The Humanist Approach to Learning

All of the approaches to learning discussed so far in this chapter have dealt with how people acquire various skills and knowledge. The humanist approach to learning dif­fers from the others in that it focuses on the affective or emotional components of learning (Kohn, 1991). The goals of the humanist approach are to enable students to express themselves creatively, to understand and cope with their feelings, and to be­come independent learners (Scotti, 1993). From a humanist perspective, teachers should be less concerned with what students learn than that they learn how to learn and develop positive attitudes toward learning and self-esteem.

Critics have frequently attacked schools for the rigid way in which instruction often takes place. They argue that teachers typically control all learning that takes place in the class­room and prevent students from expressing themselves in creative ways. As a result, many students form negative attitudes toward learning and fail to learn very much. More importantly, the critics claim, many students never really learn how to learn, so that after they leave school, they are ill equipped to cope with new situations.

The principal educational goals of the humanist approach to learning are that students become independent learners and develop into emotionally healthy individu­als. Humanists believe teachers should help students achieve "self-actualization" and "congruence". According to hu­manists, people are constantly seeking to fulfill their potential; the role of teachers is to remove obstacles that prevent students from reaching their potential and to help students feel a sense of self-determination.

The most radical aspect of the humanist approach is the central role students play in deciding for themselves what they will learn, which is often called student-centered teaching. The teacher's role shifts from that of instructor to that of facilitator. Teachers suggest various activities that students might want to engage in and provide assorted materials for them to use. The student, however, not the teacher, makes the final choice. Self-regulation of learning has a powerful effect on students' motivation to learn.

Open Education

The humanist approach to learning formed the basis for the open education move­ment, which was especially popular in the 1960s. (You may have noticed that most of the publications cited above about humanism were from the 1960s, the heyday of this approach.) Open education is a term that is somewhat loosely applied to educational settings in which students largely take charge of their own learning and where creativity and emotional growth are emphasized.

The best-known example of open education occurred at Summerhill, an En­glish school established by A. S. Neill (1960). At Summerhill, teachers and students enjoyed equal rights. Summerhill constituted a nonthreatening environment in which students were never forced to learn or study. Creativity of expression was stressed, and there were no report cards or grades. As with most attempts at open education, there is no solid research evidence concerning the effects of Summerhill on its students.

Open education found its way to the United States in the form of the open class­room, in which elementary classrooms were designed with numerous activity centers, sometimes called "learning stations," where students could choose to work. Despite the desirability of focusing on the emotional aspects of learning, the open classroom has not achieved a secure place in our schools. One problem has been the lack of a precise definition. The term open classroom has been applied to educational settings that may be nontraditional, but that nevertheless differ markedly.

Research has shown that open education does not improve student learning, but it does seem to have a beneficial effect on affective outcomes (e.g., self-esteem, attitude toward school, and social adjustment) and on creativity.

SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE