1
Cardinal Clancy Centre for Research in the Spiritual,
Moral, Religious and Pastoral Dimensions of Education
Spiritual, Moral and Religious Education is a key area of Research and Teaching in Australian Catholic University
The Future of Holistic Education: The Recession We had to Have?
Marisa Crawford and Graham Rossiter
M.L. Crawford and G.M. Rossiter, 1993, The Future of Holistic Education: The Recession We Had to Have?,
Curriculum Perspectives, 13, 1, 37-46.
Pick up any major curriculum document issued by school education authorities in Western countries in
the 1980s and you will most likely find something like the following written about the aims for schools:
Schools must prepare students to accept their social responsibilities as members of a democratic
society. Students must learn the knowledge and develop skills, values and attitudes which will enable
them to contribute to society as active and informed and confident citizens. . . [the curriculum should]
provide a basis for personal fulfilment. . . [and] prepare students for a changing society.
(NSW Board of Secondary Education 1989, p. 3.)
As well as traditional aims for knowledge and skills, there has been an increasing emphasis on education
to bring about personal change. Typically, aims for schooling are expressed in terms of promoting the
growth and development of the whole person -- the idea of a holistic education. (Dufty and Dufty 1989,
Lovat and Smith 1990, Beare 1989, Boomer 1982, Eisner 1982)
The relevance and the value of personal aims for education in schools are not in question. However,
there are developments that may be sending the personal or holistic strand of education into a
'recession'. Two influential factors will be examined:1. The potential threat to holistic education in new national education policies.
2. A hiatus between theory and practice.
The article will also appraise insights into education for personal change, looking at the central place
that the idea of personal development should have in educational aims and practice. We consider that
school curricula, no matter how successful they may be in achieving new target levels of equity,
retention and measurable employment-related competencies, will remain flawed if they fail to give a
prominent place to studies concerned with human meaning and values.
Before exploring these issues we include a contextual note on aims for education.
Aims for Education: Cognitive? Affective? Holistic?
Since the genesis of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives in the late 1950s and 1960s, aims for
schools have commonly been written in the form of cognitive and affective (Bloom 1956, Krathwohl,
Bloom and Masia 1971). While this division has been useful for drawing attention to non-cognitive
aims, it has drawbacks.
Affective aims refer to aspects of human development that are mainly non-cognitive, for example:
emotions; aesthetic sense; attitudes; values; beliefs; etc. There is a danger that this classification
tends to equate emotions with values/attitudes/beliefs. In turn this can imply that values and morals are
just matters of emotion; it tends to ignore the dimensions of moral reasoning, volition (or willing) and
commitment that are key elements in the holding of moral values (Hill 1989, 1990).
2
The affective category for aims is broad and non specific; it aggregates in too simple a fashion aspects
of human development that are complex. The cognitive/affective division suggests a dualism that does
not adequately reflect the interrelationships that exist between the cognitive and the affective in the
human person. Similarly, this division can lead to naive presumptions about learning procedures that
are supposedly affective -- as if it were easy for teachers to flick a switch and intentionally change the
'gears' of their teaching from cognitive to affective. If it were possible to develop a new instrument, an
'affectometer', which showed the affective level at which students were actually involved, it would
probably expose many so-called affective teaching procedures as unrealistic and ineffective. Those
who flourish the 'right brain/left brain' theory could also benefit from this consideration. There is not
much point in using impressive labels to justify what we are doing unless we can show or explain
realistically how our procedures achieve what is intended.
Educators who prefer to talk about holistic education claim that they have moved beyond the old
cognitive/affective dualism and the problems it entails. However, this is sometimes little more than a
new rhetoric. It champions the idea of educating the 'whole person'. While providing a variety in
relevant personal content, its advocates have not yet been able to show convincingly how this form of
education actually works at a psychological level in the classroom.
We have no quarrel with the concept of holistic education. Our concern is how make it more realistic,
specific and effective. While strongly espousing the ideals of holistic education, we are concerned that
this movement has not yet addressed the same crucial questions that troubled the cognitive/affective
educational thinking.
National Education Policies for the 'Clever Country': A Favourable Environment for Holistic
Education?
At first sight it seems unusual that three recent national education review committees which are
expected to have a shaping influence on curriculum development in Australian schools, were chaired by
business executives and not educators (Finn, Mayer and Carmichael Committees). Their reports,
emphasising measurable competencies and vocational skills, reinforce the trend that began in 1985
when commonwealth and state ministers for education invited a substantive business/industry input to
the future planning for schools.
