Stout, M. (2000). The feel-good curriculum: the dumbing down of America's kids in the name of self-esteem.

Stout, M. (2000). The feel-good curriculum: The dumbing down of America's kids in the name of self-esteem. Cambridge, MA: Perseus. (313 pp., $16.00 paper, ISBN 0-7382-0435-8)

Please read the title again! Yes, this is one of those very rare VIP books (Very Incorrect Politically)! As the title clearly illustrates, the author does not hold her punches. This book is a direct and very polemic indictment of the self-esteem movement in North American schools. Stout's goal is clear and simple: debunk the beliefs and myths disseminated by those "false prophets" who have made self-esteem one of the major goals of public education. Considering her own acknowledgement of the movement's influence on all aspects of education, that modern David is facing an awesome and very entrenched Goliath!

The breadth of the book's contents as well as the diversity of the arguments make it difficult to summarize all the themes covered in the three parts and nine chapters. Instead of the usual chapter-by-chapter overview, I will highlight those I found most interesting. Stout sets the scene in Chapter One by describing the main ideas and negative impacts of the self-esteem movement. Noting the lack of a clear empirical definition by the promoters of that ideology, she offers the following approximation: "the high value [we put] on ourselves, whether we deserve it or not. Put crudely, this view of self-esteem means feeling good for no good reason [italics in text]. It is entirely divorced from any concept of merit" (p. 12).

The most detailed description of the self-esteem movement's "dangerous" ideas appears in Chapter Six, in the form of ten myths, each one described and criticized in detail. Space does not allow more than their listing.

1. High expectations for students are damaging for their self-esteem.

2. Evaluation (grading, testing, report cards) is punitive, stressful, and damaging to self-esteem.

3. Teaching and learning must always be "relevant" and student-centered.

4. Effort is more important than achievement.

5. Competition leads to low self-esteem and should be replaced by cooperation.

6. Students should be promoted from one grade to the next, irrespective of achievement (social promotion) in order to preserve their self-esteem.

7. Discipline is bad for self-esteem and should therefore be dispensed with.

8. Teachers should be therapists.

9. It is the teacher's, not the student's, responsibility to ensure learning.

10. Feeling is more important than thinking.

The chapter I found most fascinating is the fifth one, entitled "Nothing more than feelings: The naked truth about self-esteem." It reviews the empirical evidence about the impact of serf-esteem on various educational and social outcomes (e.g., achievement, motivation, dropping out, delinquency, drug abuse, etc.). Stout summarizes a series of published reviews of the scientific literature whose conclusions converge: little evidence exists to support the view that self-esteem plays a major causal role in educational and social outcomes. Citing, among others, a massive literature review by Kahne (1996), she observes: "Although an enormous amount has been written about self-esteem, there is precious little in the way of evidence regarding its efficacy in these areas. On the contrary: The preponderance of the data illustrate that self-esteem is irrelevant in all areas of education" (p. 121).

The lion's share of her critique targets a major political endeavor put together in 1986 by several members of the California legislature, and called the California Task Force on Self-esteem. Its goal was to demonstrate the importance of this concept in virtually all aspects of society and education. The resulting report (Mecca, Smelser, & Vasconcellos, 1989) titled "The social importance of self-esteem" includes various chapters that review most of the empirical research on the subject. Here are a few quotes by Stout from that report. "If feelings of self-esteem are so important to achievement, then why is the demonstrated relationship between self-esteem and academic achievement so uniformly low?" (p. 79); "The vast body of quantitative studies does not establish level of self esteem as a cause of crime and violence" (p. 177); "The widely held assumption that low self-esteem has predictable behavioral consequences that are necessarily associated with low motivation or lack of initiative or social responsibility is not supported by the empirical literature" (p. 223); "There is a paucity of good research, especially studies that could link the abuse of alcohol and drugs with self-esteem" (p. 320). In a nutshell, according to Stout, the scientific content of the report directly contradicts its title! These reviews consistently mention two major methodological flaws of the self-esteem research effort. First, the concept is not clearly defined and validly measured; second, the direction of causality--is self-esteem a cause or an outcome--remains ambiguous.

The three chapters of the last part of Stout's book focus on four major detrimental effects of the self-esteem ideology: narcissism, separatism, emotivism, and cynicism. Narcissism is described as an excessive preoccupation with oneself that leads to a diminished interest in other people's ideas. Stout's antidote: efforts to develop empathy. Separatism follows directly from narcissism, making individuals and groups isolate themselves from others. Think of the increasing time youngsters and adults devote to playing video games and surfing the Internet. At the group level, too much focus on group identity in the name of self-esteem (e.g., ethnic, gender) often leads to group rivalries and frictions. Stout's antidote: building community and interpersonal relations. Emotivism means "viewing the world primarily from the perspective of one's emotions rather than one's intellect" (p. 220). It fosters anti-intellectual habits, a non-dissociation between (subjective) personal values and (objective) public virtues, thus a rejection of moral education. The antidote: resurrecting moral education at home and at school. Finally, cynicism, an outgrowth of emotivism, promotes the post-constructivist thesis that all ideas are equal and that therefore there is no truth, only opinion; consequently, there is nothing to believe in and no point in believing. Stout argues that when students "discover that no one really cares about their achievement, that they can go on to the next grade without even mastering their current curriculum, and that acting out in class is viewed almost with approbation, the seeds of cynicism are sown" (p. 263). She notes that cynicism goes hand in hand with politically correct thinking. Her antidote: developing instead skepticism, defined as a critical and questioning approach to learning that always keeps hope of truth-finding alive.

Stout writes very clearly and convincingly. Her frequent shows of emotion result from her accumulated anger at seeing how the tentacles of the self-esteem ideology have impregnated all aspects of the school life. Although I sometimes disagreed with judgments she made about issues, or with the intensity of her condemnations, I did feel through most of the book that the core of her thesis brought a new clarity to many long-held beliefs and intuitions about schooling. Thanks to numerous examples and anecdotes, it was also very interesting to read. Whether this review makes you react positively or negatively, I would recommend reading the book. Those who feel attuned to the thesis will find strong support for many of their own views, and those who lean toward the self-esteem movement with find many occasions to ponder the underlying premises of their endorsement.

REFERENCES

Kahne, J. (1996). The politics of self-esteem. American Education Research Journal, 33, 3-22.

Mecca, A. M., Smelser, N. J., & Vasconcellos, J. (Eds.) (1989). The social importance of self-esteem. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Francoys Gagne, Ph. D., Honorary professor of Psychology (retired), Universite du Quebec a Montreal.