Pri Nt.docx

Kyla Kathrine C. Fernandez ABM 11-17 Personal Development

ELIZABETH ROSS- STAGES OF GRIEF

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross (which is the correct spelling; Elizabeth Kubler Ross is a common incorrect form and used above for search-engine visibility). Incidentally, 'counselling' is UK English and 'counseling' is US English. Dr Elisabeth Kübler-Ross pioneered methods in the support and counselling of personal trauma, grief and grieving, associated with death and dying. She also dramatically improved the understanding and practices in relation to bereavement and hospice care. This is quite aside from the validity of her theoretical work itself, on which point see the note, right. Her ideas, notably the five stages of grief model (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance), are transferable to varying degrees and in different ways, to personal change and emotional upset resulting from factors other than death and dying. See for example John Fisher's Personal Transition Theory. We can often very clearly observe similar reactions to those explained by Kübler-Ross's grief model in people confronted with far less serious traumas than death and bereavement, such as by work redundancy, enforced relocation, crime and punishment, disability and injury, relationship break-up, financial despair and bankruptcy, etc. This makes the model worthy of study and reference far outside of death and bereavement. The 'grief cycle' is actually a 'change model' for helping to understand and deal with (and counsel) personal reaction to trauma. It's not just for death and dying. This is because trauma and emotional shock are relative in terms of effect on people. While death and dying are for many people the ultimate trauma, people can experience similar emotional upsets when dealing with many of life's challenges, especially if confronting something difficult for the first time, and/or if the challenge happens to threaten an area of psychological weakness, which we all possess in different ways. Note that the 'Five Stages of Grief' model, and Kübler-Ross's methods in developing and defining her ideas, are subject to debate and criticism. Some of this is reasonable and balanced; much is extreme and angry. The topic of death, including our reactions to death, attracts serious and passionate interest, and may be understood, rationalized, and 'treated' in many ways.

Accordingly, this article does not propose Kübler-Ross's ideas and the Five Stages of Grief as an absolute or wholly reliable scientific concept. The explanation here is offered as an interpretation and series of possibilities by which to appreciate situations involving traumatic loss. Death, as life itself, means different things to different people. Take from this what is helpful, and encourage others to treat this information in the same spirit.

One person's despair (a job-change, or exposure to risk or phobia, etc) is to another person not threatening at all. Some people love snakes and climbing mountains, whereas to others these are intensely scary things. Emotional response, and trauma, must be seen in relative not absolute terms. The model helps remind us that the other person's perspective is different to our own, whether we are the one in shock, or the one helping another to deal with their upset. The study of death and dying is actually known as thanatology (from the Greek word 'thanatos' meaning death). Elisabeth Kübler-Ross is accordingly sometimes referred to as a thanatologist, and she is considered to have contributed significantly to the creation of the genre of thanatology itself. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross's seminal book was On Death & Dying, published in 1969, in which she explained her now classically regarded 'five stages of grief'. The book and its ideas were quite revolutionary at the time, reflecting Kübler-Ross's outspoken and bold approach, which is paradoxical given the sensitivity and compassion of her concepts. Kübler-Ross was a catalyst. She opened up and challenged previously conservative (sweep it under the carpet, don't discuss it, etc) theories and practices relating to death and bereavement, and received an enormously favourable response among carers, the dying and the bereaved, which perhaps indicates the level of denial and suppression that had earlier characterised conventional views about the subject particularly in the western world, where death is more of a taboo than in certain other cultures. As stated, and important to emphasise, Kübler-Ross's five stages of grief model was developed initially as a model for helping dying patients to cope with death and bereavement, however the concept also provides insight and guidance for coming to terms with personal trauma and change, and for helping others with emotional adjustment and coping, whatever the cause. This has probably helped her ideas to spread and to enter 'mainstream' thinking. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross and her ideas have now become synonymous with emotional response to trauma, and to grief support and counselling, much like Maslow is fundamentally associated with motivational theory; Kolb with learning styles, and Gardner with multiple intelligence. As with much other brilliant pioneering work, the Kübler-Ross model is elegantly simple. The five stages of grief model is summarised and interpreted below.

