A dialogical view of self and identity: A response to Professor Hermans from an educational perspective

By Graham Rossiter, Associate Professor of Religious and Moral Education, Australian Catholic University, Sydney
Introduction I begin with an apology to Professor Hermans for not responding to his paper with the expertise of a professional psychologist. I am unfamiliar with much of the research to which he refers. My response is from the perspective of an educator with a special interest in the implications of theory for educational practice particularly in the area of moral and religious education in schools. I could be described as a passionate educational scavenger, ever on the lookout for theory and practice from across the disciplines which can inform a more relevant education. This approach tests theories in a type of crucible of educational relevance. At times, this can provide critical feedback to disciplinary theory building. Seeking the best inter-disciplinary input for the teaching/learning process is important for education; but this carries a risk of misinterpreting some unfamiliar material. I hope that Professor Hermans and colleagues will be tolerant of any oversimplifications or misinterpretations in my comments; perhaps these can be clarified later. My response to writings about identity flows from a mixture of four considerations. A. B. C. D. Why is the construct of identity being used? What are the underlying circumstances and expectations that will affect its use? How insightful is the construct in interpreting and explaining human thinking and behaviour, as well as links with attitudes, values and beliefs? What are some likely implications for clinical psychological practice? What are some likely implications for educational practice in other words, what can the theory contribute to thinking about an education in identity?

Firstly, I congratulate and thank Professor Hermans for his instructive paper. It is excellent in providing psychological foundations for the discussions that will follow during this conference. Little progress could be made in thinking about religious identity and education in identity without such a consideration of the psychological roots of the concept identity. The paper has situated Professor Hermans special interest in the dialogical self within a comprehensive review of theories about identity and self. As he noted, one of the drawbacks to the use of this construct in psychology, education, religion and the public sphere has been the vagueness and lack of contextual definition of the term. His paper provides perspective and insights that will help sharpen the focus of our debates and enhance the constructive use of the terms identity and self. I will speak briefly about parts of this response paper, the details of which can be examined later. My focus will be on some of the interesting issues that Professor Hermans address raises for education. But this should not limit more wide ranging verbal responses from the group. Comments will be made under the following headings:1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Narrative, hermeneutic theory of identity The dynamics of internal dialogue within the dialogical self Self-esteem and identity The problem of fragmentation and alienation Theories of self and identity from the perspective of identity health Theories of identity and self from the perspective of an education in identity Education for identity within religious and moral education

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

1.

Narrative, hermeneutic theory of identity

The review of theory by Professor Hermans has ably demonstrated how psychology offers views of self and identity that are complex and differentiated. It informs interpretation of the ways in which internal processes and interactions with others and the culture outside might be linked with the generation of a sense of identity and also with change in identity. I find four interesting features in the narrative approach. i. ii. iii. iv. that identity is an autobiographical process; in the main, it is derived psychologically from personal reflection; the individuals sense of identity is influenced by interaction with community narratives; identity maintenance and development can involve considerable interplay between internal components even between alternative voices representing the self.

This approach is generally consistent with Ricoeurs (1986, 1988) view of identity primarily as a hermeneutic process. It helps explain how an individuals identity could be received by absorbing particular identitydefining narratives from the community, with the possibility of change through experience and incorporating other narratives into the sense of self. Whether or not there was any religious identity would depend on how much reference was made to specifically identifiable religious narratives. While I have no difficulties with the theory itself, I would like to draw attention to a problem that sometimes arises with the use of this type of identity construct. It may be interpreted as too dependent on a process of selfconscious reflection, and hence more appropriate for those in the community who are well educated and interested in reflection to bring about personal change. The number of individuals who give little or no thought to articulating a personal and or a religious identity should not be underestimated; they may accept culturally and group defined identities relatively unconsciously having implied identities that can be interpreted from their behaviour. This would be one reason for an appropriate education in identity particularly where it gives critical attention to the importance of externals and the culture in shaping the individuals accepted view of the world. Self-reflection needs to go hand in hand with critical reflection on culture. I draw attention to the view of a colleague which, I believe, illustrates this problem in translating narrative/hermeneutic theory of identity into educational practice. Wilna Meijer (1995) tended to see traditional aims for education in identity more or less exclusively in terms of a socialised personal identity with relatively permanent, externally defined characteristics. For her, Ricoeurs ideas provided an alternative. This human potential for reflection is more fundamental than identity, for identity-as-interpretation is the outcome of reflection. Personal identity, therefore, is necessarily tentative, to be reflected upon, reconsidered and revised again and again. Education should therefore not aim at identity-development or identity-formation, but at rational autonomy, independence and responsibility, the capacity to make informed choices or at personhood. (Meijer, 1995, p. 95) Meijers emphasis on autonomy and choice of identity seems to me to represent better the position of mature, well educated people. It does not take into account sufficiently the need for young individuals to begin with a socialised identity, a baseline from which they can gradually explore the world and their inner selves, moving slowly towards an identity that is more self-constructed, and one that is more educated. To me it seems inappropriate to presume in young people a tabula rasa type of identity and hope that education towards freedom, autonomy and informed choice will result in well-chosen, personally constructed identities. Later, I will briefly outline what I think a balanced education in identity might include. 2. The dynamics of internal dialogue within the dialogical self

