What do you think?
Rate this book
The Feel-Good Curriculum: The Dumbing Down Of America's Kids In The Name Of Self-esteem
The so-called self-esteem movement-a progressive, child-centered, discovery model of schooling-has transformed schools into therapeutic clinics and teachers into counselors, creating a generation of entitled, righteous, underachieving children. An insider's account of the pernicious aspects of this seemingly well-meaning movement, The Feel-Good Curriculum provides devastating evidence that our belief in the power and importance of self-esteem in education is misplaced and without basis.Avoiding political posturing and political correctness, The Feel-Good Curriculum identifies the four specific effects of self-esteem's stranglehold on our schools-narcissism, emotivism, separatism, and cynicism. It prescribes antidotes to them-empathy, rationality and morality, connectedness, and skepticism-and offers a hopeful view of educational philosophy for the next millennium. Professor Stout urges us to replace our coddling, indulgent approach to building self-esteem in children with a sense of authentic self-confidence developed from intellectual, physical, and moral effort and achievement.
336 pages, Paperback
First published January 6, 2000
4 people are currently reading
57 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
March 31, 2013
The Feel-Good Curriculum by Maureen Stout is about the "self-esteem" agenda that's overtaken much of public education in the U.S. and is responsible for grade inflation and social promotion. There are too many good passages in the book to quote or even summarize here, but I do want to recommend it to anyone interested in education. A few salient points:
Stout explains that "self-esteem" means thinking you're a good person no matter what, and in fact, thinking that everything you do is good. What's wrong with thinking that 2 plus 2 equals 5? It may be impractical on occasion, but it's not wrong. "The only meaning is the meaning that comes from within." I agree when the meaning is coming from me, but I guarantee that some things that come from within certain other people are pretty much wrong. Seriously, in the eye of God, we may all be light and beauty, but this is a world of differentiation. Also, we must distinguish between respecting the worth of a human being, and acknowledging his actual knowledge and achievement. And we must distinguish between feeling and thinking. The schools should teach the means of making these distinctions.
Some teachers have objected not just to giving but to taking competency tests, because they don't do well. Naturally a math teacher, for example, can't be expected to excel in art, and art leaves more room for subjectivity than math. But teachers who don't have basic competencies, plus excellent skills in their particular field, perhaps should be in another line of work. Stout teaches teachers, and says the ones who've come out of the deteriorated public school system of the last couple of decades feel entitled to self-esteem too. And jobs.
Although statistics show that the "whole language" theory of teaching reading has proved a failure, educators are reluctant to relinquish it and go back to teaching phonics. They ignore the research. Of course phonics isn't as simple in English as it is in Spanish, for example, but it gives students something to work with.
Stout quotes from an award-winning article in English Leadership Quarterly (published by the National Council of Teachers of English) that "urges teachers to make intentional errors in English as 'the only way to end its oppression of linguistic minorities and learning writers'." My foreign students would not agree. They would feel oppressed and cheated if I didn't teach them correct standard English.
One of my Latin American students became dissatisfied with her children's preschool because they were not being taught phonics. A neighbor had also warned her against using phonics, but — her kids weren't learning to read. Another student, also Latin American, finds that her son is having problems because his aggressive personality has no acceptable outlet in his preschool's non-competitive environment. These are two aspects of the same problem. The aggressive little boy has to learn cooperation, but he also needs to find a place where he may be allowed to excel, if he can, which is what he wants to do. That spot will probably be sports, since that's one place where aggressiveness is valued.
Why is it, by the way, that people usually don't resent the fact that some people are athletically gifted, while they may resent people with high intelligence or academic success? I heard someone ranting on the radio about a school that is getting pressure not to display the best artistic or academic work on the walls, because it might make some students feel bad. I bet they don’t get the same pressure not to display athletic trophies. Some people have greater natural athletic or artistic or intellectual abilities, but most people can improve by study and practice. Maybe parents don't like being reminded that they're not putting in the time and sweat that some others do to help their kids. I had trouble explaining to my American students last year that they could improve their English skills (and thus their grades) by working at it. As one of my students put it so succinctly, "It's not fair that some people get better grades just because they write better!"
Or as my bro Sam (maybe I'll start calling him Sambro) once said, there's a direct correlation between grades and turning the pages of your textbook. Kids will feel good about themselves if they do that.
