The Critical Importance of Ego Identity - Essay Example

INCIDENT ACCOUNT by Introduction Tom is a year 11 British white boy, who is in my English This observation was during Friday’s period five, the last lesson of the day. Tom routinely is 15 minutes late to class, often having a ridiculous excuse up his sleeves. Often, he is ignored mainly because he is known for his absurd stories, with this time being no exception. He however was to go to detention later on, to make up for lost class time. While the teacher talked to Tom, it was notable that Tom was quite distracted, obviously visible from his frequent gazing at the door. The teacher did notice the anxious behavior, because despite Tom’s attempts at concentrating at his work, he was often distracted by the opening and closing of the door. Furthermore, he became agitated arguing with a classmate as well as the teacher, quite unlike normal students. Later on, it was to be discovered that Tom and his friends had been caught while smoking illegal substances, however with Tom being lucky to run away. He had been hiding in the washrooms, thus being late for class. Tom was all the while waiting to be called out, ready with an excuse. When his head of year came asking to talk to him, his reaction was quite telling. He immediately refused to go, arguing that he had not done anything wrong. However, his head of year insisted on Tom telling his side of the story outside the classroom. Tom’s reaction of continuing to argue with the teachers was self-evident of guilt. His hard stance was however broken, when the teachers threatened to call the principle, with Tom agreeing to go. The teachers’ reaction to Tom’s attitude and behavior, right from his lateness, and through his arguments, was in line with institutional recommended practices and policy. As a matter of urgency, as well as of confidential nature, Tom’s head of year had insisted on addressing him out of the classroom environment. Even with Tom’s agitated mood and awkward behavior, the two teachers had been calm, composed and insisting to Tom of the need to cooperate. Informative is that his was an isolated case, hence the need to allow the rest of the class to continue with their lesson. Contextual Analysis of the Incident Critical towards understanding the contextual nature of this incidence, is the need to discuss the aspect of social constructionism. Key is this regard, is the question of ‘identity’, as proposed by essentialism; to be criticized from a constructionist perspective. Accordingly, this fundamentally question’s psychology’s traditional understanding of the society and, most importantly, the individual. As Burr (1995) presents, there is need to understand language, which being the primary means of communication between human beings, can be form the basis on further understanding human experience and behavior (Burr, 1995:4/5). She portrays various ‘discourses’, whose role in the construction of social phenomena is influential in the formation of ‘individual identity’ in society. As she notes, it is the collective compilation of various individual identities, which ultimately represents the social fabric/ makeup of a given habitat (Burr, 1995:6). Furthermore, she is of the view that it is the representative power of such discourse, which eventually influences social power, as vested in existing administrative agencies (both in public and private settings) and government (Burr, 1995:7-8). Focus is placed on the constructionist ideal of social makeup and individual identity, influential in the way society identifies and perceives the individual; vis-à-vis the individual’s perception of society at large (Lowenthal & Muth, 2008:178/ Hibberd, 2005:11). Accordingly, as Lowenthal and Muth (2008) convey, social constructionism is regarded in terms of the various by-products of the infinite number of human choices, as its main form of analysis and understanding of human beings (Lowenthal & Muth, 2008:177). This is as opposed to the existing laws, rules and regulations, which are influenced by prevailing social norms, related to human judgment (Lowenthal & Muth, 2008:178). It is on this basis that Tom reacted the way he did, knowing fully-well that his and his friends’ actions were against the existing social norms and institutional regulations. Furthermore, it is this that led to his reaction of running away, subsequently hiding in the washrooms; and being late for the English lesson. Reay and Williams (1999) present such a reaction as being in line with expected defense mechanisms, as portrayed under personality theories. His actions and attitudes are the primary foundations on which he (Tom) and the rest of society (classmates) identified him in terms of personal identity (Reay & Williams, 1999:346). This is despite the varying perception i.e. his personal perception of himself, in terms of social rebellion (Reay & Williams, 1999:348). Influential in such a contextual setting as portrayed by James and James (2004), is the ideal/ notion of essentialism. As an educational/ philosophical theory, it pertains to the need for skills and ideals basic to a given culture (social setting), be imparted to all individuals in the setting, through time-tested avenues (James & James, 2004:74/Reay & Williams, 1999:350). In essence, they perceived Tom’s character as being a ‘presumed human attribute, having universal validity/ innate existence as a result of prevailing social contexts. This is as opposed to the human character being an intellectual, social or ideological construct. According to Gottshcall and Wilson (2005), Tom’s defensive stance can be critically analyzed from personality theories, vital in the continuous assessment and description of the individual personalities of those around us (Gottshcall & Wilson, 2005:67). Through analysis of the existing patterns of feelings, behavior and thoughts, these theories enable us better understand what makes an individual ‘personally unique’ (Gottshcall & Wilson, 2005:68). Barkow, Cosmides and Tooby (1992) portray Erikson’s Theory of psychosocial Development as useful towards better understanding what motivates human beings to act or react in a given manner (Barkow, Cosmides & Tooby, 1992:43). Accordingly, it enables us understand that Tom’s behavior and personality, developed systematically through various stages; up to the level where he indulged in prohibited substances while in the school environment (Barkow, Cosmides & Tooby, 1992:45). By identifying the critical importance of ego identity, as Smith (2000) presents, the two teaches were able to aptly guide Tom to leave the class. This is influenced by the fact that social interaction aids in the development an individual’s conscious sense of self, which constantly changes because of new information and experiences acquired through daily socialization (Smith, 2000:5). Accordingly, each stage of development entails the presence of new challenges; each of which essentially aids either in the further development or hindering of ‘personal identity’ (Smith, 2000:7/ James & James, 2004:80). Hibberd (2005) avers that this is in terms of the prevailing social values, ideals and beliefs that aid in the guiding and shaping of an individual’s behavior; based upon prescribed social norms (Hibberd, 2005:14). Influential in regard to the context at hand, is the need for the existing administration of the institution to take necessary measures, as a step towards ensuring that such negative behaviors and attitudes are corrected (Hibberd, 2005:15). It is on this basis that the most likely outcome I envisage is the suspension of Tom and his friends. Conclusion From the incident under study, it is critical to understand the vital importance of social construction, in relation to the aspect of personal identity. Tom and his friends, while engaging in their form of socialization, influential in the creation of their identity; the resulting effects of their actions could not be tolerated. This is informed by the essence of establishing and enforcing some form of social identity, based upon the notion of essentialism. Thus, the majority of students needed to not only be protected, but also discouraged from engaging in socially-discredited behavior and interactions. Reference List Barkow, J Cosmides, L & Tooby, J 1992, The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burr, V1995, An Introduction to Social Constructionism. London: Routledge. Gottshcall, J & Wilson, DS 2005, The Literary Animal: Evolution and the Nature of Narrative (Eds.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Hibberd, FJ 2005, Unfolding Social Constructionism. New York: Springer. James, A & James, AL 2004, Constructing Childhood: Theory, Policy and Social Practice. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave/Macmillan. Lowenthal, P & Muth, R, 2008, Constructivism. In E. F. Provenzo, Jr. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the social and cultural foundations of education (pp. 177–179). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Reay, D & Williams, D 1999, “I’LL be a nothing”: Structure, agency and the construction of identity through assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 25(3): 343-54. Smith, R 2000, Order and Disorder the Contradictions of Childhood. Children and Society, 14: 3-13. Read More