My second point is a request for further clarification. Perhaps a more traditional interpretation of the internal processes involved with the generation of a sense of self would look at recognisably different component constructs within the individual which are thought to have a bearing on what the individual ultimately thinks and feels, and how he/she behaves. This can be illustrated diagrammatically (see Figure 1).

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

Figure 1. One way of interpreting the self as influenced by both internal components and the world outside

THE INTERNAL WORLD OF THE INDIVIDUAL

The functional self
A type of president, conductor or executive officer who is the agent who is the conscious knower who thinks, feels and acts; is influenced by interaction between components within as well as by forces from without; may not understand and be conscious of all the influences.

Moods Beliefs Attitudes Values Commitments Dispositions Emotions Memories

Imaginations

Hopes Physical Needs

Desires

Physical Drives

Psychological needs

The outside world. Physical, cultural, includes others

******************************************************************

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

Figure 2. Questions in interpreting the nature and interaction of voices within the Dialogical self.
Are the polyphonic voices representative of particular constellations of qualities ( #1-3) or fully developed I positions each with its own set of qualities and narrative structure and history (#4-6)?

THE DIALOGICAL SELF

Multiple voices, each with its own narrative structure interact through dialogue

Voice #5

Voice #1

Special emphasis on creativity (limited set of qualities)

Voice #3

Special emphasis on family matters (limited set of qualities)

Voice #2 Special emphasis on intellectual skills (limited set of qualities)

Has its own full set of beliefs, attitudes, values, imaginations, emotions, memories and narrative history

Voice #4

Has its own full set of beliefs, attitudes, values, imaginations, emotions, memories and narrative history

Voice #6

Has its own full set of beliefs, attitudes, values, imaginations, emotions, memories and narrative history

The outside world. Physical, cultural, includes others

******************************************************************

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

Figure 1 presumes the view that the self is a type of president, conductor, or executive officer who decides and acts in the light of various internal and external inputs; the action or non-action is not always the result of a conscious decision. What motivates the individual may even be puzzling to the individual a complex mixture of beliefs, values, attitudes, commitments, dispositions, emotions, moods, memories, imaginations and physical states, as well as pressures from the world and the culture outside. The theory of dialogical self, which has self-reflection as a fundamental process, posits dialogue and conflict between relatively autonomous I positions or voices, each with its own distinct narrative. It proposes that polyphonic voices participate in the dialogue, generating the functional self, or at least having each voice speak for the individual at any one time. Through this the individual can become conscious of different self-patterns within. These can be interpreted as self-narratives which may have recognisable periods or episodes in their development. These internal narratives can be linked with cultural narratives -- such as in experience and literature, which can help further with interpretation and articulation of the different modes of self. I would expect that film and television could also make increasingly important contributions to this process. I wonder how this analysis can be compared with the view in Figure 1. As illustrated in the diagram (Figure 2), would each of the voices have its own subset of component constructs? And would the components have different strengths in each of the constellations? To elaborate: when comparing these two approaches, I wonder are the different voices or I positions within the dialogical self intended to take the place of the constructs in the first model (Figure 1) substituting different narrative voices in place of psychological components, or in place of patterns of emphasis within clusters of components? Or would each narrative voice be thought of as having its own distinctive pattern of components such as memories, values, beliefs etc.? The dialogical self would seem to be an appropriate construct for interpreting what happens especially when the individual is imagining the possibilities of changing the sense of self and identity. It seems to me, in this instance, that each of the dialogical voices would contain its own distinctive package of components, (beliefs, values, emotions, memories, desires etc.). There could then be interaction between different possible selves within the individual. The role of imagination would seem to be central; the process of imaginatively rehearsing what it would be like to be different would be a precursor to personal change. 3. Self-esteem and identity