The Kübler-Ross five stages and terminology are featured here with permission from the Elisabeth Kübler Ross Foundation, which is gratefully acknowledged. Please look at the website www.ekrfoundation.org, which enables and sustains Dr Kübler-Ross's values and mission, and extends help to those who need it. Please be aware that the interpretation and contextual material on this webpage represents my own thoughts on the subject. I would encourage you to develop your own ideas too - this is a deeply significant area and one that can be interpreted in many ways. My interpretation and associations are not an attempt to reproduce Kübler-Ross's thinking, they seek to provide a modern context, and to relate the basic model to the philosophies of this website.

Use of and reference to the Elisabeth Kübler-Ross five stages for commercial purposes, and publication of EKR quotations, require permission from the EKR Foundation. You can use freely the other aspects of this page subject to the normal terms for using this website, briefly summarised at the foot of this page. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Also known as the 'grief cycle', it is important to bear in mind that Kübler-Ross did not intend this to be a rigid series of sequential or uniformly timed steps. It's not a process as such, it's a model or a framework. There is a subtle difference: a process implies something quite fixed and consistent; a model is less specific - more of a shape or guide. By way of example, people do not always experience all of the five 'grief cycle' stages. Some stages might be revisited. Some stages might not be experienced at all. Transition between stages can be more of an ebb and flow, rather than a progression. The five stages are not linear; neither are they equal in their experience. People's grief, and other reactions to emotional trauma, are as individual as a fingerprint. In this sense you might wonder what the purpose of the model is if it can vary so much from person to person. An answer is that the model acknowledges there to be an individual pattern of reactive emotional responses which people feel when coming to terms with death, bereavement, and great loss or trauma, etc. The model recognises that people have to pass through their own individual journey of coming to terms with death and bereavement, etc., after which there is generally an acceptance of reality, which then enables the person to cope. The model is perhaps a way of explaining how and why 'time heals', or how 'life goes on'. And as with any aspect of our own or other people's emotions, when we know more about what is happening, then dealing with it is usually made a little easier. Again, while Kübler-Ross's focus was on death and bereavement, the grief cycle model is a useful perspective for understanding our own and other people's emotional reaction to personal trauma and change, irrespective of cause.

five stages of grief - elisabeth kübler ross EKR stage

Interpretation

1 - Denial Denial is a conscious or unconscious refusal to accept facts, information, reality, etc., relating to the situation concerned. It's a defence mechanism and perfectly natural. Some people can become locked in this stage when dealing with a traumatic change that can be ignored. Death of course is not particularly easy to avoid or evade indefinitely. 2 - Anger Anger can manifest in different ways. People dealing with emotional upset can be angry with themselves, and/or with others, especially those close to them. Knowing this helps keep detached and non-judgemental when experiencing the anger of someone who is very upset. 3 - Bargaining Traditionally the bargaining stage for people facing death can involve attempting to bargain with whatever God the person believes in. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek to negotiate a compromise. For example "Can we still be friends?.." when facing a break-up. Bargaining rarely provides a sustainable solution, especially if it's a matter of life or death. 4 - Depression Also referred to as preparatory grieving. In a way it's the dress rehearsal or the practice run for the 'aftermath' although this stage means different things depending on whom it involves. It's a sort of acceptance with emotional attachment. It's natural to feel sadness and regret, fear, uncertainty, etc. It shows that the person has at least begun to accept the reality. 5 - Acceptance Again this stage definitely varies according to the person's situation, although broadly it is an indication that there is some emotional detachment and objectivity. People dying can enter this stage a long time before the people they leave behind, who must necessarily pass through their own individual stages of dealing with the grief. (Based on the Grief Cycle model first published in On Death & Dying, Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, 1969. Interpretation by Alan Chapman 2006-2013.) Elisabeth kübler-ross short biography Dr Elisabeth Kübler-Ross was born in Zurich, Switzerland, on July 8, 1926. She was one of triplet sisters. Kübler-Ross studied medicine against her father's wishes, at Zurich, later settling in the US in 1958 and becoming a US citizen in 1961. Her experiences at the end of the Second World War, including the aftermath of the Majdanek (Maidanek) concentration camp at Lublin, Poland, as a member of the International Voluntary Service for Peace, reinforced her destiny to focus on the humanistic perspective of death and dying.