To highlight the policy, the former federal education minister, Mr Dawkins, coined the phrase
"education for the clever country". It was quickly taken into the rhetoric of the then Prime Minister,
Mr Hawke, and it remains intact under the new One Nation leadership. Note, the emphasis is not on
the wise or intelligent country, but the pragmatic clever country! The impression is given that those
who fund education think of schools mainly as instruments of economic development. The idea of
making Australia economically competitive seems to be the dominant motif influencing education
policy -- even more influential than an up-to-date theory of student centred learning.
It is not that cooperation between education and the business/industrial world is a bad thing; similarly,
enhancing vocational competencies has a valuable place in education. However, our concern is that in
the present depressed economic climate there is a danger that the progress made in Australian education
towards what can be called education for full personal development may falter.
An over-emphasis on employment-oriented competencies may eclipse the attention that should be given
to aspects of education concerned with personal development -- personal development in the rich sense
of the concept including physical, personal, social, spiritual and moral development. When defining
key competencies, the Finn and Mayer committees noted that they "do not comprise the whole of
general education which is also concerned with the development of young people as individuals and
citizens." (Mayer Committee 1992a, pp. 2,9.) Three of the original key competencies can be
interpreted as covering some aspects of personal development: "Cultural understanding", "Problem
solving", and "Personal and Interpersonal". These included: global issues, decision making, self-
3
esteem, and ethics. However, by the time the Mayer Committee published its second discussion paper,
Cultural understanding was removed from the key competency structure and there was no further
mention of global issues, decision-making, self-esteem or ethics -- presumably because the more
personal the skills the more difficult it was to define and measure them at the three required
"performance levels".
So it is not difficult to get the impression that the general thrust of the key competencies movement may
well minimise the perceived significance of the personal strand in education, especially if it is not
regarded as are the 'real subjects that count'.
But Don't Blame the Finn Report!
The Finn Report lists ten "Common and Agreed National Goals for Schooling in Australia" (1991, p.
11). They do not diverge significantly from the pattern of aims in Australian curriculum documents
through the 1970s and 1980s. The item that is new is:
4. To respond to the current and emerging economic and social needs of the nation, and to provide
those skills which will allow students maximum flexibility and adaptability in their future employment
and other aspects of life.
In itself this aim is educationally acceptable and it should not be intimidating for teachers, particularly
when it sits within the context of other more general aims, including the now familiar personal/holistic
ones. Some would argue that concern about narrowness in the competencies movement is an overreaction; they claim that the Reports see vocational competencies embedded within the more generic
competencies that should be promoted by a well rounded education.
So the real issue is about where the emphasis is to be placed in practice. Will new curriculum
development be so geared to employment-related competencies that the more person-centred subjects
will be effectively suffocated with perceived irrelevance? The answer is: "Probably yes." -- because
this has already been happening for some time, without help from the competencies movement.
If a strong personal strand in education is to flourish in the projected Finn/Mayer school environment,
then two matters need urgent redress. Firstly, the theory and practice of personal/holistic education
must be articulated with greater coherence than has been the case so far. Secondly, its perceived place
and relevance in schools need rejuvenation; and this is needed on all fronts: with students, teachers,
parents, business and the wider community. Otherwise the subjects most directly concerned with
personal development will be the ones that are ineffective and rate poorly.
The Perceived Value of the Personal Strand in Education
When evaluating what is being done in schools to promote students' personal development, one might
ask: "Does the average high school curriculum give so much attention to the main success/employment
oriented subjects that students perceive that little if any value is ascribed to studying what it means to
become fully human?"
If the evident concern of a school is to develop language, mathematical, scientific and other academic
and vocational abilities, and if there is no comparable study of personal, moral and spiritual growth,
then the absence of attention to these areas can be saying to young people that there is not much
educational interest in how they develop as persons; this can take care of itself, or it will happen
incidentally while the 'real' education goes on. This may be affirming the images of success that are
dominant in society which in turn are influencing the way students perceive (or do not perceive) value
in their education. As one author noted:
4
[this puts] more value on subject matter than on the persons being subjected to it. And this is a value
in itself. Because it has been unfashionable to talk about values in education, or at least to do anything
explicit about them, unexamined values which tend to dehumanise students have been a hidden
curriculum in our schools. (Hill 1991, p.3)
The aims for education in the Finn Report are unequivocal about promoting full human development.
However, there is a credibility gap between the rhetoric of such aims and what actually happens (or
does not happen) in practice. This is the case even in subjects like personal development, values
education, religion and living skills. The causes of the credibility gap need to be articulated and
addressed.