Stout explains that "self-esteem" means thinking you're a good person no matter what, and in fact, thinking that everything you do is good. What's wrong with thinking that 2 plus 2 equals 5? It may be impractical on occasion, but it's not wrong. "The only meaning is the meaning that comes from within." I agree when the meaning is coming from me, but I guarantee that some things that come from within certain other people are pretty much wrong. Seriously, in the eye of God, we may all be light and beauty, but this is a world of differentiation. Also, we must distinguish between respecting the worth of a human being, and acknowledging his actual knowledge and achievement. And we must distinguish between feeling and thinking. The schools should teach the means of making these distinctions.
Some teachers have objected not just to giving but to taking competency tests, because they don't do well. Naturally a math teacher, for example, can't be expected to excel in art, and art leaves more room for subjectivity than math. But teachers who don't have basic competencies, plus excellent skills in their particular field, perhaps should be in another line of work. Stout teaches teachers, and says the ones who've come out of the deteriorated public school system of the last couple of decades feel entitled to self-esteem too. And jobs.
Although statistics show that the "whole language" theory of teaching reading has proved a failure, educators are reluctant to relinquish it and go back to teaching phonics. They ignore the research. Of course phonics isn't as simple in English as it is in Spanish, for example, but it gives students something to work with.
Stout quotes from an award-winning article in English Leadership Quarterly (published by the National Council of Teachers of English) that "urges teachers to make intentional errors in English as 'the only way to end its oppression of linguistic minorities and learning writers'." My foreign students would not agree. They would feel oppressed and cheated if I didn't teach them correct standard English.
One of my Latin American students became dissatisfied with her children's preschool because they were not being taught phonics. A neighbor had also warned her against using phonics, but — her kids weren't learning to read. Another student, also Latin American, finds that her son is having problems because his aggressive personality has no acceptable outlet in his preschool's non-competitive environment. These are two aspects of the same problem. The aggressive little boy has to learn cooperation, but he also needs to find a place where he may be allowed to excel, if he can, which is what he wants to do. That spot will probably be sports, since that's one place where aggressiveness is valued.
Why is it, by the way, that people usually don't resent the fact that some people are athletically gifted, while they may resent people with high intelligence or academic success? I heard someone ranting on the radio about a school that is getting pressure not to display the best artistic or academic work on the walls, because it might make some students feel bad. I bet they don’t get the same pressure not to display athletic trophies. Some people have greater natural athletic or artistic or intellectual abilities, but most people can improve by study and practice. Maybe parents don't like being reminded that they're not putting in the time and sweat that some others do to help their kids. I had trouble explaining to my American students last year that they could improve their English skills (and thus their grades) by working at it. As one of my students put it so succinctly, "It's not fair that some people get better grades just because they write better!"
Or as my bro Sam (maybe I'll start calling him Sambro) once said, there's a direct correlation between grades and turning the pages of your textbook. Kids will feel good about themselves if they do that.
Read
June 4, 2023IS THE PROMOTION OF SELF-ESTEEM ACTUALLY HARMFUL TO STUDENTS?