According to some accounts the young Elisabeth's childhood treatment by her father was very harsh, which might explain additionally how she became so intensely concerned for people's worst suffering. Her seminal book On Death & Dying was published in 1969, in which she explained the process of dying in which she first described her now classically regarded Five Stages of Grief. The book, and the supporting publication of her ideas in Time magazine, achieved wide circulation, so that Elisabeth Kübler-Ross soon became known for her pioneering work with the terminally ill, and for her ideas in the counselling and support of those affected by death and bereavement.

Kübler-Ross spent much of the 1970s running workshops and speaking to audiences about her ideas, which quickly gained popular appeal and general acceptance among the caring professions, and which had significant positive influence over the development of hospice care and attitudes towards death and the care of the dying. In the 1980s Kübler-Ross turned her attention to the plight of babies born with AIDS, and also founded a healing and workshop centre which she called Healing Waters, on a 300-acre farm in Virginia. Kübler-Ross's work has not always been universally applauded. Detractors tend to focus on the 'vagueness' of the grief cycle model (which reminds us of the need to appreciate it as a guide, rather than a rigid process), and her interest in the after-life linked to near-death experiences also attracted mixed response, as one might expect given her iconic status, and the understandable scientific caution of much of her audience. Whatever, Elisabeth Kübler-Ross was a remarkable woman who carved out unique reputation in her field - indeed she arguably defined the field itself. Later in her life she suffered personal tragedy: a fire destroyed her Virginia home, and a series of strokes left her in ill health. She moved to Scottsdale Arizona and retired soon afterwards in 1996. Other critically admired works include Living with Death and Dying (1981) and On Life After Death (1991) which are among more than 20 books that Kübler-Ross wrote or co-authored on subjects related to death and grieving, and caring for those affected by bereavement. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross died on 24 August 2004. The Elisabeth Kübler-Ross Foundation (EKR Foundation) was formed in to keep Elisabeth's spirit alive. The EKR Foundation seeks to continue Elisabeth's life work through the education of bereavement carers, and to promote and enable the compassionate support of families affected by death across the world. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross was inducted into the The National Women's Hall of Fame in 2007, a national nonprofit organization that annually recognizes the contributions to civilization of American women in a variety of disciplines

LAWRENCE KOHLBERG – STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality At the pre-conventional level (most nine-year-olds and younger, some over nine), we don’t have a personal code of morality. Instead, our moral code is shaped by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking their rules. Authority is outside the individual and reasoning is based on the physical consequences of actions. • Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. The child/individual is good in order to avoid being punished. If a person is punished, they must have done wrong. • Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange. At this stage children recognize that there is not just one right view that is handed down by the authorities. Different individuals have different viewpoints. Level 2 - Conventional morality At the conventional level (most adolescents and adults), we begin to internalize the moral standards of valued adult role models. Authority is internalized but not questioned and reasoning is based on the norms of the group to which the person belongs. • Stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships. The child/individual is good in order to be seen as being a good person by others. Therefore, answers relate to the approval of others. • Stage 4. Maintaining the Social Order. The child/individual becomes aware of the wider rules of society so judgments concern obeying the rules in order to uphold the law and to avoid guilt. Level 3 - Post-conventional morality Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles, and moral reasoning is based on individual rights and justice. According to Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is as far as most people get. Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of abstract thinking necessary for stage 5 or 6 (post-conventional morality). That is to say most people take their moral views from those around them and only a minority thinks through ethical principles for themselves.

• Stage 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights. The child/individual becomes aware that while rules/laws might exist for the good of the greatest number, there are times when they will work against the interest of particular individuals. The issues are not always clear cut. For example, in Heinz’s dilemma the protection of life is more important than breaking the law against stealing.