In part, this situation can be explained by the way that social problems are reflected in schools. While
various problems relate to the school in different ways, the links often have one thing in common. The
problems are mirrored in the values, or lack of particular values, within the school's structures,
curriculum and social life. Hill identified this as negative values education.
Apart from anything else they might learn, [school] students get the message that, in the things which it
includes and excludes, the curriculum mirrors the priorities which the community sets on things such as
personal worth, job preparation, 'the basics', 'the disciplines', the rights of minorities, and so on.
Values education goes on, therefore, even when we are not consciously planning for it. But when its
effect is not acknowledged or controlled, the result is often that the wrong values for life are propagated
by default. In schools where the emphasis is on learning subjects to gain good marks in order to beat
others into higher education and better jobs, students are encouraged to develop a very self-centred and
consumer-oriented value system. (Hill 1991, p. 3)
One useful starting point for addressing the problem is to look at the ways in which value related issues
are the primary content for study, and not just secondary interests that emerge accidentally or
intentionally from some other investigation. We stress the need for a formal subject, with a central
place in the curriculum, where value issues can be critically examined by students. However, as
explained later, this does not imply that attention given to value issues as secondary content in other
subjects is an insignificant or unimportant part of values education.
The Need for a Philosophically Central Area in the Curriculum that Provides for a Study of
Values and Questions of Meaning
When educators and parents think about ways of linking the school with society's attempts to address
social problems, naive structuralism often emerges; that is, add a structure that apparently covers the
problem while not looking realistically at how the intervention is expected to influence students
personally. A recent magazine cover story on holistic education illustrates the point:
A Principal -- supported by parents who, in the wake of the recent government financial fiasco, are
disillusioned with businessmen and politicians alike -- has introduced Ethics into his school's
curriculum. . . [to help students recognise] the consequences of the shortsightedness, selfishness and
greed that seemed to come to a head in the 80s.
[Another Principal]
It's certainly becoming more evident recently that there is a need for values teaching. We are looking
to firming up on responsibilities and duty -- duty to the community is coming back in. There is an
increasing disenchantment with money-making in reaction to the government inquiry on corruption and
the bankruptcy of the 'high-flyer' businessmen. Where we've always been considered a very secular
school, 12 months ago we actually took a chaplain onto the staff. It went through without too much
opposition. His main role is as a social worker, but there is hope he will work more and more in the
values and ethics area. (Boag 1991, pp. 78, 81)
5
How times have changed! It was recorded that the only form of rehabilitation given to the convicts on
the hulks in England in the nineteenth century was Religious Education. (We do not want to push this
analogy too far).
The schools' role, as part of the wider community's attempts to address social problems, is related to
what schools do best -- helping students to be well informed and to learn how to think about the issues.
Of fundamental importance then is the need for an established, credible subject area that can serve as a
natural forum for studying such matters. It should not be labelled 'social problems', because this name
is too narrow and negative. It needs to be part of a wider, positive study of philosophy of life and of
the answers to human questions that religion, philosophers, psychologists etc. have offered.
Subjects that include elements of religion, philosophy, ethics and personal development could provide
students with the opportunity to study questions of meaning and value with the same rigour as is
expected in traditional subjects. Such studies provide for some correction to any trend in the
curriculum which glorifies the 'market oriented' subjects or ignores values education.
Educators cannot presume that questions of value and meaning will be adequately explored within a
general curriculum that does not program in a specific study of these issues. While it will always be
important to try to address moral and spiritual issues in all subjects, this is not a desirable alternative to
a subject area where these issues are the main focus of study. Education needs both strategies.
In addition, a values-centred subject provides a place where the purpose and value of students'
education itself can be examined and debated; it is in a pivotal position in the curriculum where
students can try to evaluate and integrate into their lives their diverse school experiences and learnings.
Educators will argue that offering such a subject is no simple solution to the problem of devising a
holistic curriculum. We agree. But it is a good beginning.
The idea is not new. There already are subjects like this in place in schools: personal development,
religion, living skills etc. However, no matter how prominent they appear in the school's prospectus or
mission statement, they are more like 'fringe dwellers' than central subjects in the curriculum; they are
stressful for teachers who often perceive them as educational 'health hazards'. Questions are often
raised about their effectiveness and their poor image in the eyes of students, parents and school staff.
The experience of those who teach them suggests that their educational potential is often subverted by
school structures and by what we call the "psychology of the learning environment".