Author Maureen Stout wrote in the Preface to this 2000 book, “many of these future teachers seemed apathetic … [They] seemed to think that they should get A’s for effort rather than achievement, that high expectations were a form of oppression, and that they were entitled to good grades just for showing up in class…. Self-esteem, they had been told, was one of the main goals of public education … These students had been indoctrinated by … their education professors—that the way to get kids to feel good about themselves is not by … striving for excellence… but by telling them they’re wonderful---whether they are or not. Unfortunately, these fallacies … have damaged at least two generations of kids in the United States. And… the students who are most hurt by these fallacies are those who were meant to most benefit from them: poor and minority kids… Success has moral as well as intellectual components, and in this book I propose that moral guidance, broadly defined, must be part of the foundation of public schooling. If there is anger in this book, it is directed … at the cynicism of some education professors who continue to promote ideas regarding self-esteem that do more harm than good.” (Pg. x-xi)
She continues, “This book tells the story of the self-esteem---its effects on our schools and society, and … how we can fix what has gone wrong.” (Pg. 5) She adds, “This book examines the reality of self-esteem and how the public has been tragically misled by academics, policymakers, and educators into believing in a concept that is not only empty but very dangerous.” (Pg. 13) Later, she adds, “One of the themes of this book is that self-confidence is important but it must be authentic. Authentic self-confidence develops from intellectual, physical, and moral effort and achievement, and can come as much from lessons learned from failure as from success.” (Pg. 41)
She states, “almost any activity that requires an investment of the mind, body, or soul and leads to self-improvement or the betterment of others is an activity that will naturally lead to feelings of self-worth. That is meaningful self-esteem: feeling good about oneself because of intentional effort aimed at improvement and accomplishment.” (Pg. 14)
She argues, "in many ways the idea of self-esteem is the perfect icon for a postmodern world: entirely self-referential, highly relative, ill defined, totally individualized, and deliberately ignorant of either the concept or community or the ideal of progress. If acquiring high self-esteem has replaced the ideals of creating a civil society, ensuring social justice, or developing character and intellect, we have truly fulfilled the gloomy destiny of postmodernism by replacing those ideals with new ideologies: narcissism, separatism, emotivism, and cynicism. The idolization of the self is the ultimate consequence not of modernism but of our failure to preserve its promise.” (Pg. 6)
She asserts, “The self-esteem movement also creates a permanent state of victimization. The student is inadequate---a victim of bad parents or mean teachers and an uncaring society---and must be ‘cured’ by a variety of therapeutic practices and teaching methods designed to foster self-esteem… In a tragically self-fulfilling prophecy, these kids will only achieve what is expected of them: very little.” (Pg. 16)
She contends, “For many years, minorities have had their identites either completely negated or defined wholly in terms of the ‘norm’ of the white man. Thus it is hardly surprising if black Americans and other groups wish to capitalize on the idea of being outside the mainstream and redefine themselves are positively distinct. This is one kind of separatism seen in schools that is clearly a legacy of racism and institutional discrimination. But it is inflamed and exacerbated by the self-esteem movement, which defines identity primarily in terms of ethnicity.” (Pg. 37)
She notes, “the progressive [education] movement gave ideology and energy to what we now know as the self-esteem movement. The idea of authority being taken from the teacher and given to the child; the notion that no one should fail a test; the emphasis on personal creativity can collaborative group work---there are all hallmarks of the current self-esteem movement as well as the progressive movement of the 1930s and 1940s.” (Pg. 79)
She outlines, “the self-esteem movement has woven a whole tapestry of myths masquerading as truth… I review the ten major myths of the self-esteem movement… Myth 1: High Expectations for Students are Damaging to Their Self-Esteem… Myth 2: Evaluation … is Punitive, Stressful, and Damaging to Self-Esteem… Myth 3: Teaching and Learning Must Always Be ‘Relevant’ and Student-Centered… Myth 4: Effort is More Important than Achievement… Myth 5: Competition Leads to Low Self-Esteem and Should Be Replaced by Cooperation… Myth 6: Students Should be Promoted from One Grade to the Next, Irrespective of Achievement… Myth 7: Discipline is Bad for Self-Esteem and Therefore Should Be Dispensed With… Myth 8: Teachers Should Be Therapists… Myth 9: It is the Teacher's, Not the Student’s, Responsibility to Ensure Learning… Myth 10: Feeling Is More Important Than Thinking.” (Pg. 160-172)
She asserts, “Another thing that worries liberals about teaching morality is that somehow teaching virtue is not democratic; that it sets up standards that no one can meet and therefore discrimination against certain groups. But the virtue of virtue… is… precisely the opposite. It does not discriminate. If we expect all students to be honest, decent, responsible, and courageous, how can that possibly be called discriminatory?” (Pg. 231)
She concludes, “We need to restore the dreams that have been shattered by the self-esteem movement by letting children know that they are capable of great things… Hope is not an irrational concept… If, as a society, we embrace these ideals, rather than the ideals of the self-esteem movement, they will not only guide us into the future… but will prevent us from becoming vulnerable to other kinds of dangerous fads that threaten public education. Our children deserve no less.” (Pg. 276)
This book may interest those studying current trends in educational psychology.
