of humanness?
8902
Should the curriculum for educators of adults include a study of humanness?
William McCall Robb, University of Glasgow
Summary
The author has found that a study of humanness should be included in the curriculum for educators of adults. Using a phenomenological approach, to ensure that the criteria for assessing ‘should’ were derived from the essence of the phenomenon of education itself and were not mere opinions or views of the author, it was found that all educators, whether they are aware of it or not, are striving to be authentic educators. Authentic educators attempt to alleviate both symptomatic and fundamental (ontic), human needs. Humanness is found to be fundamental (ontic) needs plus the actions necessary to alleviate them, and the author finds education to be synonymous with helping educands identify and alleviate fundamental (ontic) need. Unless educators know what fundamental human needs are and what is required to alleviate them, the quality of their educative teaching is limited and they cannot claim to be doing the best possible for their educands. Consequently, a study of humanness should be included in the curriculum for educators of adults.
Introduction
In a previous study the author found that man[1] is the only manifestation of Being called human[2]; that only humans participate in the phenomenon called education[3], and that education is consequently, a uniquely human phenomenon. The author arrived at the preliminary finding that what education is, cannot be thoroughly understood without an understanding of what humanness is (what it means to be human) and that a study of humanness should be included in the curriculum for educators of adults[4]. Some other educationists such as Spencer[5] find similarly: in determining the curriculum the first step is to classify ‘... the leading kinds of activity which constitute human life’.
However, the author observed that in many[6] textbooks on, and courses in, adult education, students of the discipline are given little or no grounding in what it means to be human. While the author wanted to investigate reasons for this lack of grounding in humanness, it was recognised that a preliminary question had to be asked and answered, namely: should a study of humanness be included in the curriculum for educators of adults? The current study[7]was undertaken to answer the question just stated.
Topicality of the current study
An indication of the topicality of a study of the curriculum for the education of adults is evident from the numerous[8] findings that very little research has been conducted in this area. The relevant literature indicates that little progress has been made since 1964 when Liveright[9] found that practitioners in the United States of America (USA) in adult education lacked shared common goals, and that the field of adult education was not at a point where the desirable content and organisation of a programme of graduate study for adult educators could be specified. For example, Mocker[10] found that people responsible for designing curricula had little basis for making decisions concerning content, and Griffin[11] found that planners did not make explicit their rationale for the courses they offered or, that the rationale they used was not visibly linked to the beliefs they had about adult education.
While it is true that educationists[12] have attempted to identify required competencies and knowledge for educators of adults[13] and have developed suggestions[14] for developing curricula for educators of adults, the author found that the competencies and suggestions just referred to did not include, in an explicit way, knowledge of what it means to be human. An extensive literature search[15] also indicated that few studies have been conducted into the relationship ‘humanness-education-curriculum’ and that the current study might contribute to scientific dialogue in this regard. ‘Scientific’ in the previous sentence indicates a systematic, methodical and thorough investigation and does not refer to the scientistic, mechanistic approach often employed in the natural/physical sciences. The author regards the rational-analytic approach in philosophy to be a scientific approach and to explain this further the methodology employed in the current study is now described.
Methodology
The author is aware that when one asks ‘should’[16], one is asking a question about what ought to be, and the danger with ought-to-be questions is that they frequently result in the expression of mere views, opinions or beliefs of the researcher. As an educationist, the author wished to contribute to scientific dialogue on the main phenomenon being investigated in the current study: the curriculum for educators of adults. Consequently, the criteria for assessing ‘should’ had to be derived from the very essence of the phenomenon of education itself, rather than from unsubstantiated views or opinions of the author. In order to achieve the goal as stated in the previous subparagraph, the author employed the phenomenological approach.
The phenomenological approach
A detailed description of the phenomenological approach[17] is inappropriate, and indeed impossible in this short paper. However, in summary, that the approach requires the author, as far as is humanly possible, to: temporarily suspend all preconceived views, opinions, prejudices and suppositions about what the phenomenon could or should be; describe, uncover or reveal what the phenomenon being studied really is, that is, what the phenomenon in essence is - what it essentially is, and to be scientifically accurate and precise, with regard to structure of thought, choice of terminology and expression of findings.
As already stated, the main phenomenon under consideration in the current study is the curriculum for educators of adults, and the author’s choice of the phenomenological approach was made to confirm the intention not to build theories or models, but to describe as accurately as possible what the curriculum for educators of adults is. The author realised that only if it could be established what the curriculum for educators of adults is, would it be possible to decide what should be included in the curriculum. The distinction between ‘the’ curriculum and ‘a’ curriculum is discussed later in this paper. The intention to describe what is, scientifically, explains the author’s use of the term ‘findings’ in place of ‘views’, ‘opinions’ and ‘beliefs’. A phenomenological study involves the researcher in scientific, fundamental, radical (from Latin radix meaning root) reflection on the phenomenon and a part of this scientific reflection requires a thorough explication of major terms: the results of this explication are now presented.
