Human Nature – A Conceptual Framework – I

The most basic truth about human beings is that we have the capacity for change and development.  As Oscar Wilde observed,

The only thing that one really knows about human nature is that it changes. Change is the one quality we can predicate of it. The systems that fail are those that rely on the permanency of human nature, and not on its growth and development. The error of Louis XIV was that he thought human nature would always be the same. The result of his error was the French Revolution. It was an admirable result. (1)

In order to make progress in a world where everything seems broken, it is necessary to believe that not only change, but change for the better, is possible.  The main obstacle to this change is a negative view of human nature.  This is so widespread that, when we want to describe a tendency towards any bad behaviour we say, “Well, what do you expect – that’s human nature for you.”  This is a more pervasive and dangerous notion than we sometimes realise.  If we really want to make the world a better place we must challenge this conceptual framework regarding human nature, in ourselves and others, as there is quite a lot of evidence that as far as human beings are concerned, you get what you expect.

A very clear study regarding the influence of expectation was conducted in the United States in the1960s, by Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson.  In the now famous Oak School experiment, Rosenthal and Jacobson demonstrated what they called, the Pygmalion Effect.

In simple terms, the Pygmalion Effect means that when teachers expect students to do well and show intellectual growth, they do; and when teachers don’t have such expectations, performance and growth are not as common. For the purposes of the experiment, teachers were led to believe that certain students were showing signs of a spurt in intellectual growth and development. The students were chosen at random and the ‘proof’ of their aptitude or potential was fabricated.  Nevertheless, at the end of the year, the students of whom the teachers had these expectations showed significantly greater gains in intellectual growth than did those in the control group.

Forty years later, Robert Rosenthal is so convinced of this effect that he says –

Superb teachers can teach the “unteachable”; we know that. So, what I think this research shows is that there’s a moral obligation for a teacher: if the teacher knows that certain students can’t learn, that teacher should get out of that classroom. (2)

If Robert Rosenthal and his associates are correct and negative expectations lead to negative results then it is not just advisable that we see ourselves and our fellow humans as capable of positive change – it is essential.

Tomorrow – Human Nature – A Conceptual Framework – II

(1) Collected Works of Oscar Wilde

(2) Pygmalion in the Classroom – http://www.ntlf.com/html/pi/9902/pygm_1.htm

Related articles

• Building Belief (geoffreywebb.wordpress.com)
• Power of Personal Influence II (gregghake.com)
• What you damned well better know about control (monkeytraps.wordpress.com)

0

0