The Valuing Process as a Holistic and Integrated Approach to SESSION 5
Values Education: Model, Challenges and Implications
The APNIEVE Sourcebook, Learning To Be, envisions an educative process that is bothholistic and integrative in approach. The underlying belief is that, only in this very contextwill the learner truly experience the art of being fully human and reach their full potential, instead of learning it merelyas an idea and/or ideal.
This poses, however, a great challenge to the educator. Howthe educator will successfully guide and facilitate the learner’s ability to actualize the verycore values that lead to this experience would require great sensitivity (sense-ability) andresponsibility (response-ability).
Firstly, one needs to reconsider the kind of learningapproaches and atmosphere or learning environment appropriate to the learner. Secondly, one needs to possessan understanding and mastery of the dynamics involved in the process of valuesdevelopment.
The traditional model of values education has placed greater emphasis on the content ofvalues instead of on the valuer, the one choosing and acting on the values. Theapproach is more teacher-centred, where the educator is seen as both the possessor ofknowledge (an expert) and the model of values (an idol). The responsibility therefore,largely rests on the educator. The learner simply adopts a more passive role, merelyabsorbing the material being handed down.
In the humanistic model however, there is a shift. The stress is from content- to process-based; values-focused to valuer-focused and teacher-centred to student-centred orientation. Thegreater part of the learning this time will involve the valuing process where a dynamicinteraction within the individual learner (and educator) and between each other occurs.
Figure 1 is one model that illustrates the valuing process. Here, the educator awakensthe consciousness of the learners in terms of their responsibility as the valuers, the ones who determine their own value system. This is achieved by inviting the learners to lookinward to their inner self and to examine how the various systems of which they are apart, have had an influence on their development of values.
These systems include thefamily unit, the school, their place of worship, the workplace, the community, the nation, the worldand even cosmic realities, i.e. the experience of a higher power.
This implies that the educators must themselves be attuned to and updated with thedifferent systems, including the intra-personal system, and their potential effects on thelearner. Hopefully, this kind of examination will increase the learners’ consciousness, notonly with their outer realities, but also with their inner realities.
In the process, the learners eventually realize their ability to work towards personalintegration, wholeness and a sense of harmony within. This means that the values theyprofess in the cognitive level will be filtered down to the affective as well as thebehavioural, thereby making them authentic persons who are true to themselves and reaching their full potential.
This also involves effort in finding consistency between the values one personally upholds, with the values that one’s externalrealities promote, i.e. cultural norms, peer group, family and societal expectations, roles undertaken etc.
The learning experience of the valuing process will inevitably heighten thelearner’s self-awareness, which eventually also leads to an increase in self-identity andself-direction. Consequently, one becomes more fully empowered to take on the role andresponsibility of influencing and contributing to the community.
The valuing process therefore, necessitates experiential learning. The educator simplyprovides the learning opportunity and context from which genuine exploration,expression and discovery may freely occur. In the end, learners act on the values thatthey consciously choose and own. The educator serves both as an enrichment and a guide to the learner’s owndiscernment experience.
Challenges for the Values Educator
Actualizing the valuing process entails several challenges and has certainimplications. The following are some challenges for the educator to reflect upon.
1 Reaching the valuing level
The first challenge for the educator is to engage the learner in the following mutually reinforcing processes:
- acquisition of facts and information
- conceptual understanding and analysis of ideas
- valuing and appreciating – finding personal meaning
- skill development for integration to habits and behaviours.
For a concept to be turned into action, it must firstfind its way into our value system through personal meaning. Knowing or understanding a value concept does not guarantee its internalization in the learner towards action.
When learners have experiences, whether personally or vicariously, a value may then become meaningful to them. Only then does the value becomeactualized as one’s own. For instance, the value of health is given utmost importance when one experiences the potential threat of losing it.
Educators ought not underestimate the importance of the affective dimension in the
process of valuing. According to Dr L. R Quisumbing: “It is not what we know that we do. It is what we want that we do.”Dr. Antonio V. Ulgadodefines values as “ideas that areemotionally fired.” Seldom, however, do educators ask the learners what they want.
Often questions are limited to what learners should know. Today, the valuing processdiscovers its ally in the area of Emotional Intelligence. While education of the mind isessential, this should be coupled with the education of the heart. How a learner reactsaffectively to experiences is an essential dimension to examine and from which to learn.
Oftentimes, the affective part becomes the block from which the actualization of a valuethat is deemed essential in the head will be lived out in action. One can easily claim that service vocation as a value is important, but not act upon it due to one’s fear of rejection.
Values education is not values transmission or moral education as these do not necessarily lead the learner towards personal integration. The valuing process ensures that the learning of values will not stop at thecognitive level. Rather, these must be subjected to a process by which the integrationand internalization of values occurs.