• Stage 6. Universal Principles. People at this stage have developed their own set of moral guidelines which may or may not fit the law. The principles apply to everyone. E.g. human rights, justice and equality. The person will be prepared to act to defend these principles even if it means going against the rest of society in the process and having to pay the consequences of disapproval and or imprisonment. Kohlberg doubted few people reached this stage. Problems with Kohlberg's Methods 1. The dilemmas are artificial (i.e. they lack ecological validity) Most of the dilemmas are unfamiliar to most people (Rosen, 1980). For example, it is all very well in the Heinz dilemma asking subjects whether Heinz should steal the drug to save his wife. However Kohlberg’s subjects were aged between 10 and 16. They have never been married, and never been placed in a situation remotely like the one in the story. How should they know whether Heinz should steal the drug? 2. The sample is biased According to Gilligan (1977), because Kohlberg’s theory was based on an all-male sample, the stages reflect a male definition of morality (its androcentric). Men’s' morality is based on abstract principles of law and justice, while women’s' is based on principles of compassion and care. Further, the gender bias issue raised by Gilligan is a reminded of the significant gender debate still present in psychology, which when ignored, can have a large impact on the results obtained through psychological research. 3. The dilemmas are hypothetical (i.e. they are not real) In a real situation, what course of action a person takes will have real consequences – and sometimes very unpleasant ones for themselves? Would subjects reason in the same way if they were placed in a real situation? We just don’t know. The fact that Kohlberg’s theory is heavily dependent on an individual’s response to an artificial dilemma brings question to the validity of the results obtained through this research. People may respond very differently to real life situations that they find themselves in than they do with an artificial dilemma presented to them in the comfort of a research environment. 4. Poor research design The way in which Kohlberg carried out his research when constructing this theory may not have been the best way to test whether all children follow the same sequence of stage progression. His research was cross-sectional, meaning that he interviewed children of different ages to see what level of moral development they were at. A better way to see if all children follow the same order through the stages would have been to carry out longitudinal research on the same children.

However, longitudinal research on Kohlberg’s theory has since been carried out by Colby et al. (1983) who tested 58 male participants of Kohlberg’s original study. She tested them 6 times in the span of 27 years and found support for Kohlberg’s original conclusion that we all pass through the stages of moral development in the same order. Problems with Kohlberg's Theory 1. Are there distinct stages of moral development? Kohlberg claims that there are but the evidence does not always support this conclusion. For example a person who justified a decision on the basis of principled reasoning in one situation (post conventional morality stage 5 or 6) would frequently fall back on conventional reasoning (stage 3 or 4) with another story. In practice it seems that reasoning about right and wrong depends more upon the situation than upon general rules.

What are more individuals do not always progress through the stages and Rest (1979) found that one in fourteen actually slipped backwards. The evidence for distinct stages of moral development looks very weak and some would argue that behind the theory is a culturally biased belief in the superiority of American values over those of other cultures and societies. 2. Does moral judgment match moral behavior? Kohlberg never claimed that there would be a one to one correspondence between thinking and acting (what we say and what we do) but he does suggest that the two are linked. However, Bee (1994) suggests that we also need to take account of: a) Habits that people have developed over time. b) Whether people see situations as demanding their participation. c) The costs and benefits of behaving in a particular way. d) Competing motive such as peer pressure, self-interest and so on. Overall Bee points out that moral behavior is only partly a question of moral reasoning. It is also to do with social factors. 3. Is justice the most fundamental moral principle? This is Kohlberg’s view. However, Gilligan (1977) suggests that the principle of caring for others is equally important. Furthermore Kohlberg claims that the moral reasoning of males has been often in advance of that of females. Girls are often found to be at stage 3 in Kohlberg’s system (good boy-nice girl orientation) whereas boys are more often found to be at stage 4 (Law and Order orientation). Gilligan replies:

“The very traits that have traditionally defined the goodness of women, their care for and sensitivity to the needs of others, are those that mark them out as deficient in moral development.” In other words Gilligan is claiming that there is a sex bias in Kohlberg’s theory. He neglects the feminine voice of compassion, love and non-violence, which is associated with the socialization of girls. Gilligan reached the conclusion that Kohlberg’s theory did not account for the fact that women approach moral problems from an ‘ethics of care’, rather than an ‘ethics of justice’ perspective, which challenges some of the fundamental assumptions of Kohlberg’s theory.