Professor Hermans critical comments about self-esteem are timely and useful. It is certainly a concept that is related to self and identity, but the relationship is problematic. Because self-esteem has potentially valuable implications in education and clinical practice, I believe it is important to try to address problems both in the construct itself and in related research. Two principal difficulties are:1. There seems to be a serious disjunction between the way counsellors/educators make good use of selfesteem as a psychological theme for interpreting behaviour and the way the concept has been operationalised in empirical research. 2. There is a need for more differentiation within the construct to make it less ambiguous. In particular, scope is needed for evaluation of the self. 1.) In both educational and clinical practice, the concept of self-esteem has been useful for interpreting peoples behaviour, (particularly that of children and adolescents) and for promoting personal development. It is spoken about by practitioners as a profound psychological reality which is often a key to the behaviour of individuals; self-esteem problems can be complex and influenced by many factors and experiences. Negative behaviour, particularly attention-getting behaviour, is often a reflection of poor regard for the self and at times, ultimately a reflection of the poor way in which the individual has been treated by significant others. In some instances where young people have been able to understand the syndrome of poor self-esteem and to imagine themselves more positively, there has been a dramatic turn around in their behaviour. Acknowledging that poor self-esteem has triggered negative behaviour can be a psychological watershed for some people, enabling them to start their lives anew with more openness and self-confidence, and with a sense of being freed from destructive behaviour patterns into which they had been locked.

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

The English language empirical research that I have examined which links self-esteem with behaviour, has, in my opinion, conflicting or insignificant findings (For a review, see Kohn, 1994). The reason, I believe, is that the research has not adequately operationalised the construct. What is being measured is therefore not the same construct that educators and clinical psychologists are using. The research instruments were concerned primarily with subjects' responses to questions about how favourably they felt about themselves. Hence, what was measured was self-assertiveness -- and not self-esteem, the more complex and influential construct which has such an important influence on behaviour. Hitler would have scored well on these self-esteem inventories! While self-assertiveness is an interesting part of personality, it should not be thought of as the equivalent of selfesteem. The approach in this research failed to take into account the content of self-image; consequently, there was no scope for any moral self-evaluation of its goodness or appropriateness. The self-esteem research informed the development of educational resource materials in the late 1970s. However, their practical strategies (intended to enhance self-esteem) were often facile, because they went little further than attempts to foster self-assertiveness. (See for example Borba and Borba, 1978, and Clark, 1978). The focus of the strategies was very different from that of educators who used self-esteem in a clinical way to interpret and try to address particular problematic behaviour in young people. 2.) To address this problem and to try to build more continuity between clinical use and empirical research in self-esteem, the construct needs further differentiation. One approach is to define the construct to include both content and affect. For example: if self-esteem is defined as the dynamic link between what individuals think about their personal identity and how they feel about this, then the construct includes both a descriptive content (their self perceived qualities as a person) and an affective dimension (how comfortable or satisfied they feel with that image of self). For example, people may feel more or less comfortable with their self understanding and about how this is reflected to others; or there may be a fundamental, almost unconscious, unarticulated, doubt about their value -- they may feel that if others only knew what they were really like, they would find them unattractive and undesirable. Self esteem may not always be unconditionally positive; for example, some individuals may have a sense of identity that is arrogant, intolerant, aggressive and hurtful to others -- and they may feel comfortable and happy with this picture (high self esteem?) The moral value of the 'content' of identity should not be dismissed under the democratic guise of being equally respectful and tolerant of all identities. The limits to tolerance are set by the rights, freedoms and responsibilities of citizens which are protected by law. (This would also become an important consideration in any examination of the relationships between identity and violence). While it may be transparently evident to an adult that a particular young person feels he/she is unloved and perhaps unloveable, this may be something that the young person is not able to comprehend or admit. Sensitive adults, teachers and clinicians often make an accurate diagnosis of this condition in young people; but it is not easy to change. It is not just a matter of identifying the problem for the young person; neither is it resolved by a small dose of what has been called 'unconditional affirmation.' It can be a psychological difficulty that individuals carry throughout their lives, often a cause of distress to themselves and to those close to them. I would expect that the principal use of the construct self-esteem would be in clinical practice, or in personal relationships where the mode particular interactions was relatively clinical. 4. Addressing the problems of fragmentation and alienation

I believe the final paragraphs of Professor Hermans paper are very important for charting a way forward for psychology and education in Western countries. The contemporary situation is, as he noted, characterised by increasing multivoicedness in self and society, a development unprecedented in the history of the human mind. People find themselves awash with a multiplicity of proposed ways of being yourself, all with apparently easily accessible resources for doing this. Yet, in spite of this apparent cultural richness, there is evidence of alarmingly high levels of alienation and lack of meaning. The problem is not so much the multiple voices per se, but the way people respond to the condition. Professor Hermans suggests that dialogue is the crucial element for finding meaningful relationships between unity and multiplicity; he rightly points out that a retreat towards unity and sense of continuity away from fragmentation with its negative connotation is not an appropriate answer. I would go further to suggest that the dialogue needs to include the following key elements:

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

interpretation and evaluation in the light of basic common values; the development of baseline values for dialogue need to be wider than the values of individualism; the themes of community and justice need to be central;

To further the idea of such dialogue, I now wish to comment on the theme identity health. In turn, this can show how an education in identity might make a valuable, but limited, contribution to dialogue. 5. Theories of self and identity from the perspective of identity health

In any progression from psychological theory of identity to educational or clinical practice, it seems to me that the practitioner would need some notion of identity health to guide the translation; this would include a moral component. It would be concerned with evaluating whether an identity is good for the individual (and for others and society), taking into account respect for the freedom, uniqueness, creativity, rights and responsibilities of the individual; this would in turn imply a view of the nature of the human person. Practitioners usually work with some idea of what they are trying to cultivate with their clients as regards identity whether or not this is clearly articulated. My suggestion is that the development of such an important and influential notion needs to begin with the theorists themselves. I do not know well enough the research literature to which Professor Hermans has referred, to be able to know where it deals with this issue, or whether or not the theorists in question have given attention, even indirectly, to what constitutes identity health in terms of their respective theories. Therefore, I offer the following as a preliminary invitation to explore the question further. My attempt to propose notions of identity health that might emerge from the different theories may well be nave and not always consistent with the theories. The intention is to begin rather than complete the task. (Corrections, additions and refinements will be welcome from interested colleagues). The reason I draw attention to the notion of identity health germane to the different theories is twofold. Firstly, I believe that a well articulated interpretation of identity health would be a valuable component to the theories; this could involve even a minimal indication of the direction which the development of healthy identity might take. Secondly, a notion of identity health is needed before the implications within any theory for an education in identity can be developed. These same issues also seem to be relevant to clinical psychology and counselling. Similarly, notions of identity ill-health or identity sickness could be developed and used appropriately. While not the only way of evaluating the theories, this approach would be an interesting test of their relevance, and possibly in some instances a stimulus for further theory development. Table 1 has summarised the theories addressed by Professor Hermans showing how they relate to the categories concerned mainly with social roles (external, cultural) or with psychological constructs related to a sense of continuity of personal identity over time (internal). For each theory a simple, tentative comment is made about what might emerge naturally from each theory as an indication of what constitutes identity health. (Please peruse the table before continuing with the conclusions which follow)

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

Table 1.

A summary of theories of identity with some preliminary ideas as to what might be implied within each as identity health The references in the table are taken from Professor Hermans paper. Consequently, these have not been listed in the bibliography to this response. Some relevant additions have been added: theory from Ricoeur, Kegan, and the symbolic interactionist school of sociology.
Types of theory of identity and self Public features Theories of identity and self A major focus is internal (psychological construction with continuity over time) A major focus is external and cultural (social roles, public features, cultural reference points) Social roles Preliminary ideas as to a view of identity health implicit in, or related to, the theories When the individual is comfortable with the social roles taken; the appropriateness of social roles needs evaluation within value frameworks. Ability to make an idiosyncratic combination of roles which satisfy the individual. Satisfactory completion of developmental tasks Eg. Achieving ego integrity, intimacy etc. Building a meaningful world view with resolution of psychological inconsistencies. Maintenance of sense of continuity over time. Satisfactory development of distinctness and volition, together with meaningful material, spiritual and social constituents. As the individual matures he/she negotiates change progressively from stage to stage. Satisfactory progression through stages of development towards a more interdependent self. Achievement of high self-regard (and selfassertiveness)

Identity as a public feature

Multiple social identities (Rosenberg and Gara, 1985) Eriksons developmental tasks (1963) Presumes a continuity of proprietorship during the development of identity; finds evolving answers to the question who am I? as the fundamental needs in succeeding developmental tasks are addressed. I and Me as components of self as knower and selfknown

Description of identity in terms of multiple social roles and cultural reference groups Experimentation with social roles together with an attempt to harmonise these internally.

Psychological constructs with continuity over time

William James (1890)

Materials form a part of the self as known.

Robert Kegans stage theory of development of the self (1982)

Self esteem theory (1970s see Kohn, 1994)

The evolution of self through a series of structuraldevelopmental stages where selfunderstanding operates in modes distinctive of the stage. (Eg. Stages include incorporative, impulsive self, imperial self and interpersonal self. An undifferentiated notion of self-regard which may be high or low. Self-concept (self-image) which is positive or negative .