In a structured learning game suchas the Broken Square for example, learners are challenged to form a square puzzle withthe individual pieces provided them in the fastest time possible. This can be anenjoyable and enriching strategy to engage learners in realizing the value of cooperation.
However, knowing that cooperation is an important value, is just an initial step in a longprocess of ensuring that cooperation will be one’s internal disposition in the face of interpersonal conflict and intolerance.
2Structuring clarifying processes
The second challenge for the educator who seeks an integrative and holistic approach to education is to structure processes in the learning environment where thelearner’s personal values are examined and clarified.
Valuing consists of seven sub-processes:
Prizing one’s beliefs and behaviours
1. Prizing and cherishing
2. Publicly affirming, when appropriate
Choosing one’s beliefs and behaviours
3. Choosing from alternatives
4. Choosing after consideration of consequences
5. Choosing freely
Acting on one’s beliefs
6. Acting
7. Acting with a pattern, consistency and repetition
These suggested steps invite the learner to carefully examine three importantdimensions:
Firstly, it leads learners in an inquiry into their Cognitive Structure, mindset or level of consciousness. The valuing process invites thelearners to examine their thinking process.
The meaning/s that learners place on reality form the basis of their value judgment. How learners determine what isright or wrong, the meaning of their existence, what they consider to be essential for life and living, would be the context from which their decisions are made.Some may possess wide and encompassing ways of looking at the world, while others maybe narrow and limited.
The roles of the educator here are manifold:
- to facilitate thelearner’s awareness of their cognitive basis for value decisions,
- to examine andquestion this cognitive base and the corresponding choices,
- to dialogue with the learneron certain value issues, and
- to expand both the learner’s and educator’s ways oflooking at the world, to arrive at more informed choices.
Secondly, the process invites the learners to study their Affective Life. How learners react on the affective level to different realities varies in form and intensity. To examine these reactions will lead to insights intothe learner’s unique emotional history and personal dynamics. Here, the educator may need to assess whether the affective dimension may hinder or facilitate the living of certainvalues.
Thirdly, the educator facilitates reflection of the learner’s Behavioural Patterns. Behaviours ultimately reveal values and priorities, so the educator invites learners to look into how they act and what they do and say. Self observation enables learners to develop congruence and consistencybetween words, intentions and actions.
The following strategies (Simon, Howe, Kirschenbaum. Values Clarification, 1972) areexamples that illustrate how the valuing process may be facilitated.
a) Values Voting
This strategy is a rapid method to check the learner’s stand on variousissues and to affirm it to others.
(Ask learners to vote on current issues by raising their hand)
b) Values Ranking
This strategy challenges the learner to thoughtfully considerdecisions among alternatives and to clarify priorities. (eg Ask “Which of these do you prefer?”)
c) Forced Choices
This strategy is a variation of values ranking, but compels thelearner to choose between two competing, attractive alternatives. (eg “Do you prefer this or that?”)
d) Values Continuum
This strategy provides the learner with a greater range of choiceson issues that are not clear-cut and to view situations from multiple perspectives.
(eg Ask “How would you handle this situation? As Spectator, As Participant)
e)Strongly Agree/Strongly Disagree
This strategy helps the learner examine thestrength of their feelings about an issue by asking them to circle theresponse that indicates most accurately how they feel about acontentious statement.
SA = Strongly Agree
AS = Agree Somewhat
DS = Disagree Somewhat
SD = Strongly Disagree
f) Value Whips
This strategy poses questions and issues for the learner to consider.The questions are normally about matters that the learner would generally take for granted. For example:
“What would you be willing to work hard for?”
g) Unfinished Sentences
This strategy brings to the surfacevalues manifested in their attitudes, interests, convictions, likes, dislikes, goals, etc. (eg Ask, “If I were able to completely rid myself of fears, I would…. “)
h) Autobiographical Questionnaires
This strategy facilitates awareness of thelearner’s life patterns. For example, “Recall the various significant events that have helped you become the person you are today.”
i) Pictures Without Caption/Freedom Board
This strategy allows the learners freedomof expression to explore their current thinking and feelingprocesses. For example “Write your reactions to the cover of this magazine.”
Or “Feel freeto write on this board anything you wish to express.”
j) Coded Papers
This strategy teaches the learners to become critical in their reading of for example newspaper or internet articles. Learners are invited to indicate a (+) sign against ideas they favour and a (-) sign for ideas they do not favour, followed by discussion.
These strategies are merely tools to help learners clarify their values, leading them to the valuing process beyond facts and concepts.
3Personal Integration
The third challenge for the educator is to lead learners to personal integration.
The educator ensures that learners get in touch with their personal values and compare themwith the values of the systems to which they belong. Clarifying personal values therefore, is not an end in itself. The learners may need guidance in reconciling their values with those of the systems to whichthey belong. In addition, theymay need to seek consistency within their internal system,(i.e. moral and spiritual consciousness, ideals and aspirations etc). The task therefore, isto bridge gaps that may exist in the process of discovery.