School Structures and the 'Psychology of the Learning Environment': Subverting the Personal
Dimension of the Curriculum
Certain subjects are seen by students as having high status and importance in the curriculum. Even if
they do not like studying them, most students pay at least some attention to what is being taught, and in
general try to understand the basics just on the off chance that "it may come in handy for a job".
Also, when subjects are fully accredited (and examinable either by continuous or summative
assessment) at Year 11-12 level and when they count towards university entrance, students are more
inclined to perceive these subjects as important and correspondingly they are more ready to work at
them. Students' attitude to subjects becomes problematic when they do not have 'credibility' and 'mark
status'. The point is well illustrated by the history of subjects like non-elective art and music, personal
development and religion. This same problem has also been one of the major hurdles to be overcome in
developing more equitable curricula in the post-compulsory years where the bias has traditionally been
in favour of university-oriented students.
6
To a great extent, student attitudes towards the study of personal/social subjects at school mirror
society's attitudes. For example, the study of religion in church-related schools is not regarded by
many as a necessary or valuable pursuit, certainly not one that could make a difference when getting a
job; neither is it seen by most as making a major contribution to their quality of life. Though
interestingly, most of the same students will say that religion as such is important -- the sort of nominal
religion that is better to have than not to have, just in case!
If school structures and community opinion are not supportive of the purposes and value of personal
subjects, then they will subvert their value in the curriculum. Hence, to make the study of religion,
ethics, philosophy and personal development a valuable and effective exercise in the school, it needs to
have well defined and highly visible support structures to help show its value to students.
If the subject matter is to be taken seriously, it must be studied with the same rigour as in the 'status
subjects'; the study must be seen to be supported by the school philosophy and by the teaching staff;
and, as noted earlier, there must be similar support from the community. For example, a recent
publication in the United Kingdom showed that studying religion at school was of value for jobs in
tourism, medicine, nursing, law, education, police work and public service (Smith 1987).
It is not only this school experience that sheds light on student attitudes to 'non-subjects' At a Law
school in a metropolitan Australian university, Legal Ethics is compulsory, but non-examinable. As
the lecturer noted, "This is the subject when the paper planes come out." Another lecturer in a medical
faculty faced the same problem in her course on medical ethics. While the purpose of these courses is
admirable, their value is subverted by the prevailing psychology of the learning environment.
We are not suggesting that the value related subjects will only be acceptable when and if they are fully
accredited, or that accreditation will solve most if not all the problems. However, any attempt to
implement such studies that does not take into account the psychology of the classroom learning
environment runs the risk of being quickly marginalised.
It goes without saying that efforts are needed to address other factors that influence student expectations
such as:- a comprehensive sequential program; appropriate content for students; enlightened, relevant
student texts; and well trained, competent, professionally committed teachers.
This is not a statement of unquestioned support for the system of examination or assessment geared
learning. But it is an acknowledgment of the realities within schools and community that have the
potential to undermine any program that does not keep these issues in mind and does not attempt to
address them.
We are well aware of the other side of the story and we do not wish to present just a negative picture.
There are examples of good personal subjects that in the students' estimation make a valuable
contribution to their education and human development. Our task here is to concentrate on analysis of
the problems that inhibit progress.
The Dimensions of Meaning, Value and Purpose in the General Curriculum
So far the place and relevance of studies that have a special, direct focus on value issues have been
examined. While emphasising their crucial place in the curriculum, we consider it artificial,
inappropriate and probably ineffective to try to channel all reference to value issues into such subjects -as if they could adequately handle the school's role in values education. To do this would be to distort
values education considerably.
As noted earlier, the structure and content of the general curriculum itself is not value free. Also there
is great scope for the treatment of value issues where they arise naturally in various subjects. Our
7
concern now is with the way in which all subjects make a contribution to values education and to the
personal development of students.
This view has important implications for the role of teachers.
The Role of Teachers in Promoting the Personal Development of Students
The prominence of personal/holistic aims for education in authoritative curriculum documents presumes
that all teachers have some role in promoting the personal development of students, even though this is
usually not spelled out in detail.
The 'blueprint' for educational reform in New South Wales emphasises the expectation that all teachers
share a responsibility for students' moral and spiritual development.
Values and Education
The moral, ethical and spiritual development of students is a fundamental goal of education. It is
clearly not confined to one area of the curriculum. All teachers, across all areas of the curriculum
have a responsibility to inculcate in their students positive values and a capacity for moral and ethical
judgment.