Explication of terms
Humanness
‘Humanness’ in the current study means, ‘what it means to be human’, and Murray et al.[18] find, as does Gove[19], that ‘humanness’ means ‘... human quality or state of being human ...’. Even though Murray et al. and Gove indicate that humanity’ and ‘humanness’ can be regarded as synonymous, the author selected ‘humanness’ because ‘humanity’, is used in the English language to name another well established concept, namely, the ‘... human race, mankind; human beings collectively: humankind...’.
The term ‘humanness’ was unacceptable for two different reasons: firstly, the fact that ‘humane’ is merely an earlier and now obsolete spelling of ‘human’, makes ‘humanness’ synonymous with ‘humanness’. Secondly, ‘humane’ currently indicates a certain human disposition: that of kindness, benevolence; treating humans and animals with consideration and compassion, and relieving their distress. ‘Humanness’ is preferred to ‘human nature’ because the latter indicates man as merely a complex of fundamental dispositions and traits; merely a physiological, stimulus-response mechanism, which the author[20] and other educationists have found to be an inaccurate description of humans.
‘Humanness’, in the current study is taken to mean ‘what it means to be human’ or similarly, ‘the qualities[21] of being human’. Since much of philosophy is an attempt to find out what humanness is and since many researchers over many centuries have sought answers to what humanness is, an investigation into what humanness is, was outwith the scope[22] of the current study. The author considered that it would be possible to investigate whether or not a study of humanness should be included in the curriculum for educators of adults, without describing in detail what humanness[23] is. Just what is meant by ‘educators of adults’ is now explained.
Educator of adults
‘Educators of adults’ in this paper indicates only those teachers of adults who go about their task intentionally, whose main motive is the betterment of learners, and whose aims are worthwhile. Consequently, educators of adults are involved in teaching that which is worthwhile in a worthwhile manner, that is, they are involved in educative teaching (educating). As Peters[24] has also found, education involves something worthwhile and the relationship between ‘worthwhile’ and humanness will be further explained later in this paper. ‘Educators of adults’ also indicates student educators, that is, those undertaking study to become educators of adults. Just as a distinction is made between teachers and educators, the author considers it necessary to distinguish between learners and educands. ‘Educands’ identifies learners who intend to learn something educative (worthwhile), and whose goal is consequently, to become better educated. Although ‘educators of adults’ may be considered a more clumsy term than ‘adult educators’, the latter is ambiguous meaning both educators who are adults and educators of adults. Consequently, ‘educators of adults’ is used throughout this paper. Those whose task it is to facilitate the further education of educators, are referred to as educators of educators. It cannot be denied, that before assessing whether or not something should be included in the curriculum, understanding of what the curriculum is, must be achieved.
The curriculum
As already explained, the phenomenological approach requires penetrating to the roots of what the phenomenon is: in the current study, what it actually is that humans name with the words ‘the curriculum’. However, in order to fulfil this requirement, a major study would have been necessary to clarify the extensive haphazard use of terminology and ungrounded definitions[25] and to assess the accuracy of the numerous theories and models in much of the literature in Curriculum Studies/Theory. The results of a study of the kind just described would have been impossible to report in a short paper and at this stage the author merely describes the concept of the curriculum used in the current study without explaining why some of the other concepts named by ‘the curriculum’ have not been used.
Van Zyl and Duminy[26] observing ‘curriculum’ to be derived from Latin currere meaning to run, find that: ‘The curriculum includes the whole study programme to be followed to reach a certain goal’.[27] Hirst[28] makes a similar finding, stressing that the curriculum is not merely to do with subject matter. In the sense just described, the curriculum is always ‘for’ people and indeed, for people who wish to follow a certain course of study. Consequently, the curriculum in the current study was found to be the course or programme of study one must follow to achieve a certain goal. The definition just given is consistent with the findings of other researchers[29] who have found the curriculum to be a set of experiences or, the whole learning situation[30]. It is still, however, convenient to refer to subjects in the curriculum because in the practice of educating, a set of experiences is grouped within a content area and given a corresponding subject name such as ‘chemistry’ or ‘adult education’.
Just as a distinction was made between educators and teachers and educands and learners, so in the current study, only the educative curriculum is considered. The educative curriculum is the course of study (set of experiences) which is educative (worthwhile)[31]: consequently, educators and educands, teaching and learning the curriculum have the respective aims of educating and becoming more educated[32]. The author does not use the term ‘educative curriculum’ in the title of this paper because the term ‘educators of adults’ implies an educative curriculum. While ‘a’ curriculum indicates a specific, particular and actual curriculum, that is, the actual experiences provided on a particular course in a particular institution, ‘the’ curriculum indicates what should or ought to be provided and is the ideal specified by the nature of education itself. Just how far ‘the’ (ideal) curriculum becomes reality in ‘a’ (particular) curriculum would depend on a number of practical constraints. However, it cannot be denied that even if there were no practical constraints, actualisation of the curriculum in a curriculum would not take place if the educators’ knowledge of what education is, was inadequate. All practical constraints, except that of the educators’ knowledge of what education is, were outwith the scope of the current study and are not discussed in this paper.
