Andres, I am not aware of any evidence to the 
affect that self-esteem is influenced by 
genetics.  By and large it is a product of life 
experience.  As you point out, some--Freire for 
example--believe that low self-esteem is a social 
construction.  It is one of those mechanisms that 
keep the oppressed in a state of 
oppression.  Others would focus more on the 
family.  To me, however, the most important point 
is that low-self esteem can be treated.  The 
question is how.  One school would argue that 
lots of social support and positive feedback is 
the way.  The problem with this is that it can 
lead to a very condescending attitude, a focus on 
deficit, and indirect reinforcement of the 
literacy stigma.  The other way to "treat" 
low-self-esteem is simply by helping learners to 
be successful.  Success is the most powerful antidote to low self-esteem.

Over thirty years ago, Last gamble on Education 
(Mezirow, Darkenwald & Knox) found that the 
characteristic that directors most sought in 
hiring teachers was a warm, pleasant 
personality.  It mattered less whether they could 
TEACH.  I think this is true today to a certain 
extent.  In my view, this value is misplaced.  If 
we want to enhance self-esteem the way to do it 
is to hire teachers who care more than anything 
about their learners progress and know how to produce it.




At 02:37 PM 9/26/2006, you wrote:

>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message

>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

>         boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C6E19A.D8C6745C"

>

>Hi Ana: Thinking about this issue is going to 

>drive me nuts and keep me out of my work, but 

>here I go again. You define self –esteem as:

>“In psychological research, self-esteem is 

>typically defined in terms of how we evaluate 

>ourselves and our characteristics, the personal 

>judgment of worthiness that is expressed in the 

>attitudes the individual holds toward himself," 

>in the words of Coopersmith, a pioneering 

>researcher in the field. It is a fuzzy construct 

>but a certain consensus has developed. Many seem 

>to agree that self esteem can be differentiated 

>into global and specific self esteem. Global 

>represents a general attitude towards oneself, 

>and can be considered a trait self-esteem, 

>whereas specific self-esteems concern particular areas of people’s lives. “

>What I wonder is if this feeling of self-worth 

>is caused by genetics, or is it caused by 

>certain experiences. It is possible that self 

>esteem is inherited. If so, then, self esteem 

>reporting, would be similar regardless of group. 

>However, if the environment has something to do 

>with self esteem, the question to me would be 

>what factors influence self-worth.

>If genetics are a predictor of self esteem, and 

>we can identify the gene that determines self 

>esteem, then there is no reason to work on the 

>self esteem of the students. It is possible that 

>self esteem can be associated with dopamine, 

>serotonin activity in the brain and that there 

>is a gene that influences the presence or 

>absence of these substances. If such is the 

>case, then, we may be able to prescribe prozac 

>to those with low self-esteem and, most likely, 

>there is probably something to this

>I assume that most of us believe that there are 

>causes in the environment that can influence 

>self-worth. For example, there was an in your 

>face Sprite commercial that used to say “Image 

>is Everything”. I assume that the makers of the 

>commercial believe that people’s self worth has 

>to do with their image and that people would do 

>anything to improve their image which would lead 

>to an improve self-worth. I am not sure if this 

>is true or not, but a whole field of advertising 

>has been developed on this premise. The purpose 

>of advertising is to make people feel bad about 

>themselves and to feel that they will feel 

>better by acquiring a given product. In fact, 

>the poor seem to be the biggest target of 

>predatory type of advertising that banks on their low self worth.

> From this I get that while there is not that 

> much direct evidence that the self worth of the 

> poor is worse than the self worth of the 

> wealthier, there is indirect evidence. The 

> indirect evidence is the extent and success of 

> the predatory advertising to make the poor 

> consumers of things that they do not need, but 

> are marketed as means to improve their self worth.

>So, if we assume that the environment has 

>something to do with self-esteem, then I would 

>try to identify the elements in the environment 

>that influence self esteem. I would hypothesize 

>that self esteem will increase with the 

>accomplishment of something that I want to 

>achieve. So, if I achieve something, then I will 

>feel that I fulfill my goals or I became self 

>actualized, as Maslow articulates.

>I think that the problem rests in the things 

>that will make us feel self actualized and the 

>difference between what different groups can do 

>to become self actualized. Ideally, we would 

>have control in the things that we chose to do. 

>Unfortunately, institutions in the community and 

>the media shape those choices. In a capitalist 

>community where success is measured in terms of 

>wealth, the need to show socioeconomic success 

>has to be important. So, those who determine 

>that they want to succeed economically will 

>become fulfilled by economic success. Hence, 

>they will become self-actualized and their 

>perception of themselves, their self worth will improve.

>At the same time, there are limitations to the 

>things that we can do that are mediated by 

>economics. If, for example, my kid has a cold, I 

>may need to take her to the doctor or buy 

>medication. My ability to do this may very well 

>depend on my economic status. Providing for my 

>child becomes a way to become self actualized, 

>but the possibility of me becoming self 

>actualized is tied to my financial situation. 

>The same has to do with going to school, sending 

>children to school, finding employment, 

>practicing my art, etc. In our society the means 

>to become self actualized, even if they are our 

>choices, may be tied to economic forces.

>Because I don’t believe that economic success is 

>an important marker of self worth, I want to 

>challenge this with my students. But, to do 

>this, we need to find other makers of success 

>and help them explore these. These may lead to 

>self actualization and improved self worth. 

>Being a good mother, helping a friend, writing a 

>story, etc, can be means of self actualization. 

>However, these models compete with the powerful 

>advertising and marketing models that plague the 

>lives of most of our students. But I don’t 

>believe that my students’ self esteem has been 

>lowered by society’s established markers of self 

>worth and society’s established vehicles for 

>self actualization, then I have no reason to 

>create alternative models. I think that we all 

>do, and we work on this which leads to our 

>students becoming self actualized. However, we 

>are always competing with Walmart.

>There are other issues tied to consciousness of 

>history that Freire explores that are tied to 

>oppressor/oppressed status, hegemony, etc. I 

>will not get into them right now. However, I 

>still believe that self-esteem is something very 

>complex that cannot be looked at as some 

>isolated independent variable that can be reported.

>Andres

>

>

>

>

>

>

>----------------------------------------------------

>National Institute for Literacy

>Focus on Basics mailing list

>FocusOnBasics at nifl.gov

>To unsubscribe or change your subscription 

>settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/focusonbasics


Rutgers University
Graduate School of Education
10 seminary Pl.
New Brunswick, NJ 08901
732-932-7496 ext. 8213