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter Psychological constructs with a dynamic multiplicity of components and a focus on organisation of knowledge as a key factor. These theories address the ways individuals process and organise information in the interpretation of self Complexity of images (Rhodewalt & Morf, 1995)

9
Self interpreted in terms of multiple images Collection of images which satisfy the individual.

Mental representations (Kihlstrom & Cantor, 1984)

Self interpreted in terms of mental representations

A self-description which is found satisfying and which meets needs.

Facets (Marsh, 1986),

Goals (Brandstdter & Rothermund, 1994)

Tasks (Sheldon & Emmons, 1995) Possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986) Private, public, and collective selves (Triandis, 1989)

Actual, ought, and ideal selves (Higgins, 1987).

Self interpreted as a combination of different facets (aspects which embody qualities and action) Self interpreted in terms of life goals to be achieved. Self is motivated by aims for life. Self interpreted in terms of multiple developmental tasks. Self interpreted in terms of interactions between different possible expressions of the self. The self interpreted in terms of interaction between understandings of the individual, his/her public expression and the identities of the groups in which the individual participates. Self interpreted in the light of perceived discrepancies between different expressions of the self.

An individually satisfying combination of facets. Facets need to be comprehensive to cover all aspects of life. The achievement of particular life goals.

Satisfactory completion of particular tasks. A satisfying sense of self achieved through combinations of attributes from different possible selves. A satisfying sense of self derived from internal and external representations.

The public and collective selves can be reference points for the individuals sense of identity.

Psychological constructs with a dynamic multiplicity of components and a narrative perspective.

Narrative theory of identity (Bruner, 1986; Cohler, 1982; Gergen & Gergen, 1988; Hermans, 1996a,b; McAdams, 1993; Sarbin, 1986; Thomae, 1988; Tomkins, 1987).

The world and personal experience are given meaning as parts of a narrative or autobiographical structure. A history of episodic events influence self understanding.

Cultural elements contribute to the experience of individuals and stimulate narrative interpretation.

The satisfying resolution, to some extent, of discrepancies between the perceptions of the actual self, the ideal self and the morally desirable self. A sense of satisfying meaning is derived from narrative understanding of self and experience.

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter (Continued) Psychological constructs with a dynamic multiplicity of components and a narrative perspective. Paul Ricoeurs narrative perspective on identity

10
Identity development is an autobiographical process; it is derived psychologically from personal reflection -primarily a process of interpretation (hermeneutics). Going beyond the I as author and me as actor to a plurality of relatively independent narrative perspectives. Self is understood and expressed through a dynamic multiplicity of relatively autonomous I positions which interact through dialogue. The individual interprets identity through interaction with community narratives. Achieving an ongoing, satisfying narrative which helps interpret the individuals sense of self and experience.

The narrative perspective of the polyphonic novel as proposed by Bakhtin (See Hermans and Kempen, 1993) The dialogical self (Hermans, Kempen and Van Loon, 1992)

Allowing multiple different voices to have a say in understanding the self. Dialogical relationships for identity can extend to others. Through dialogical relationships (mainly internal) the individuals identity achieves a multivocal quality; A number of distinct and semiautonomous voices are allowed to have a say in the self-expression of the individual. Success in dialogue between the different identity voices; this would also include conflict that is not always resolved. Achievement of a satisfying image of self that is in harmony with the culture.

Psychological constructs which emphasise the influence of culture/others on the development of identity

C.H. Cooleys idea of the looking glass self as developed in symbolic interactionist school of sociology. (Cooley 1998 -- from work written at the turn of the century ; see also Blumer, 1969)

The image of self is in part derived from reflections of the self that an individual encounters through interaction with others.

Social interaction has a major influence on selfunderstanding. How individuals are viewed and treated by others has a significant bearing on their acquisition of values, beliefs, and sense of self.