HANS EYSENCK - THEORY OF PERSONALITY Eysenck’s Personality Theory Eysenck (1952, 1967, 1982) developed a very influential model of personality. Based on the results of factor analyses of responses on personality questionnaires he identified three dimensions of personality: extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. During 1940s Eysenck was working at the Maudsley psychiatric hospital in London. His job was to make an initial assessment of each patient before their mental disorder was diagnosed by a psychiatrist. Through this position he compiled a battery of questions about behavior, which he later applied to 700 soldiers who were being treated for neurotic disorders at the hospital (Eysenck (1947). He found that the soldiers's answers seemed to link naturally with one another, suggesting that there were a number of different personality traits which were being revealed by the soldier's answers. He called these first order personality traits He used a technique called factor analysis. This technique reduces behavior to a number of factors which can be grouped together under separate headings, called dimensions. Eysenck (1947) found that their behavior could be represented by two dimensions: Introversion / Extroversion (E); Neuroticism / Stability (N). Eysenck called these second-order personality traits. Eysenck traits theory of personality According to Eysenck, the two dimensions of neuroticism (stable vs. unstable) and introversionextroversion combine to form a variety of personality characteristics. Extraverts are sociable and crave excitement and change, and thus can become bored easily. They tend to be carefree, optimistic and impulsive. Introverts are reserved, plan their actions and control their emotions. They tend to be serious, reliable and pessimistic. Neurotics / unstables tend to be anxious, worrying and moody. They are overly emotional and find it difficult to calm down once upset.

Stables are emotionally calm, unreactive and unworried. Eysenck (1966) later added a third trait / dimension - Psychoticism – e.g. lacking in empathy, cruel, a loner, aggressive and troublesome. Eysenck related the personality of an individual to the functioning of the autonomic nervous system (ANS). Personality is dependent on the balance between excitation and inhibition process of the nervous system. Neurotic individuals have an ANS that responds quickly to stress.

LEV VYOTSKY – SOCIAL LANGUAGE THEORY Vygotsky and Language Vygotsky believed that language develops from social interactions, for communication purposes. Vygotsky viewed language as man’s greatest tool, a means for communicating with the outside world. According to Vygotsky (1962) language plays 2 critical roles in cognitive development: 1: It is the main means by which adults transmit information to children. 2: Language itself becomes a very powerful tool of intellectual adaptation. Vygotsky (1987) differentiates between three forms of language: social speech which is external communication used to talk to others (typical from the age of two); private speech (typical from the age

of three) which is directed to the self and serves an intellectual function; and finally private speech goes underground, diminishing in audibility as it takes on a self-regulating function and is transformed into silent inner speech (typical from the age of seven). For Vygotsky, thought and language are initially separate systems from the beginning of life, merging at around three years of age. At this point speech and thought become interdependent: thought becomes verbal, speech becomes representational. When this happens, children's monologues internalized to become inner speech. The internalization of language is important as it drives cognitive development. 'Inner speech is not the interior aspect of external speech - it is a function in itself. It still remains speech, i.e. thought connected with words. But while in external speech thought is embodied in words, in inner speech words dies as they bring forth thought. Inner speech is to a large extent thinking in pure meanings.' Vygotsky (1987) was the first psychologist to document the importance of private speech. He considered private speech as the transition point between social and inner speech, the moment in development where language and thought unite to constitute verbal thinking. Thus private speech, in Vygotsky's view, was the earliest manifestation of inner speech. Indeed, private speech is more similar (in its form and function) to inner speech than social speech. Private speech is 'typically defined, in contrast to social speech, as speech addressed to the self (not to others) for the purpose of self-regulation (rather than communication)'. (Diaz, 1992, p.62) Unlike inner speech which is covert (i.e. hidden), private speech is overt. In contrast to Piaget’s (1959) notion of private speech representing a developmental dead-end, Vygotsky (1934, 1987) viewed private speech as: 'A revolution in development which is triggered when preverbal thought and preintellectual language come together to create fundamentally new forms of mental functioning'. (Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005: p. 1). In addition to disagreeing on the functional significance of private speech, Vygotsky and Piaget also offered opposing views on the developmental course of private speech and the environmental circumstances in which it occurs most often (Berk & Garvin, 1984). Piaget's and Vygotsky's views on private speech Through private speech, children begin to collaborate with themselves in the same way a more knowledgeable other (e.g. adults) collaborate with them in the achievement of a given function. Vygotsky sees "private speech" as a means for children to plan activities and strategies and therefore aid their development. Private speech is the use of language for self-regulation of behavior. Language is therefore an accelerator to thinking/understanding (Jerome Bruner also views language in this way). Vygotsky believed that children who engaged in large amounts of private speech are more socially competent than children who do not use it extensively.