Author Maureen Stout wrote in the Preface to this 2000 book, “many of these future teachers seemed apathetic … [They] seemed to think that they should get A’s for effort rather than achievement, that high expectations were a form of oppression, and that they were entitled to good grades just for showing up in class…. Self-esteem, they had been told, was one of the main goals of public education … These students had been indoctrinated by … their education professors—that the way to get kids to feel good about themselves is not by … striving for excellence… but by telling them they’re wonderful---whether they are or not. Unfortunately, these fallacies … have damaged at least two generations of kids in the United States. And… the students who are most hurt by these fallacies are those who were meant to most benefit from them: poor and minority kids… Success has moral as well as intellectual components, and in this book I propose that moral guidance, broadly defined, must be part of the foundation of public schooling. If there is anger in this book, it is directed … at the cynicism of some education professors who continue to promote ideas regarding self-esteem that do more harm than good.” (Pg. x-xi)
She continues, “This book tells the story of the self-esteem---its effects on our schools and society, and … how we can fix what has gone wrong.” (Pg. 5) She adds, “This book examines the reality of self-esteem and how the public has been tragically misled by academics, policymakers, and educators into believing in a concept that is not only empty but very dangerous.” (Pg. 13) Later, she adds, “One of the themes of this book is that self-confidence is important but it must be authentic. Authentic self-confidence develops from intellectual, physical, and moral effort and achievement, and can come as much from lessons learned from failure as from success.” (Pg. 41)
She states, “almost any activity that requires an investment of the mind, body, or soul and leads to self-improvement or the betterment of others is an activity that will naturally lead to feelings of self-worth. That is meaningful self-esteem: feeling good about oneself because of intentional effort aimed at improvement and accomplishment.” (Pg. 14)
She argues, "in many ways the idea of self-esteem is the perfect icon for a postmodern world: entirely self-referential, highly relative, ill defined, totally individualized, and deliberately ignorant of either the concept or community or the ideal of progress. If acquiring high self-esteem has replaced the ideals of creating a civil society, ensuring social justice, or developing character and intellect, we have truly fulfilled the gloomy destiny of postmodernism by replacing those ideals with new ideologies: narcissism, separatism, emotivism, and cynicism. The idolization of the self is the ultimate consequence not of modernism but of our failure to preserve its promise.” (Pg. 6)
She asserts, “The self-esteem movement also creates a permanent state of victimization. The student is inadequate---a victim of bad parents or mean teachers and an uncaring society---and must be ‘cured’ by a variety of therapeutic practices and teaching methods designed to foster self-esteem… In a tragically self-fulfilling prophecy, these kids will only achieve what is expected of them: very little.” (Pg. 16)
She contends, “For many years, minorities have had their identites either completely negated or defined wholly in terms of the ‘norm’ of the white man. Thus it is hardly surprising if black Americans and other groups wish to capitalize on the idea of being outside the mainstream and redefine themselves are positively distinct. This is one kind of separatism seen in schools that is clearly a legacy of racism and institutional discrimination. But it is inflamed and exacerbated by the self-esteem movement, which defines identity primarily in terms of ethnicity.” (Pg. 37)
She notes, “the progressive [education] movement gave ideology and energy to what we now know as the self-esteem movement. The idea of authority being taken from the teacher and given to the child; the notion that no one should fail a test; the emphasis on personal creativity can collaborative group work---there are all hallmarks of the current self-esteem movement as well as the progressive movement of the 1930s and 1940s.” (Pg. 79)
She outlines, “the self-esteem movement has woven a whole tapestry of myths masquerading as truth… I review the ten major myths of the self-esteem movement… Myth 1: High Expectations for Students are Damaging to Their Self-Esteem… Myth 2: Evaluation … is Punitive, Stressful, and Damaging to Self-Esteem… Myth 3: Teaching and Learning Must Always Be ‘Relevant’ and Student-Centered… Myth 4: Effort is More Important than Achievement… Myth 5: Competition Leads to Low Self-Esteem and Should Be Replaced by Cooperation… Myth 6: Students Should be Promoted from One Grade to the Next, Irrespective of Achievement… Myth 7: Discipline is Bad for Self-Esteem and Therefore Should Be Dispensed With… Myth 8: Teachers Should Be Therapists… Myth 9: It is the Teacher's, Not the Student’s, Responsibility to Ensure Learning… Myth 10: Feeling Is More Important Than Thinking.” (Pg. 160-172)
She asserts, “Another thing that worries liberals about teaching morality is that somehow teaching virtue is not democratic; that it sets up standards that no one can meet and therefore discrimination against certain groups. But the virtue of virtue… is… precisely the opposite. It does not discriminate. If we expect all students to be honest, decent, responsible, and courageous, how can that possibly be called discriminatory?” (Pg. 231)
She concludes, “We need to restore the dreams that have been shattered by the self-esteem movement by letting children know that they are capable of great things… Hope is not an irrational concept… If, as a society, we embrace these ideals, rather than the ideals of the self-esteem movement, they will not only guide us into the future… but will prevent us from becoming vulnerable to other kinds of dangerous fads that threaten public education. Our children deserve no less.” (Pg. 276)
This book may interest those studying current trends in educational psychology.