Further reflections on the analysis in the table Within the limitations of this exercise (particularly my tentative comments in the final column), it seems to me that many interesting issues are raised by the question about what might constitute identity health within the different theoretical frameworks. Most of the theories would seem to give rise to an idea of identity health that is more concerned with the successful engagement in, or completion of, psychological processes rather than with identity content. By content I mean qualities or self and behaviour which can be evaluated in moral and ethical terms an evaluation of how identity meets individual needs, freedom, rights, self-expression and quality of life, and how it might impact on the rights and needs of others and the community. Have the theories of self been too value free or value neutral? Where the focus is predominantly psychological, have the theories tended to reinforce, even unintentionally, a cultural and individual narcissism? If exaggerated individualism and narcissism are problems in our society, then is there a need for individual-focused psychology to build in some correctives? When thinking about what each theory might imply for identity health, I found it difficult to avoid using the words satisfying for the individual as the ultimate source of value judgments about a healthy identity. In one sense, it is the natural province of the individual to make such judgments. However, I feel uncomfortable about the possibility of excessive subjectivism and relativism that might be implied if identity health were to be judged exclusively by what pleases individuals or meets their needs. I would hope that there were some objective value

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

11

judgments that could be used by individuals and by those with educational responsibilities for promoting the moral evaluation of identity. The other area I would like to comment on in this response is the notion of education in identity. I hope to show how the ideas presented by Professor Hermans might flow through to education. 6. Theories of identity and self from the perspective of an education in identity

Usually the first idea that the term education in identity brings to mind is the intention of a cultural group to transmit or communicate some social identity to young people through a formal educational process (Eg. Public school, religious school, community of faith). I believe that this is a legitimate intention, but not without qualification. It also should be noted that other forums are probably more important and effective for communicating a sense of identity; schools have only a limited role. Both the ethics of education in public and religious schools, and the theories of identity would propose that an education in identity should respect the freedom and integrity of the individual, and his/her right to conscious participation in the process of identity development. Hence, an education in identity should involve not just the teaching of identity content, but a study of the identity forming processes themselves; this could help foster a more informed and responsible participation of young people in their own identity development the level of involvement depending on their age and level of maturity. Another crucial element to include in this education would be an attempt to help young people learn how to evaluate both identity content and formative process, as well as contemporary issues that are identity related (Eg. Religious and ethnic violence, racial prejudice). To bring the accounts of identity theories (as summarised by Professor Hermans) into an education in identity, I would begin with an educational working definition of identity as follows. This is not a definition like those considered above, but a way of giving direction to the study of identity processes and issues. It is a scheme within which different theories of identity can be considered. Because formal education (Eg. in schools) is specially concerned with handing on an intellectual culture, this scheme sets out to give special attention to the way internal psychology is linked with culture. It is concerned with the way in which individuals draw on cultural elements, using them as resources for identity development; they can be internalised and appropriated, and used for the construction of meaning. From this viewpoint, identity is the process in which individuals draw on cultural elements for their selfunderstanding and self- expression. It looks at the way that externals and ideas can be appropriated or used as cultural reference points for the internal process of self-understanding; this view draws attention to the individuals incorporation of ideas, beliefs, images, objects, behaviour patterns etc. into their thinking and behaviour (even when this happens relatively un-self-consciously) to help them make sense of their lives both inner experience and their experience of life. These identity related elements can also serve as forms of selfexpression -- to help individuals express themselves, particularly in ways they feel are consistent with their identity; combinations of internal processes and cultural elements can inform self-expression. This educational framework for considering identity focuses on a dynamic interplay between individuals and the culture; it is like making use of external elements of culture (such as family life, heroes/heroines, peers, religion, school, artefacts, work, lifestyle), in relationship with internal elements (like needs, beliefs, values, ideals, emotions and moods), to fashion the internal clothing of individuals which in turn gives them a sense of self; it is also meshed with their sense of individuality and uniqueness. When individuals think about their identity, these self-defining elements come to mind as their reference points. Another important component of this approach is a value judgement about what constitutes identity health. For example, it is proposed that a healthy identity needs to be rooted primarily in internal resources such as beliefs, values, commitments and attitudes (these can be thought of as spiritual resources they may or may not include formally religious elements). External reference points and links with culture (family, peers, cultural groups etc.) are fundamentally important. Within this interpretative framework, a healthy identity requires a balance between internal and external identity resources. Some identity problems may be interpreted in terms of too great a dependence on externals, or too much dependence on internals. From this point of view, an education in identity would include the following elements:

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

12

1. The educational institution needs to ensure that its curriculum includes adequate attention to its culture and traditions which are needed by students as identity building materials. The idea is to give students access to these identity resources, along with those provided by home and other agencies, as well as by the popular culture. Whether or not individuals incorporate particular elements into their sense of identity cannot be determined by teachers however, it is the educators responsibility to ensure that appropriate access to cultural traditions is provided. 2. A study of the processes of identity formation can help students understand something of the dynamic interplay between culture and the individual. It provides a construct for interpreting and making sense of human behaviour and development, both in the self and others. It can help individuals become more critically aware of how identity forming processes could operate, both in themselves and others; influences which previously operated at a relatively subconscious level could be identified, better understood and evaluated. This provides the ground work for some level of conscious involvement in the development of identity as well as a better capacity to resist efforts from outside to form their identity. 3. Value judgments need to be made about what constitutes identity health. Within this system, it is proposed that a healthy identity includes a balance between internal and external identity resources; this is where an individuals sense of identity is not dominated exclusively by conformity to, and dependence on, externals (or authorities); it includes internal resources (beliefs, values, positive attitudes, commitments). A healthy identity is not only concerned with development of the self, but also with the welfare of others -- it should not motivate behaviour that is anti-social or harmful to others or the environment. Healthy identity is not isolated, self-centred or excessively individualistic it is positively oriented to relationships. 4. As a result of 1, 2 and 3, individuals might be better able to develop a critical perspective on the way that culture has a shaping influence on identity, beliefs, attitudes, values and behaviour. Hopefully, such a perspective would help them become more wise and discerning in their understanding of the formative functions of institutions and culture. Their sense of identity and self could thus be enhanced through education. There is then less chance that they would accept ready made or imposed identities uncritically. 5. Educating for identity also includes the notion of extending the identity horizons of individuals. They may be helped to consider moving beyond the sense of identity that they have inherited socially and to look at possibilities for the further development of their identity by making use of resources which they have learned about through education. Hopefully, another outcome of education in identity could be a better understanding and tolerance of the identities of others. (Eg. Education may help people understand how narrow identity labels can reinforce prejudices and bias against particular groups and individuals.) This view of the identity process provides useful curriculum themes for selecting content and teaching approaches. Traditions need not be presented just for their own sake; they can be presented because, to be educated, individuals need access to the traditions which have helped people make sense of their lives both in the past and the present. These traditions are not imposed, but offered as identity building resources. Also, consideration of how beliefs, ideas etc. are used to give purpose and value to life provides an appropriate teaching focus that can be more interesting and relevant for young people for whom the search for meaning in a puzzling world remains a fundamental concern. The Moral Self and Identity Development I believe it is very important to include a moral component to the interpretation of self. This applies particularly to the moral character of the behaviour which expresses the self. Education in identity should then give attention to issues concerned with moral self-evaluation, even though it would not set itself up for the moral evaluation of the students! Issues such as the following could be considered: Some aspects of self-expression might not be in the best interests of the individual or it may be harmful to others. This view can be related to popular thinking about what constitutes ones better self. There may be both light and dark sides of the self. The mature and moral individual could be interpreted as one whose better self is maximised in expression and behaviour, and where harmful behaviours which may emanate from the negative self are minimised. Fidelity to ones own personal beliefs and values could be proposed as a mark of a morally mature self. As Polonius advised Laertes in Shakespeares Hamlet, first of all, to thine one self be true. Then it follows, as surely as the night follows the day, that thou shalt not be false to any man. 7. Education for identity within religious and moral education

This approach is relevant to the teaching of religion in school. It presents the study of religious traditions under a theme which fits in with the secularised mood of contemporary western cultures especially for young people. Even though students may not be receptive to religious teaching and may be antagonistic to organised religion,