As already stated, educators have as their main aim the betterment of their educands. Educators of adults can themselves be regarded as educands who follow a curriculum to become more educated, so that they can better educate their adult educands[33] . Consequently, ‘the curriculum’ for educators of adults now means: those subjects (sets of experiences) which educators of adults ought to study if they wish to enhance the educativeness of their teaching activities, whether formal or informal, thereby becoming better educators of adults. It cannot be denied that for educators of adults to become better educators, choices must be made regarding what experiences the educator requires to become a better educator. It is also undeniable that the choices just referred to require an understanding of what it means to be (how to be) a better educator of adults: in short, what it means to educate adults.
Relating what has just been stated to the curriculum, if it can be shown that to be educative a curriculum requires to have a particular subject included in it, then the curriculum is not an educative one if that subject is omitted. If educators of adults require certain experiences to enable them to be better educators, but those experiences are omitted from their curriculum, then it can be said that that curriculum is not educative, the ‘educators’ of the educators are not educating ( as the quotation marks indicate) and the educators of adults themselves are not being educated. If it is found that educators of adults cannot obtain an accurate understanding of how to be better educators of adults without a study of humanness, then, humanness should be included in the curriculum. The research question in the current study, can now be further explicated as follows: if a study of humanness is omitted from the curriculum for educators of adults, are the educators of adults enabled to become better educators (does education of the educators take place)? Having now explicated some of the more important terms used in the current study and further clarified the research question, the main findings[34] can be presented.
Worthwhileness, education, humanness and the curriculum
It has already been shown that choice of experiences for inclusion in the curriculum for educators of adults, requires understanding of what it means to educate adults, that is, what it means to educate or, what education is. As already explained, to educate means to be involved in, and achieving something worthwhile. Consequently, to continue the search for an answer to whether or not a study of humanness should be included in the curriculum for educators of adults, the author had to seek what is worthwhile in the context of education of adults. Verduin[35] makes a similar finding and the author considers that Kelly[36] reports a similar finding when he states that the main task facing curriculum planners is to ‘... work out a basis on which some total scheme can be built ..’. [37]
The author attempted to find out what is worthwhile in the context of education of adults by examining: (a) the general ideas that people[38] have of what educators and educands should be aiming for, (b) what educators of the educators consider should be the aims of educators of adults[39] , (c) the particular[40] and, (d) the universal needs, as found by Maslow[41] , that adult educands bring to education for alleviation. In seeking what is worthwhile in the ways just described, the author found that education is considered worthwhile because it:
(a) facilitates complete living, promotes the highest intellectual and moral development and liberates the human spirit, for example;
(b) facilitates educators becoming more supportive, friendly, sensitive to others[42], and reassuring, and respectful of dignity[43], for example;
(c ) helps adult educands to create something[44], find employment[45], help their children with school work and to overcome the fear of going senile[46], for example;
(d) satisfies physiological, safety, love and belonging, esteem, self-actualisation and knowing and understanding needs.
It might be considered that the findings just stated explain what is worthwhile in the context of education of adults. However, by asking several, more fundamental questions, the apparent explanations of worthwhileness are shown to be inadequate. For example:
(a) Why is facilitating complete living, promoting the highest intellectual and moral development and liberation of the human spirit, considered worthwhile?
(b) Why is facilitating educators becoming more supportive, friendly, sensitive to others and reassuring and respectful of dignity, considered worthwhile? Why is the experiencing of competent transmission of information not sufficient for adult educands? Why do educators consider it worthwhile for educands to experience respect for their dignity, approachableness, sensitiveness to their needs and encouragement?
(c) Why is helping adult educands to create something, find employment, help their children with school work and to overcome the fear of going senile, considered worthwhile? Why do people want to experience creating something and helping their children with school work?
(d) Why is achieving esteem and self-actualisation, for example, considered worthwhile? Why do people wish to experience esteem and self-actualisation? Maslow[47] himself, in explaining how difficult it is to define self-actualisation asks: ‘Beyond self-actualisation, what?’
Although final or absolute answers are not possible, questions like those just asked do indicate that although many people express symptomatic[48] reasons for participating in education, there are fundamental, real[49], meta[50] or ontic (Being)[51] needs which underlie them. The author is not implying that alleviation of symptomatic needs is any less important to the educand than the alleviation of fundamental needs, but it is safe to state that most people are unlikely to be consciously aware of their fundamental (ontic) needs. On considering the fundamental questions just asked, the author found that only humans would be involved in the activities stated in the questions and that only humans are capable of asking such questions. Consequently, the fundamental questions can be included under one umbrella question: What does it mean to be human? Or, synonymously: What is humanness? Answers to the fundamental questions will, therefore, identify fundamental human needs and simultaneously provide a part-description of what humanness is. The author has used ‘part-description’ in the previous sentence because a description of what humanness is, would entail not only identifying fundamental needs, but also identifying what is required to alleviate them. It can be safely stated that the complex and never-final seeking to identify fundamental needs and what is required to alleviate them, constitutes a study of humanness[52] .