January 9, 2018
As I read this book I felt a need to reflect on each (and there are quite a few) topics that I found relevant both as a teacher and as one of the students being described as "victim" of the self-esteem movement.
Yet one idea trumps all the mental notes I had accumulated: Good intentions don't necessarily yield good results. And that's ok, despite the hit your self-esteem may take from the failure. If you allow yourself to be human, make mistakes, suffer disappointments, find yourself in uncomfortable or even situations, then you are allowing yourself to live IN the world.
Living and feeling must be seen as two distinct actions (though they are certainly tied to one another). Focusing heavily on promoting self-esteem without requiring a person to live is a great injustice that has already become all too common.
I take away two important messages from this book...
1. Having experienced the early stages of the self-esteem obsession I must be careful not to fall into the trap of entitlement and expectations for a problem-free, pain-free life.
2. As a teacher, I have taken on the responsibility to help prepare my students for life beyond the classroom. I am more than a facilitator, I am an educator with the capability to model a less narcissistic way of living and to uphold the same expectations to my students. Anything less than preparing them for the rude awakening that follows graduation does just as much harm as avoiding the "uncomfortable" matter.
Yet one idea trumps all the mental notes I had accumulated: Good intentions don't necessarily yield good results. And that's ok, despite the hit your self-esteem may take from the failure. If you allow yourself to be human, make mistakes, suffer disappointments, find yourself in uncomfortable or even situations, then you are allowing yourself to live IN the world.
Living and feeling must be seen as two distinct actions (though they are certainly tied to one another). Focusing heavily on promoting self-esteem without requiring a person to live is a great injustice that has already become all too common.
I take away two important messages from this book...
1. Having experienced the early stages of the self-esteem obsession I must be careful not to fall into the trap of entitlement and expectations for a problem-free, pain-free life.
2. As a teacher, I have taken on the responsibility to help prepare my students for life beyond the classroom. I am more than a facilitator, I am an educator with the capability to model a less narcissistic way of living and to uphold the same expectations to my students. Anything less than preparing them for the rude awakening that follows graduation does just as much harm as avoiding the "uncomfortable" matter.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 30, 2017
I agree with most of what she said though I wish it had been more facts and less opinion. This is an older book, and I fear it's just gotten worse.
July 28, 2015
I agree with just about everything that Stout writes in this book, but I don't think that she does a good enough job citing hard, conclusive data to those that actually believe in the self-esteem method of education. The self-esteem side has little to no evidence going for it, but Stout attempts to counteract it by using primarily professional opinions rather than using data as her most important resources.
Her main thesis is that the self-esteem movement is destroying the American education system. Today's teachers have been educated in this environment in which everyone's opinion is considered valid, nothing is done that could potentially hurt a child's self-esteem, and there aren't strong standards anymore. Social promotion has become commonplace and children are graduating from high school in some parts of this country without being able to even read properly. This leads to adults that do not know how to debate, argue, or prove a point with rational data and analysis. They do not believe that they need to reach high standards, thinking that the bar will always be lowered to them as long as they "work hard". Students coming out of high school and college are not prepared for the work world, where standards run supreme and no one is going to make exceptions for you. Stout believes that we need to reinstate strong standards, stop practices like social promotion, and reinstate teachers as respected educators (rather than as counselors, babysitters, etc.). Students tend to live up (or down) to the standards we make for them, so the path to ultimate success is to set high, but attainable, standards. She also believes that schools of education need to be revamped to reflect these new ideals. Many of today's professors have been indoctrinated by the self-esteem movement, so it is strongly entrenched among the professors of our future teachers. These entrenched opinions need to be eradicated if we ever are to fix the American education system.