As the learnerasks “who am I really?” and “who am I expected to be?”there may be many areas of integration to work on (eg ideal self vs. actual self; role self vs. true self; social self vs. real self).
The valuing process does not merely bring about awareness; it also invites personal effort in resolving internal conflicts. In theprocess, the ideal may be bridged with the actual, if the learner is also taught skills in resolving internal conflict.
The learner is also challenged to identify priority values since not all values need to be integrated. Only those values are chosen that match the preferred lifestyle. As Sue Bender (Plain and Simple, 1996) states: “There is abig difference between having many choices and making a choice. Making a choice –declaring what is essential to you – creates a framework for a life that eliminates manychoices but gives meaning to what remains.”Learners are then empowered tomake a difference.
What matters most in this process is the learner’s confidence and ability now to define his or her own life. Ultimately “empowerment is about who does the defining and whoaccepts the definitions.” (Dorothy Rowe cited in Davies, Philippa, Personal Power, 1996)
4Providing democratic space in the learningenvironment
The fourth challenge is for educators to guarantee a democratic space in the learningenvironment for learners. By doing so, the atmosphere for psychological honesty and truthfulness isestablished. Many educators when asking questions are simply waiting for the learnersto articulate the expected responses. Therefore, learners tend to say things, which theythink their teachers would like to hear. They do not genuinely report what they think andfeel. Without this honesty though, any sincere effort at valuing will be in vain.
The educator is challenged to be open, sincere, genuine, non-judgmental and non-threateningso that learners find the freedom to be themselves. This does not meanthat the educator can’t disagree with a learner’s value. In fact, real dialogueabout issues can be achieved as a result of an atmosphere of openness and honesty.Values are therefore shared, not imposed, in the context of meaningful interactionsbetween the educator and learner.
5Modeling the values
Finally, the educator becomes a model for the learner. However, the modeling is notone of perfection or full embodiment of the values, but of striving to be integrated and whole. This way, the learner isinspired to work towards ideals without denying limitations or weaknesses. The learning environment becomes a human and humane place. This requires educators to be willing to invest themselves in the learning process.As the learner is being enriched, the educator learns from this as well, creating a dialogical process.
A MODEL OF THE VALUING PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT OF
THE TEACHING AND LEARNING CYCLE
Since the valuing process is a holistic and integrated approach, all learner faculties need to be tapped and developed. In this light, theTeaching and Learning Cycle in Figure 1 (p6) is appropriate as both a reference and a model.
A four-step process is proposed, which includes:
Step One: Cognitive Level – Knowing
Valuing does not exist in a vacuum. It needs a knowledge base from which values may be explored and discerned. This levelbasically introduces specific values to look into andexamine. How these values affect the self and others, our behaviours, culture, history,country is suggested for the learners to consider. Knowing, however, is within theparameters of facts and information. We therefore need to move to the second step.
Step Two: Conceptual Level – Understanding
In the cycle, a distinction is madebetween knowledge and understanding which leads to wisdom, when combined with meaning and values. Knowledge may be easily transmitted by the educator and in turn quicklymemorized by learners. However, learnersfirst need to understand and gaininsight.
Brian Hall (Value Development, 1982) refers to wisdom as“intimate knowledge of objective and subjective realities, which converge into thecapacity to clearly comprehend persons and systems and their inter-relationships.”Concepts that are analysed, understood and applied by learners may be grasped more fully and easilyby them.
Step Three: Affective Level – Valuing
As discussed in previous sections, knowing andunderstanding are not guarantees that values are internalized and integrated. Thethird step, therefore, ensures that the value concepts are filtered through one’sexperiences and reflections and are eventually affirmed in the affective dimension.
Inshort, these concepts will flow through the three processes: chosen, prized and actedupon. Since teaching and learning is conducted on a group level, the additional benefit ofthis step is the appreciation, acceptance and respect of both one’s own value system andthose of others.
Step Four: Active Level – Acting
The value concepts that are valued ultimately lead toaction. Whether the action is expressed in improved communication skills, betterdecision-making, non-violent conflict resolution, etc., the value concepts find their wayinto our behaviours. The affective is the driver and the motivator for action.
The learners are thereby challenged to see through thespontaneous flow of the concept and affective dimension into behavioural manifestations.Sometimes, this is automatic. Other times, it involves further skills enhancement in theparticular area.
Figure 1The Valuing Process
Although the steps presented appear to follow a logical sequence, they are by no meanssequential. This means, creativity could allow the interface or reordering of suchprocesses. Our example below will illustrate this.
The following is a sample model of how the Valuing Process may be implemented in thecontext of this Teaching and Learning Cycle. The core values involved are peace andjustice, while its related values are non-violence, cooperation, collaboration, and respectfor human rights. These values will be presented in relation to how people respond toconflict and why a collaborative problem-solving approach is suggested.