Government schools should actively promote the moral values which are shared by the majority of
people in our community. There is merit in the clear statement of this responsibility. (Metherell 1990,
p. 65)
While not opposed to the idea that schools can contribute to students' personal, moral and spiritual
development, teachers understandably ask how can this be done within the confines of their ordinary
teaching? They also ask: "How much teacher responsibility is reasonable and realistic?" If their
response is to be constructive, what they need is a scheme that shows how personal development can be
linked with all the key learning areas.
Firstly, there is the point made earlier that teachers in all subjects need to refer to the value issues that
are related to their subject matter. This is a topic that warrants more attention than is given here.
Questions to be considered include:- What issues should be covered? In which subjects and at what
year levels? With what methods? How can value issues be explored while maintaining the integrity of
the primary subject matter? How can these studies be integrated and coordinated?
Secondly, and the major point we wish to make in this section, is the proposal that all school learning
areas need to be able to show how they can contribute to the personal development of students. This a
major issue for curriculum theory.
With a curriculum theory that is student-centred, it will not be appropriate to presume that a subject
should have a place in the school curriculum simply because it represents a traditional academic
discipline, imparts specific knowledge and skills or develops a set of key employment related
competencies. Rather, the justification of its place requires an explanation of how it contributes in both
general and distinctive ways to the personal development of students (Castles and Rossiter 1983).
Complementing the way these issues are discussed in the literature of curriculum theory, we suggest an
approach (not the only one) through which each subject fosters personal development. It can show
students how this study is ultimately valuable for them in the larger context of their own lives; it should
challenge them by trying to alert them to the meaning of their learning and not to be content with
outward proofs of learning as shown in assessment results.
This approach has two aspects:-
8
1. Showing how the subject contributes to general skills for personal development Eg. collecting and
analysing data; identifying and evaluating arguments, and learning how to articulate an informed point
of view with logic and with supporting evidence; empathising with the situation and point of view of
others; identifying moral and political issues; differentiating emotional and reasoned responses to an
issue; identifying conflict and its sources with reflection on possibilities for non-violent conflict
resolution; speculating on short term and long term human consequences of particular actions;
reflecting on implications for quality of life and respect for the environment; showing how events in
the past can help illuminate and interpret what is happening at present. (to name some of the general
skills that schooling can help promote).
2. Showing how learning from this subject contributes in a distinctive way to students' understanding
of life; this learning has a 'spiritual' or 'purpose' dimension in the way it adds to the range of an
individual's access to physical and cultural inheritance. It has some ultimate value and meaning in
equipping students to respond to life. Eg. learning a foreign language enhances the capacity to enter
into another culture and literature; health education can be a prerequisite to a life long sensitivity to
health issues; from a study of geology and biology can come a capacity to 'read' the ecology of any
environment; religious studies can contribute an understanding of the ways religious beliefs influence
behaviour and how people interpret the dilemmas of human existence such as life, joy, pain and death.
Every now and again teachers should attempt to alert students to the long term meaning of their current
learning, even if this seems to fall on uninterested ears. Whether they agree with it or not at this stage,
it is important for students to know that the teacher has reasons why this study is valuable for their
personal development. This is our interpretation of what normative curriculum documents say about
the aim for students "to achieve maximum personal benefit from their educational experience. . .[and] a
sense of self worth and respect and consideration for others as a basis for understanding themselves and
their world." (NSW Board of Secondary Education 1989, p. 3)
While all of this may look good in theory, we know that the practice often falls well short of
expectations. And it is this discrepancy that is the major problem inhibiting holistic education in
schools.
Personal/holistic Education in Schools: The Hiatus Between Theory and Practice
Earlier, the negativity in student perceptions of some of the 'fringe dwelling' personal subjects in
schools was examined. Such negative perceptions may be evident even though students say that they
enjoyed the lessons. Not a small part of the problem is the way these subjects are subverted by school
structures and lack of perceived status and value.
This situation is ironic, because over the last thirty five years the tenor of official curriculum documents
has changed more and more in the direction of emphasising personal aims and objectives for all subjects
and in introducing studies that focus directly on aspects of personal development. As education
authorities are increasingly turning towards a holistic, personal curriculum, the practice indicates that
the personal intentions are not taking root in the school. There is a hiatus between the personal
purposes and the practices of education. The potentially negative influence of the recent emphasis on
employment-oriented competencies is but a new aspect of a much older problem.