Vygotsky (1987) notes that private speech does not merely accompany a child’s activity but acts as a tool used by the developing child to facilitate cognitive processes, such as overcoming task obstacles, enhancing imagination, thinking, and conscious awareness. Children use private speech most often during intermediate difficulty tasks because they are attempting to self-regulate by verbally planning and organizing their thoughts (Winsler et al., 2007). The frequency and content of private speech are then correlated with behavior or performance. For example, private speech appears to be functionally related to cognitive performance: It appears at times of difficulty with a task. For example, tasks related to executive function (Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005), problem solving tasks (Behrend et al., 1992), schoolwork in both language (Berk & Landau, 1993), and mathematics (Ostad & Sorensen, 2007). Berk (1986) provided empirical support for the notion of private speech. She found that most private speech exhibited by children serves to describe or guide the child's actions. Berk also discovered than child engaged in private speech more often when working alone on challenging tasks and also when their teacher was not immediately available to help them. Furthermore, Berk also found that private speech develops similarly in all children regardless of cultural background. Vygotsky (1987) proposed that private speech is a product of an individual’s social environment. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that there exist high positive correlations between rates of social interaction and private speech in children. Children raised in cognitively and linguistically stimulating environments (situations more frequently observed in higher socioeconomic status families) start using and internalizing private speech faster than children from less privileged backgrounds. Indeed, children raised in environments characterized by low verbal and social exchanges exhibit delays in private speech development.

Childrens’ use of private speech diminishes as they grow older and follows a curvilinear trend. This is due to changes in ontogenetic development whereby children are able to internalize language (through inner speech) in order to self-regulate their behavior (Vygotsky, 1987). For example, research has shown that childrens’ private speech usually peaks at 3–4 years of age, decreases at 6–7 years of age, and gradually fades out to be mostly internalized by age 10 (Diaz, 1992). Vygotsky proposed that private speech diminishes and disappears with age not because it becomes socialized, as Piaget suggested, but rather because it goes underground to constitute inner speech or verbal thought” (Frauenglass & Diaz, 1985).

Classroom Applications A contemporary educational application of Vygotsky's theories is "reciprocal teaching", used to improve students' ability to learn from text. In this method, teachers and students collaborate in learning and

practicing four key skills: summarizing, questioning, clarifying, and predicting. The teacher's role in the process is reduced over time. Also, Vygotsky is relevant to instructional concepts such as "scaffolding" and "apprenticeship", in which a teacher or more advanced peer helps to structure or arrange a task so that a novice can work on it successfully. Vygotsky's theories also feed into the current interest in collaborative learning, suggesting that group members should have different levels of ability so more advanced peers can help less advanced members operate within their ZPD. Critical Evaluation Vygotsky's work has not received the same level of intense scrutiny that Piaget's has, partly due to the time consuming process of translating Vygotsky's work from Russian. Also, Vygotsky's sociocultural perspective does not provide as many specific hypotheses to test as did Piaget's theory, making refutation difficult, if not impossible. Perhaps the main criticism of Vygotsky's work concerns the assumption that it is relevant to all cultures. Rogoff (1990) dismisses the idea that Vygotsky's ideas are culturally universal and instead states the concept of scaffolding - which is heavily dependent on verbal instruction - may not be equally useful in all cultures for all types of learning. Indeed, in some instances observation and practice may be more effective ways of learning certain skills.

