A CONVERSATION ON CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT OR MANAGING ANY CHALLENGING HUMAN BEHAVIOR, IN CONTEXT OF ADLERIAN PSYCHOLOGY - sudhanshu

GOOD DAY ......... !!!!!!

JUST OUT OF FUN TODAY …………

A CONVERSATION ON CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT OR MANAGING ANY CHALLENGING HUMAN BEHAVIOR, IN CONTEXT OF ADLERIAN PSYCHOLOGY

NAMRATA – Today I want to talk to you about CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT OR MANAGING ANY CHALLENGING HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN CONTEXT OF ADLERIAN PSYCHOLOGY…….

SUDHANSHU – I made a categorical statement the other day – and I am saying it again – THAT ONE SHOULD NOT ENTER THE CLASSROOM BE IT KINDERGARTEN OR PHD, WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF ADLERIAN PSYCHOLOGY. In fact at a more macro level one should not be in education sector without a course in Adlerian Psychology.

NAMRATA : Before coming to the decision to visit you once more today, that is to say, before making the firm resolution to abandon Adler, I went through a great deal of distress. It troubled me more than you can imagine. That’s how attractive Adler’s ideas were to me. But the fact is that at the same time as I was attracted to them, I was harbouring doubts all along. And those doubts concern the name ‘Adlerian psychology’ itself.

SUDHANSHU : Hmm. What do you mean?

NAMRATA : As the name ‘Adlerian psychology’ indicates, Adler’s ideas are regarded as psychology. And, as far as I am aware, psychology is essentially a science. When it comes to the opinions put forth by Adler, however, there are aspects that strike me as decidedly unscientific. Of course, as this is an area of study that deals with the psyche, it might not be completely expressible in mathematical form. That I understand perfectly well. But the problem, you see, is that Adler talks about people in terms of ‘ideals’. He’s offering up the same kind of cloying sermons that Christians do when they preach about neighbourly love. Which brings me to my first question: do you think of Adlerian psychology as a ‘science’?

SUDHANSHU : If you are speaking of a strict definition of science, that is to say, a science that has falsifiability, then no, it is not. Adler declared his psychology to be a ‘science’, but when he began talking about his concept of ‘social feeling’, many of his colleagues parted ways with him. Their judgement was much like yours: ‘That sort of thing isn’t science.’

NAMRATA : Right. That’s a natural response for anyone who is interested in psychology as a science.

SUDHANSHU : THIS IS AN ONGOING AREA OF DEBATE, BUT FREUD’S PSYCHOANALYSIS, JUNG’S ANALYTICAL PSYCHOLOGY AND ADLER’S INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY ALL HAVE ASPECTS THAT COME INTO CONFLICT WITH SUCH A DEFINITION OF SCIENCE IN THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE FALSIFIABILITY. THIS IS A FACT.

NAMRATA : Okay, I see. I’ve brought my notebook with me today. I’m going to get this down in writing. That strictly speaking . . . it is not science! Now to my next question: three years ago, you referred to Adler’s ideas as ‘another philosophy’, did you not?

SUDHANSHU : You are correct, I did. I think of Adlerian psychology as a way of thinking that follows in the same vein as Greek philosophy and is itself a philosophy. I think the same way about Adler himself. Before regarding him as a psychologist, I see him as a person who puts his expertise to practical use in clinical settings. This is my perception.

THE CLASSROOM IS A DEMOCRATIC NATION

NAMRATA : In this world, the past does not exist. One must not get drunk on the cheap wine of tragedy. The only thing we should be talking to each other about is ‘What should be done from now on?’ Okay, I’ll go along with this premise. The issue I’ll be facing from now on, I suppose, is the kind of teaching I put into practice in my school. So, I’m going to get into this area of discussion right away. You’re okay with that, right?

SUDHANSHU: Of course.

NAMRATA: All right. Earlier you said that the concrete first step is to ‘Start from respect’, right? This is what I want to ask you about. Do you think that just by bringing respect into the classroom, that will solve everything? In other words, that the students will stop making any trouble?