Over the years, while retaining the traditional educational goals of basic knowledge and skills,
authoritative curriculum documents have made room for more personal and social aims. Commonly,
such documents list as aims student development in the following areas:social, aesthetic, attitudinal, moral and spiritual development; abilities and interests;
imparting/inculcating values; family values; cultural values; student maturation; individual needs;
self identity; personal fulfilment; self confidence; sense of self worth and self esteem; independence;
critical thinking; moral autonomy; human relations; sexuality; leisure; equity; awareness of one's
9
place in the world; respect and consideration for others; access to cultural heritage and ethnic
identity; cooperation with the educative role of parents; informed confident citizens; social and civic
values; rights and responsibilities; communication skills; decision making skills for a democratic
society; interpersonal skills; conflict resolution; problem solving skills; organisational ability; skills
in oral and written communication; practical living skills; careers awareness; vocational skills;
experience in the world of work; flexibility and adaptability for the future; community relations;
awareness of and resistance to manipulation; awareness of pressure groups.
(Drawn from: NSW Board of Secondary Education 1989)
Quite an imposing list! Will it remain just a lot of well intentioned rhetoric? -- no more than an
attractive dream of the ideal citizen that the education system is trying to produce?
An essential step in addressing the problem is to clarify teaching methods and content that relate in
some constructive way to the stated aims. The difficulty is that anyone, after reading the above list,
will be daunted and confused by such a large, wide-ranging, idealistic set of aims revolving in their
heads as they try to work out what might be done about them in the classroom.
At the heart of the problem is an educational naivety about how classroom teaching is related to
personal change in students. It is not difficult to devise personal objectives for education. However
there remains great ambiguity about how they are to be put into practice.
There is a natural uncertainty and un-predictability in causal links between classroom teaching
procedures and constructive personal change in students. This is to be expected because we are dealing
here with the mysterious process of personal growth which is influenced by so many complex factors,
the most powerful of which have little to do with schooling. By contrast, the links between classroom
teaching and measurable skills are more mechanical, predictable and controllable! The complexity of
personal change processes in young people and the limited potential of schooling to influence them
need to be articulated and accepted by teachers and the wider community.
There is a significant literature that has a bearing on the personal and social dimensions to education.
However, there is a need to synthesise, at both theoretical and practical levels, how the relevant
teaching/learning processes and the use of student materials may occasion students' growth and
development as persons. Too much credence often seems to be given to the intention of educators to
promote personal change in students, without adequate investigation of the actual lines of personal
influence along which the teaching activity proceeds. Similarly, not enough attention is given to the
active role of students as autonomous, thinking, feeling, individuals involved in their personal change in
response to education and other aspects of their social and cultural environment.
To develop a broad framework for understanding the theory and practice of education for personal
change would give a better sense of purpose and integration to its diverse elements. There is an
important national need to take up the clarification of these issues in a substantial and integrated way; it
is important even to keep this personal agenda before the eyes of politicians, educators and the wider
community.
At this point we refer to findings from the theory and practice of religious education in church-related
and government schools because they provide insights that are applicable to the wider question of
education for personal change.
The Problem of Designing Education for Personal Change: Relevant Insights from Religious
Education
Because of the content of religious education at school (similarly for moral education), it has been
subjected to greater pressure to resolve problems of education for personal change than have other
subjects. We suggest that the answers that have already emerged and that are still emerging can be
10
applied with advantage across the curriculum; in other words, these results should provide useful
guidance for the diverse efforts to promote students' personal development through the teaching of all
subject areas, particularly the personal/social ones.
The following is a summary list of relevant principles in education for personal change that are
elaborated in more detail in other writings (Crawford and Rossiter 1985, 1988).
1. Classroom teaching can educate students in relation to the possibilities of personal change,
accepting that it is not appropriate or realistic to think that the teaching itself brings about such change.
Teaching can make a limited but valued contribution to the complex process of personal change which
is effected by students themselves who are influenced by many other factors besides their formal
schooling.
2. Classroom teaching can provide learning experiences that enable students to become more informed
about personal, moral and religious issues. They may reflect and comment on their own personal views
if they so wish, but there should be no expectation that this is required. Teachers may hope that
through such experience students are favourably disposed towards the development of attitudes, values
and beliefs. However, teachers need to recognise that any authentic personal change will be free and
will come from within the individual; and that it should be a part of their wider life lived on a 'much
larger stage' than the classroom.
3. Teaching about issues involves an open, inquiring study where the provision of up to date
information extends students' horizons, challenging them to identify, analyse and evaluate evidence and
arguments. Use of appropriate student materials gives students access to the same information as the
teacher; an emphasis on teacher talk as the primary means of presenting information should be avoided,
giving objectivity and encouraging students to learn how to find and sift information for themselves.