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

13

they can be shown that to be educated they need a basic familiarity with the cultural and religious traditions that have shaped peoples lives. Whether or not they incorporate religious belief and practice into their lives, they can be encouraged to see how religious and moral education can help them learn how to identify and address a spiritual and moral dimension to life. This would not be intended as the latest institutional trick to help make religion teaching more palatable to disinterested youth. Rather it would be an attempt to make religious education a valuable educational process for students whether or not they are formally religious. A key element in religious education would be helping students learn how to become interpreters of the spiritual and moral dimension to life hence the relevance of hermeneutics for religious education. Use of the construct identity can help with interpretation of self understanding and self expression for the self and others. Elsewhere (Rossiter, 1999B) I have considered how the social sciences made a valuable contribution to Catholic school religious education after the second Vatican Council through the development of a psychological spirituality; this development has parallels in other religious education contexts. While this gave useful and relevant insights into personal development, where it was over-used, and not kept in balance with other interests, it tended to result in a religious education that looked excessively individualistic in its focus. There was a danger that it could promote and reinforce self-centeredness and self-preoccupation in pupils, aggravating problems of narcissism that might already be there in some individuals. When promoting the use of theories of identity to foster personal development, I suggest that there is this same need to be cautious of an education that appears to harmonise with narcissism. Attempts to minimise this potential problem could involve the following: studying identity development in a larger context which emphasises a place for transcendence, responsibilities as well as rights and freedom, a commitment to social justice and a need for critical interpretation of cultural (structural and political) influences on human development and the operation of institutions. This means that when promoting the use of theories of identity development for individuals, some attention is given to limitations and potential problems that may arise through an excessive focus on identity and the self. Stressing the importance of internal identity resources does not have to imply self centredness; individuality does not have to exclude altruism; autonomy does not have to exclude interdependence. Christian spirituality has much to offer in its emphasis on fidelity to others. It states parabolically that individuals may find themselves best in the very process of giving themselves away for others; social justice is central to Christian spirituality, and service is central to Christian ministry. This perspective would also call into question modern society's preoccupation with individuality and also its materialism. I believe that what is really crucial for religious education is the perceived relevance of cultural elements (including narratives) for making sense of life. This is why I think there has been a deterioration in the significance of religious identity; because the language in which religion has been traditionally expressed seems to have little relevance for people today they do not see that traditional religious language comes to grips with the issues and questions about life which are of most immediate concern to people. When principles, stories, etc. help people make some sense of their current experience and of the world they live in, then they will ascribe relevance to these elements. For youth (and many from other generations as well) the credibility of both religion and education is now very dependent on their perceived relevance to todays issues. Some examples of the way in which the theme of identity can be been used within religious education are given elsewhere (Crawford and Rossiter, 2001). For example: How might we help students learn how to analyse and evaluate experience in which people seem to be seduced into a sense of identity that is subtly constructed for them as a marketable package by power/economic/advertising/media groups in society? How can students learn how to make use of theories of identity development which could help alert them not only to their human potentialities, but also to dangers to their own humanness and authentic identity? Clearly, reference to value judgments and normative positions would be involved in such evaluations especially in looking at what authentic might mean. While educators take different value positions, the differences do not excuse educators from undertaking the task value assumptions need to be made very clear as part of the educational process. Ideas on how to address the prominence of film and television as a spiritual and moral influence on identity are given in Rossiter (1996, 1997 and 1999A). A related issue is the way in which advertising informed by psychology has taken identity development and identity needs into account for the planning of marketing

Response to Prof Hermans: G.Rossiter

14

strategies. The manufacture and marketing of commodities as identity reference points contributes to what might be called retail identity. This question is addressed educationally by Rossiter (1999A). ************************************************************* Correspondence on this material can be directed to Associate Professor Graham Rossiter, School of Religious Education, Australian Catholic University, Locked Bag 2002, Strathfield, Sydney, NSW 2135 Australia. Fax: 61-2-9739 2275 Email: g.rossiter@mary.acu.edu.au Web: www.acu.edu.au/ren/index.htm ************************************************************* Bibliography Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs N.J: Prentice Hall. Borba, C and Borba, M. (1978). Self Esteem, a classroom affair: 101 ways to help children like themselves. Minneapolis: Winston Press. Clark, J. (1978). Self Esteem: A family affair. Minneapolis: Winston Press. Cooley, C. H. (1998). On self and social organisation: Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929) H-J Schubert (Ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Crawford, M.L. and Rossiter, G.T. (2001 in manuscript) Reasons for living: Religious Education and young peoples search for meaning, spirituality and identity. Kegan, R. (1982) Kohn, A. (1994). The Truth About Self-Esteem. Phi Delta Kappan, 272-283. Meijer, W. (1995) The Plural Self: The Hermeneutical View on Identity and Plurality. British Journal of Religious Education, 17, 2, 92-99. Ricoeur, P. (1986). Life: A Story in Search of a Narrator, In Facts and Values. Philosophical Reflections from Western and Non-Western Perspectives. Ed. M.C. Doeser & N. Kraaj: Dordrecht, 121-132. Ricoeur, P. (1988), Time and Narrative, Volume 3, Chicago and London: Chicago University Press. (Translation of Temps et recit. 3.). Rossiter, G.M. (1996). Science, Film and Television: An Introductory Study of the Alternative Religious Stories that Shape the Spirituality of Children and Adolescents, Part 1. International Journal of Children's Spirituality, 1, 1, 52-67. Rossiter, G.M. (1997). The Shaping Influence of Film and Television on Young People's Spirituality: Implications for Moral and Religious Education, Part 2. International Journal of Children's Spirituality, 1, 2, 21-35. Rossiter, G.M. (1999A). The shaping influence of film and television on the spirituality and identity of children and adolescents: An educational response, part 3. International Journal of Children's Spirituality, 4, 2, 207224 Rossiter, G.M. (1999B). Historical perspective on the development of Catholic Religious Education in Australia: Some implications for the future. Journal of Religious Education, 47, 1, 5-18.