SUDHANSHU: That won’t solve things on its own. There will still be trouble.

NAMRATA: Then, I’ll have to yell at them after all, won’t I? Because they’re still engaging in bad conduct and being a nuisance to other students.

SUDHANSHU: No, you must not rebuke them.

NAMRATA: So you’re saying I should just let them do bad things right under my nose and not do anything about it? But that’s no different from saying that a thief shouldn’t be caught and punished, now is it? Would Adler accept such lawlessness?

SUDHANSHU: Adler’s view is not one that ignores laws or rules. That is, as long as they are rules that have been created through a democratic process. This is an extremely important point, both for society as a whole and for running a classroom. NAMRATA: A democratic process?

SUDHANSHU: Yes. Think of your classroom as a democratic nation.

NAMRATA: Huh! What do you mean?

SUDHANSHU: The sovereignty of a democratic nation is with its people, right? This is the principle of ‘national sovereignty’, where ‘Sovereign power rests with the people.’ The people, who are sovereign, establish all manner of rules on the basis of mutual consent, and those rules are applied equally to all citizens. It is for that reason that they can observe the rules. Rather than simply obeying the rules, they can observe them more actively, as ‘our rules’. On the other hand, what happens when rules are established according to someone’s solitary judgement, rather than on the basis of citizen consensus, and when, furthermore, those rules are enforced very unequally?

NAMRATA: Well, you can bet the people won’t be quiet about it.

SUDHANSHU: Then, to suppress a rebellion, the ruler would have no choice but to exercise tangible and intangible powers. This is something that concerns not only the nation, but the corporation and the family, too. An organisation in which someone is using their power to suppress has irrationality at its foundation.

NAMRATA: Hmm. I see.

SUDHANSHU: The same goes for the classroom. The sovereign of the classroom-nation is not the teacher—it’s the students. And the rules of the classroom must be established on the basis of consensus from the students, who are sovereign. Let us start with this principle in mind.

NAMRATA: As usual, you’re making things so complicated. So, what you’re saying is that the students should be allowed to govern themselves? Our school already has a regular system of self-government in place, with a student council and such.

SUDHANSHU: No, I am talking about something more fundamental. If, for example, we think of the classroom as a nation, then the students are the citizens. What would be the position of the teacher, then?

NAMRATA: Well, if you’re saying the students are the citizens, I suppose the teacher would be the prime minister or president who acts as their leader.

SUDHANSHU: But that doesn’t seem right, does it? Were you chosen by the students in an election? And if you were to call yourself a president without having gone through an election, it wouldn’t be a democratic nation. It would just be a dictatorship.

NAMRATA: I guess so. Logically speaking, anyway.

SUDHANSHU: I am not talking about logic, but about reality. The classroom is not a dictatorship that is ruled over by the teacher. It is a democratic nation in which each and every student is sovereign. Teachers who forget this principle set up a dictatorship without even realising it.

NAMRATA: Ha-ha! So, you’re saying I’ve got fascistic leanings?

SUDHANSHU: If you put it in extreme terms, yes. The fact that your classroom has got out of control is not the problem of your students individually. And you are not insufficiently qualified as a teacher. It is only that the situation there is akin to a corrupted dictatorship—that is why it is out of control. An organisation that is under the command of a dictator cannot escape corruption.

NAMRATA: Stop making accusations! On what grounds can you make such criticisms?

SUDHANSHU: The grounds are quite clear. It is on the basis of that ‘reward and punishment’, which you insist is necessary.

NAMRATA: What are you talking about?

SUDHANSHU: You’d like to talk about this, yes? The subject of praising and rebuking.

NAMRATA: It’s funny that you’re the one who’s throwing down the gauntlet. Because I’ve gained a fair amount of experience of teaching, especially in classrooms. I’m going to make you take back those extremely rude accusations, you can count on it!

SUDHANSHU: All right, let’s talk it over to our hearts’ content, next time.

To be Continued ……… The subject of praising and rebuking.

MUCH LOVE

Sudhanshu