All in all, I liked reading this book. Stout knows what she's talking about and has a wealth of experience to draw on, from her time in teacher schooling as a student to her time as a professor. She has participated in industry-wide conferences and workshops and has collaborated with other academics on papers and research projects. I believe that her diagnosis is ultimately correct. However, the point of writing a book like this is to persuade those on the fence and on the other side. Though I think there's certainly enough here for someone like me to enjoy it, I'm not sure if there's enough in terms of hard data to persuade someone that is entrenched on the other side. I certainly don't mean to say that she hasn't cited any data at all; most of the chapters have at least some data and others have quite a bit. Overall, though, I kept getting the impression that there just wasn't quite enough.
Her main thesis is that the self-esteem movement is destroying the American education system. Today's teachers have been educated in this environment in which everyone's opinion is considered valid, nothing is done that could potentially hurt a child's self-esteem, and there aren't strong standards anymore. Social promotion has become commonplace and children are graduating from high school in some parts of this country without being able to even read properly. This leads to adults that do not know how to debate, argue, or prove a point with rational data and analysis. They do not believe that they need to reach high standards, thinking that the bar will always be lowered to them as long as they "work hard". Students coming out of high school and college are not prepared for the work world, where standards run supreme and no one is going to make exceptions for you. Stout believes that we need to reinstate strong standards, stop practices like social promotion, and reinstate teachers as respected educators (rather than as counselors, babysitters, etc.). Students tend to live up (or down) to the standards we make for them, so the path to ultimate success is to set high, but attainable, standards. She also believes that schools of education need to be revamped to reflect these new ideals. Many of today's professors have been indoctrinated by the self-esteem movement, so it is strongly entrenched among the professors of our future teachers. These entrenched opinions need to be eradicated if we ever are to fix the American education system.
All in all, I liked reading this book. Stout knows what she's talking about and has a wealth of experience to draw on, from her time in teacher schooling as a student to her time as a professor. She has participated in industry-wide conferences and workshops and has collaborated with other academics on papers and research projects. I believe that her diagnosis is ultimately correct. However, the point of writing a book like this is to persuade those on the fence and on the other side. Though I think there's certainly enough here for someone like me to enjoy it, I'm not sure if there's enough in terms of hard data to persuade someone that is entrenched on the other side. I certainly don't mean to say that she hasn't cited any data at all; most of the chapters have at least some data and others have quite a bit. Overall, though, I kept getting the impression that there just wasn't quite enough.
December 14, 2010
"I need a better grade; I deserve an A; I never get Bs" - These are the kinds of complaints and examples of entitlement that teachers hear everyday. Maureen Stout is accurate in her analysis of these attitudes and behavior of American students. Stout concludes that we are addicted to self esteem; the symptoms of our addiction are narcsisim, separtism, cynicism, amd emotivism. The only weakness of this book is towards the end where the author starts to throw around labels like "liberal" and "conservative." These generalizations get away from the problem itself. An overall good read for parents and teachers.
December 21, 2007
The biggest problem I had with this book was the poor writing. I ended up skimming through it pretty quickly, mostly because I felt so strongly that someone who complained repeatedly about college students' inability to write their way out of a paper bag should really be able to do better, herself. I agreed with many of the author's arguments, but I wish she had been able to make them more coherently.
May 20, 2012
Yet another well written book on the failure of our public schools to educate our kids. We don't want to risk hurting their "self esteem" by actually trying to TEACH them anything, now, DO we? How an originally well meaning movement has been turned into a political tool used to keep teachers from teaching.
August 22, 2009
This book was great. Stout yearns for a world were education brings back student accountability vs. lowering expectation so kids don't have hurt feelings. I was a stalker and totally emailed the author to tell her how great her book was.
Read
September 18, 2011She nailed it.. after reading this you only have 3 choices, move to a wealthy township, private school or homeschool. That's it ..if you want to know why your choices are so limited now in America? Read it..b/c it goes into detail.
August 1, 2016
Interesting and decisive opinions on the education system and teaching kids not just the content material of the class, but life lessons as well.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews