What is Hope?
I was fortunate to be partnered with Sarah Stitzlein, PhD, for my UHP+Discover project. Dr. Stitzlein is an Associate Professor of Education and Affiliate Faculty in Philosophy at University of Cincinnati and co-directs the Center for Hope and Justice Education. I applied for her project because it was, in my opinion, a singularly unique opportunity. It combined something I am passionate about, psychology, with a field of which I have very little functioning knowledge, philosophy. It allowed me to expand my comfort zone and establish a knowledge base in an unfamiliar field. Additionally, it allowed me to examine, compare, and contrast theory with an eye for how it can be made practical. Put another way, it allowed me to take abstract concepts and argue for how they can be combined and turned into action.
My task seemed relatively simple: read about pragmatist philosophy to get a general understanding, particularly of John Dewey, and then understand the pragmatist view of hope (more on this later). Following that, read everything you can on positive psychology and its stance on hope, as well as any other references you can find to hope (various disciplines of psychology, neuroscience, etc.). Try expanding to other terms as well (grit, optimism, etc.).
Simple enough, yes?
NO.
The literature on hope is vast, and even more vast if you include terms that, while not precisely synonymous in this case, have similar meanings. Even skimming articles to gain a basic understanding is a task that took hours. I am eternally grateful for Dr. Stitzlein's advice and direction during this stage of the project, because without it I might STILL be reading the literature.
Then end goal of all of this reading and summarizing of texts was also deceptively simple: determine if there is a way for these two differing ideologies (pragmatist philosophy and positive psychology) of hope can be used in conjunction to introduce hope curriculum into schools.
Two things: First, I have no background in education except that, at one point, I had wanted to become an English teacher. Second, having never really studied either pragmatist philosophy or positive psychology, I had no idea how different they might be.
Thankfully, it turned out that these two schools of thought are remarkably similar in their understandings of hope. There are a few marked differences, but in general they can be said to agree that hope is a series of goals that are acted upon by various pathways to achieve further goals. A state of hopefulness, then, can be defined as the state of following pathways to achieve identified goals, and hopelessness can be defined as either a lack of goals or a lack of pathways to achieve identified goals.
Now, one of my big questions, and I'm sure one of yours at this point, was why? Why read all of this information and determine if these ideas can be combined? Well, for starters, "hope" gets thrown around a lot, and most of the time people really mean "optimism" when they use it. It's been an integral part of political campaigns over the past decade (particularly during Barack Obama's presidential campaigns). It is important to understand hope as exactly as possible in these cases. Additionally, it is a term that we apply to children a lot. People assume that children are essentially hopeful. However, I would argue that children, while they may have a certain optimism that everything will turn out for the better, are not inherently hopeful. Even optimism, or pessimism, is a learned behavioral reaction based on environment. If hope, as defined previously, has to be taught or cultivated, then understanding perspectives of hope allows us to begin to create a way to begin this cultivation where it counts most: children. If children can be taught to hope (see how, in light of the definition I provided, there is a lot more verb action packed into the term now?) from an early age, then they will be better able to cope with the stresses and inequities in life. They are more likely to successfully overcome them and flourish, passing on these traits to their own children. They are more likely to be advocates for social change. They are more likely to make a difference in the world from an earlier age.
I was very privileged and honored to be invited to submit my thoughts on this for publication in the Journal of School and Society, a free online publication of The John Dewey Society. After several anxious weeks, I received the fantastic news that my piece had been accepted for publication and, near the end of October, the edition was released. I hope that you will take the time to at least skim my article (pp. 49-57) in the PDF version below, as well as the other articles (including one by Dr. Stitzlein). They are fantastic articles, and I hope to continue studying hope in the future. Below is also a PowerPoint presentation, which I gave during the closing symposium of the UHP+Discover program.
My task seemed relatively simple: read about pragmatist philosophy to get a general understanding, particularly of John Dewey, and then understand the pragmatist view of hope (more on this later). Following that, read everything you can on positive psychology and its stance on hope, as well as any other references you can find to hope (various disciplines of psychology, neuroscience, etc.). Try expanding to other terms as well (grit, optimism, etc.).
Simple enough, yes?
NO.
The literature on hope is vast, and even more vast if you include terms that, while not precisely synonymous in this case, have similar meanings. Even skimming articles to gain a basic understanding is a task that took hours. I am eternally grateful for Dr. Stitzlein's advice and direction during this stage of the project, because without it I might STILL be reading the literature.
Then end goal of all of this reading and summarizing of texts was also deceptively simple: determine if there is a way for these two differing ideologies (pragmatist philosophy and positive psychology) of hope can be used in conjunction to introduce hope curriculum into schools.
Two things: First, I have no background in education except that, at one point, I had wanted to become an English teacher. Second, having never really studied either pragmatist philosophy or positive psychology, I had no idea how different they might be.
Thankfully, it turned out that these two schools of thought are remarkably similar in their understandings of hope. There are a few marked differences, but in general they can be said to agree that hope is a series of goals that are acted upon by various pathways to achieve further goals. A state of hopefulness, then, can be defined as the state of following pathways to achieve identified goals, and hopelessness can be defined as either a lack of goals or a lack of pathways to achieve identified goals.
Now, one of my big questions, and I'm sure one of yours at this point, was why? Why read all of this information and determine if these ideas can be combined? Well, for starters, "hope" gets thrown around a lot, and most of the time people really mean "optimism" when they use it. It's been an integral part of political campaigns over the past decade (particularly during Barack Obama's presidential campaigns). It is important to understand hope as exactly as possible in these cases. Additionally, it is a term that we apply to children a lot. People assume that children are essentially hopeful. However, I would argue that children, while they may have a certain optimism that everything will turn out for the better, are not inherently hopeful. Even optimism, or pessimism, is a learned behavioral reaction based on environment. If hope, as defined previously, has to be taught or cultivated, then understanding perspectives of hope allows us to begin to create a way to begin this cultivation where it counts most: children. If children can be taught to hope (see how, in light of the definition I provided, there is a lot more verb action packed into the term now?) from an early age, then they will be better able to cope with the stresses and inequities in life. They are more likely to successfully overcome them and flourish, passing on these traits to their own children. They are more likely to be advocates for social change. They are more likely to make a difference in the world from an earlier age.
I was very privileged and honored to be invited to submit my thoughts on this for publication in the Journal of School and Society, a free online publication of The John Dewey Society. After several anxious weeks, I received the fantastic news that my piece had been accepted for publication and, near the end of October, the edition was released. I hope that you will take the time to at least skim my article (pp. 49-57) in the PDF version below, as well as the other articles (including one by Dr. Stitzlein). They are fantastic articles, and I hope to continue studying hope in the future. Below is also a PowerPoint presentation, which I gave during the closing symposium of the UHP+Discover program.
journal_of_school___society_2016.pdf | |
File Size: | 9295 kb |
File Type: |
hope_presentation.pptx | |
File Size: | 478 kb |
File Type: | pptx |