MORGAN SCOTT PECK – SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT Spiritual Growth and M Scott Peck's Stages The Road Less Traveled M Scott Peck first alluded to the spiritual growth stages in his first book, The Road Less Traveled: A New Psychology of Love, Traditional Values and Spiritual Growth. However, he did not enumerate stages at that point. He only explained how, in his practice of psychiatry, sometimes a particular person would require assistance working their way out of religious belief while the next person might require help moving toward faith. The explanation given for this phenomenon was that of spiritual growth. Apparently, people still in what we are calling the "Faithful" stage on this site might need help learning to question the religion that was handed to them at birth. It seems Peck had figured out that blind acceptance without doing the work of personalizing faith was not a mature way to approach religion. In the long run, this led the person to shirk assuming responsibility for their beliefs. Going through the stage of questioning was important and healthier than just blindly accepting. But other people who were already in the questioning stage (Rational stage in the termninolgy of this site) often seemed to need help moving toward some type of spiritual faith. In this case, the route of

spiritual growth would be to accept faith but this post-questioning faith would be very different from the type of faith typical of the Faithful. The Different Drum I think Peck gave the most complete description of his spiritual growth stages in The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace. (New York: Touchstone. 1987.) Stage I: Chaotic, antisocial. A stage of undeveloped spirituality, people in Stage I of spiritual growth are manipulative and selfserving. Though they may pretend or even think they are loving toward others, they really don't care about anyone but themselves. There are no principles (such as truth or love) important enough to these people to override their own desires. Because they don't allow any principles to govern their existence, there is a lack of integrity to these people and a chaos to their existence. Personally, I find the term "anti-social" most misleading here. Some of these people are very engaging and personable and can really fool you. Some even rise to positions of considerable power, such as presidents. This stage is equivalent to the Lawless stage as described on this site. Stage II: Formal, institutional. In order to save themselves from the chaos of the prior stage, when someone converts from Stage I to Stage II, he submits himself to an institution of some sort for "governance." This could be a church, or it could be the military or even a prison. Nonetheless, to this person the rules are very important. And the structure provided by an institution is very important in providing order in this person's world. In religion, people in Stage II will mainly view their God as an external, transcendant Being. They generally need a legalistic God, who will punish misdeeds, to keep them from chaotic behavior. A priniciple value for people in Stage II is stability. And they percieve external forms of socitey or their religion as providing this stability. Thus they can become very upset if minor changes occur in the rituals at church, for example. This is where Peck uses the word "formal" - this person sees their church as being about the outer forms, not about the interior meanings. Peck's Stage II is roughly equivalent to what we are calling the "Faithful" stage on this site. Stage III: Skeptic, individual. According to Peck, people in the third stage of spiritual growth have the prinicples of goodness "engraved on their hearts." Thus they no longer need the forms of society or a church to keep their behavior in check. They are self-governing. Because they no longer need the services offered by a church, they begin to feel free to question the value of religion in their lives. They may at this point choose to reject religious belief.