4. Discussion of issues is an integral part of the learning process; discussions should be conducted
along the lines of informed debate (and not proposed as 'personal sharing'), trying to avoid the problems
where it is little more than an exchange of uninformed opinions. The privacy and freedom of students is
respected by focusing on intellectual inquiry, without expecting personal responses.
5. Controversial issues should be approached in a way that looks at authoritative and conflicting views.
The teacher should be able to model responsible criticism.
6. The potential emotional reaction of students needs to be assessed prior to the use of any experience,
process or student materials. Excessively emotional or any manipulative process is inappropriate.
7. The values that the school upholds need to be stated and not presumed; it is inappropriate to try to
impose them. Teachers should follow a clear, written code of ethics for classroom interaction that is
impartial (but not neutral) and which allows the teacher to make reference to his/her own values, beliefs
and commitments when this is judged likely to make a valuable educational contribution to the lesson.
8. Appropriate use may be made of general values/moral education strategies such as:- values
clarification; values analysis; moral dilemmas; exploration of moral biographies and of situations
where moral decisions have to be made; appraising information and arguments about contemporary
issues (including the potential influence of the media on the development of moral values in the
individual); simulation games; conflict resolution activities; role plays; analysis of moral codes ( Eg.
from world religions).
A critical appraisal of these diverse approaches is needed if they are to be used effectively with
coherence and harmony, at appropriate stages of student development, without manipulation, and with
some appreciation of their possibilities and limitations.
11
The above are based on a fundamental principle which argues that classroom teaching/learning is
primarily concerned with helping students learn how to think and to be informed. This view presumes
that there should be an overarching cognitive basis to classroom learning. In such an environment the
most appropriate attention can be given to personal matters.
The role of classroom teaching is not so much to provide emotional experiences etc. but to help students
identify and think about them; to work towards some understanding of the personal/affective dimension
in their own lives and in human experience generally. It is important to note that this perspective on the
classroom should not be interpreted as 'narrowly cognitive', limiting the place for the affective, but as
the most appropriate way of structuring classroom learning to make the handling of experience,
emotions, attitudes, values, beliefs etc. more respectful of students as free autonomous human persons
(This issue is discussed in more detail in Rossiter 1988, Crawford and Rossiter 1985, 1988).
Conclusion
The experience of universal education, which in historical terms is a relatively recent occurrence, has
presented educators, parents, students, governments and society with a startling array of what such a
process can achieve. At no other time in history have so many people been exposed to so much
information and knowledge, so many ideas, and as a consequence, so many options.
It would not be over-zealous to state that this more democratic experience of education has been a
significant influence in the many technological, medical, and social advances in the last 100 years. It is
no wonder that educators are so consistently called on to be in the forefront of bringing about desired
changes in society. And in turn, this is probably why there are such high expectations for schooling to
produce desirable personal change in students.
The idea of education of the whole person is behind the growing concern to expand the school
curriculum to include areas for study that have previously existed on the margins of school life, even
though they were said to be of vital importance for young people -- areas like personal development,
philosophy, ethics and religion. In addition, holistic education proposes that all subjects have a role in
helping young people develop morally and spiritually.
However, we are at a critical point -- the crossroads -- as regards the future of this personal development
thrust in Australian education. If it is to develop and take a central place in schooling in the decades to
come, then it needs a clarification of both theory and practice that makes it more coherent, more
practical and more self-evidently valuable for the practitioners and the consumers. Also, at this time
when national frameworks for the development of school curricula are being prepared at the instigation
of the Australian Education Council, the place of personal, meaning and value dimensions in the
curriculum urgently needs this clarification; otherwise, the valuable developments along these lines
already evident in the aims for education will be lost or will remain untranslated into practice.
Considerable work still remains to be done in exploring the relationships between education and young
people's personal and spiritual development. Until the complexities of personal learning in the
classroom are acknowledged and researched in more detail, educators and the community will continue
to make gross presumptions about the school's influence on the processes of belief, attitude and value
formation.
To illustrate the type of reinterpretation that is needed at the level of theory we offer a rewrite of the
earlier quoted statement on Values and Education. It highlights a limited, complex, but more realistic
view of the important role of the school curriculum in the personal development of young people.
Original Statement:
Values and Education (Metherell, NSW Ministry of Education 1990)
The moral, ethical and spiritual development of students is a fundamental goal of education. It is
12
clearly not confined to one area of the curriculum. All teachers, across all areas of the curriculum have
a responsibility to inculcate in their students positive values and a capacity for moral and ethical
judgment.
