For years, promoters of the self-esteem movement have been asserting that low self-esteem is responsible for many of our students' social and academic problems. Their prescription? Give students big doses of praise and assure them that they are "special" and doing very well, even if their performance is mediocre or poor. You hear less about self-esteem these days--perhaps because the movement has not brought about the social transformation that advocates promised. Nevertheless, the latest Public Agenda report, "Getting By," suggests that the self-esteem movement has taken firm root among students, teachers, and the public. This is alarming for a number of reasons.
It is certainly true that people are more likely to succeed if they believe they will, and children are no exception. They also wilt under unfair or harsh criticism. Good parents and teachers have always known these things. However, there are obvious problems with the smiley-face approach advocated by self-esteem enthusiasts. Making mistakes and seeing them for yourself--or having them pointed out so you can correct them--are natural and important components of learning. But when self-esteem is an end in itself and generous praise is considered the way to get kids there, how likely are teachers to point out mistakes or students to learn from them?
Another problem is that the self-esteem movement separates self-esteem from achievement. If you tell students that they are terrific no matter what they do, either they won't believe you or they will see no reason for doing the hard work necessary to learn. But if you help them to achieve in real ways, you will be giving them a solid basis for self-esteem.
Clearly, self-esteem, as pushed by the self-esteem movement, is no panacea. Now, a study of relevant research says that it may actually be harmful, particularly when it is not founded in reality--which is the kind of self-esteem supporters have been advocating for the schools. An article by Roy F. Baumeister, Laura Smart, and Joseph M. Boden, which appeared in the scholarly journal Psychological Review (1996, vol. 103, no. 1) and in a shortened version in American Educator (Summer 1996), says that it is a big mistake to see self-esteem as totally positive. The kind of self-esteem that has you thinking well of yourself, whether or not you have any basis for doing so, also has a dark side--conceit, pride, feelings of superiority and entitlement. How many parents would want to encourage these attitudes in a child, and how would they feel if they thought the child's school was doing so?
Baumeister and his colleagues found that studies done by many different researchers linked unfounded self-esteem with bad behavior of all kinds, from schoolyard bullying and juvenile delinquency to murder, rape, and other crimes of violence. These studies show that a person who thinks he is great--and who has no objective reason for thinking so--is likely to turn on people who fail to share his good opinion of himself. And as he tries to assert his superiority, violence is likely to erupt.
Self-esteem enthusiasts would probably jump in here and say that this proves their case. These violent people, they would argue, really suffer from low self-esteem, which is masked by their arrogance. They don't feel OK about themselves at all and try to boost their self-esteem by violent actions. Baumeister and his colleagues say there is nothing to this. There is no evidence linking low self-esteem and violent behavior--though many researchers have sought to make the connection.
Furthermore, Baumeister says, it doesn't make sense to assume that high but unfounded self-esteem is a mask for low self-esteem. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. For example, when Harold Stevenson and James Stigler compared the math achievement of American and Asian elementary school students, they found that American kids did considerably less well than Japanese and Chinese students. However, the Americans felt just fine about their performance; their self-esteem was very high. Was that masking feelings of low self-esteem? Hardly. What you see is what you get. American kids come from schools where they have been encouraged to think positively about themselves. Their sunny view of their math skills simply shows that the lessons in self-esteem have taken.
American schools have been the victims of all kinds of faddish movements that were touted as cure-alls--from performance contracting, open schools, and "relevant" curriculums to EAi-type school management and self-esteem. Supporters usually insist that their claims are based on "research." If people were to ask, "What research?" they might find that there is none or that it can't pass scientific muster or, as in the case of self-esteem, that it proves the opposite of what supporters claim. Few people would take a medicine if there was nothing to back up the pharmaceutical company's claims. We should demand no less for our schools.
For a copy of the American Educator article, "Should Schools Try to Boost Self-Esteem?" by Roy F. Baumeister, write AFT/Self, 555 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20001.