Even though they may describe themselves as atheist or agnostic, people in Stage III are actually more spiritually developed than most of those content to remain in Stage II. They are often deeply committed to social causes. They are active seekers of truth. This stage is roughly equivalent to the "Rational" stage as described on this site. Stage IV: Mystic, communal. According to Peck, Stage IV of spiritual growth arises when the seeker in Stage III keeps seeking. They keep finding more pieces to the puzzle and the "larger and more magnificanet the puzzle becomes." Thus the person in Stage IV grows to value the beauty of the mystery of our existence over the definitive answers provided by the traditional church. They speak of unity and connectedness and are not into magnifying the differences that divide us. Peck's StageIV of spiritual growth is roughly equivalent to the "Mystic" stage as described on this site. ________________________________________________________________________ ROBERT HAVIGHURST – THEORY OF DEVELOPMENTAL TASKS Although many theorists are responsible for contributing to the Developmental Tasks Theory, it was Robert J. Havighurst who elaborated on this theory in the most systematic and extensive manner. Havighurst’s main assertion is that development is continuous throughout the entire lifespan, occurring in stages, where the individual moves from one stage to the next by means of successful resolution of problems or performance of developmental tasks. These tasks are those that are typically encountered by most people in the culture where the individual belongs. If the person successfully accomplishes and masters the developmental task, he feels pride and satisfaction, and consequently earns his community or society’s approval. This success provides a sound foundation which allows the individual to accomplish tasks to be encountered at later stages. Conversely, if the individual is not successful at accomplishing a task, he is unhappy and is not accorded the desired approval by society, resulting in the subsequent experience of difficulty when faced with succeeding developmental tasks. This theory presents the individual as an active learner who continually interacts with a similarly active social environment. Havighurst proposed a bio psychosocial model of development, wherein the developmental tasks at each stage are influenced by the individual’s biology (physiological maturation and genetic makeup), his psychology (personal values and goals) and sociology (specific culture to which the individual belongs). Some developmental tasks evolve out of the biological character of humans and are therefore faced similarly by all individuals from any culture. An example of this is learning how to walk for infants. Being a skill that depends on maturation and genetically determined factors, the mechanics involved in learning how to walk are virtually the same and occur at generally the same time for children from all cultures.

Other tasks that stem from biological mechanisms include learning to talk, exercising control over bodily functions, learning skills typically utilized in children’s games, and coping with physiological changes related to aging, to name a few. Havighurst stressed the importance of sensitive periods which he considered to be the ideal teachable moments during which an individual demonstrates maturation at a level that is most conducive to learning and successfully performing the developmental tasks. Psychological factors that emerge from the individual’s maturing personality and psyche are embodied in personal values and goals. These values and goals are another source of some developmental tasks such as establishing one’s self-concept, developing relationships with peers of both sexes and adjusting to retirement or to the loss of a spouse. There are other tasks, however, that arise from the unique cultural standards of a given society and as such, may be observed in different forms in varying societies or, alternatively, may be observed is some cultures but not in others. One such task would be preparing oneself for an occupation. An individual who belongs to an agricultural community, for instance, might make the preparations for an occupation such as becoming a farmer at an early age, possibly in middle childhood or in adolescence. A member of an industrialized society, on the other hand, requires longer and more specialized preparation for an occupation, thus, embarking on this developmental task sometime during early adulthood. Other culturally-based tasks include achieving gender-appropriate roles and becoming a responsible citizen. An enumeration of developmental tasks, therefore, will differ across cultures. Nevertheless, Havighurst did propose a list of common critical developmental tasks, categorized into six stages of development which offers a rough picture of what these specific developmental tasks are. Below is a partial list of Havighurst’s developmental tasks. Infancy and Early Childhood – birth to 5 years Learning to walk Learning to control bodily wastes Learning to talk Learning to form relationships with family members Middle Childhood – 6 – 12 years Learning physical skills for playing games Developing school-related skills such as reading , writing, and counting Developing conscience and values Attaining independence Adolescence – 13 – 17 years Establishing emotional independence from parents Equipping self with skills needed for productive occupation Achieving gender-based social role Establishing mature relationships with peers of both sexes Early Adulthood – 18 – 35 years Choosing a partner Establishing a family Managing a home

Establishing a career Middle Age – 36 – 60 years Maintaining economic standard of living Performing civic and social responsibilities Relating to spouse as a person Adjusting to physiological changes Later Maturity – over 60 years Adjusting to deteriorating health and physical strength Adjusting to retirement Meeting social and civil obligations Adjusting to death or loss of spouse The assertions and principles presented by Havighurst are quite easily understandable and clear. The applications of the theory extend to the field of education and have asserted influence over educators and psychologists worldwide. Although the theory has its roots in the 1930s, it continues to stimulate the insights of contemporary psychologists, prompting the publication of new manuscripts and books based on the concepts of the developmental task theory. Over the years, the reception and interpretation of Havighurst’s theory of developmental tasks have evolved with the upsurge of new findings. Nevertheless, this theory has remained robust in its testimony that development is continuous throughout the entire lifespan.