A Re-interpretation in the Light of the Discussion in this Article
The moral, ethical and spiritual development of students is a fundamental goal of education. In areas
like personal development, religion and ethics/philosophy, the meaning of this human development
itself becomes the subject matter for serious study and exploration. However, enhancement of this
human development is clearly not confined to one area of the curriculum. All teachers, across all
curriculum areas have a role in educating young people in relation to the greater meaning and wise
integration of all of their learnings within the larger context of their lives. While it is acknowledged
that education cannot automatically inculcate or inject values, it is hoped that this highlighting of the
dimensions of value and purpose throughout the curriculum will foster the development of students'
capacity for moral and ethical judgment.
References
Beare, H. (1989), The Curriculum for the 1990s: A New Package or a New Spirit? Canberra, The
Australian College of Education.
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1956), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, London,
Longman.
Bloom, B.S. (1971), Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning, New
York, McGraw Hill.
Boag, C. (1991), 'Nice Kids Rule, OK! The Getting of Character: Education Expectations in the 90s'
(Cover story), The Bulletin, Sydney, July 30, 78-83.
Boomer, G. (1982), Negotiating the Curriculum: A Teacher-Student Partnership, Gosford, Ashton
Scholastic.
Brady, L. (1990), Curriculum Development, Sydney, Prentice Hall.
Castles, G.M. and Rossiter, G.M. (Eds.), (1983) Curriculum Theory and Religious Education, Sydney,
Australian Association for Religious Education.
Crawford, M.L. and Rossiter, G.M. (1985), Teaching Religion in the Secondary School: Theory and
Practice, Sydney, Christian Brothers Province Resource Group.
Crawford, M.L. and Rossiter, G.M. (1988), Missionaries to a Teenage Culture: Religious Education in
a Time of Rapid Change, Sydney, Christian Brothers Province Resource Group.
Dawkins, J. (1988), Strengthening Australian Schools: A Consideration of the Focus and Content of
Schooling, Canberra, Department of Employment, Education and Training.
Dufty, H. and Dufty, D. (1989), Thinking Whole: The Quest for a New Educational Paradigm,
Sydney, Social Education Association of Australia.
Eisner, E. (1982), Cognition and Curriculum: A Basis for Deciding What to Teach, New York,
Longman.
13
Employment and Skills Formation Council, (1992), The Australian Vocational Certificate Training
System (The Carmichael Report), Canberra, National Board of Employment, Education and Training.
Finn Committee, (1991), Review of Young People's Participation in Postcompulsory Education and
Training, Canberra, Department of Employment, Education and Training.
Grimmitt, M.H. (1983), Religious Education and Humanisation: A Consideration of the Contribution
of Religious Education to Personal Development and its Implications for Curriculum Decision-Making,
Sydney, Australian Association for Religious Education.
Hill, B.V. (1989), 'The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Is it a Faded Bloom?', Unpublished
Paper, Murdoch University, Western Australia.
_____ (1990), A Time to Plant and a Time to Uproot: Values Education in the Secondary School,
Sydney, Sydney Anglican Education Commission.
_____ (1991), Values Education in Australian Schools Hawthorn, Australian Council for Educational
Research.
Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S. and Masia, B.B. (1971), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book II
Affective Domain, London, Longman.
Lovat, T. and Smith, D. (1990), Curriculum: Action on Reflection, Wentworth Falls, Social Science
Press.
Mayer Committee, (1992a), Employment-Related Key Competencies for Postcompulsory Education
and Training: A Discussion Paper, Canberra, Department of Employment, Education and Training.
Mayer Committee, (1992b), Employment-Related Key Competencies: A Proposal for Consultation,
Canberra, Department of Employment, Education and Training.
Metherell, T. (1990), Excellence and Equity: New South Wales Curriculum Reform, Sydney, NSW
Ministry of Education and Youth Affairs.
NSW Board of Secondary Education, (1989), The Purposes of Schools, Sydney, Board of Secondary
Education.
Professional Council for Religious Education, (1989), What is Religious Education? and What Use is
it? Derby, Christian Education Movement.
Rossiter, G.M. (1988) A Cognitive Basis for Affective Learning in Classroom Religious Education,
British Journal of Religious Education, 11, 1, 4-10.
Smith, H. (Ed.) (1987), The Career Value of Religious Education/Theology; What Can I do with a
Religious Studies Qualification? (R.E. Today Supplement), London, Christian Education Movement.