Pedagogy

I. Developmental Overview of the Theory
    Erik was born on 15 June 1902 in Frankfurt. The identity of his true biological father was hidden from him. His mother was a Jewish from Copenhagen and was married to a Jewish named Waldemar Salomonsen. In 1904, his mother Karla Abrahamsen remarried a Jewish pediatrician named Thedoro Homburger. After being adopted by his stepfather, Erik Salomonsen became Erik Homburger. Little was known about his true father and because of that, he has spent his childhood struggling to belong to a Jewish community that renounced his awkward tallness and his blue eyes. When he went to grammar school where he couldve finally gained acceptance, he was often teased for being Jewish.
    The young Erik isolated himself from his stepfather and because of this he likewise stayed away from the practice of their religion. In later life, he was often criticized for renouncing his Jewish identity. What his critics probably did not realize, his estrangement from the Jewish identity was not due to the oppressed state of the Jews in that era  nor for the lack of respect to the tradition, his seeming renunciation of his Jewish background may be basically because of the absence of the feeling of belongingness to the social institutions that should have served as his home.
    After high school, Erik wanted to explore his talent as an artist. However, this was not encouraged by his stepfather. His stepfather wanted him to pursue his studies in the field of medicine. Refusing such order, abandoned his home and he took art classes in Baden State Art School. When not in school, he wandered around Europe and visited museums where he could further find inspiration to improve his artistry. In his wanderings, he reached Vienna and was able to get acquainted with Dorothy Burlingham, a friend of Anna Freud  daughter of the well-known father of Psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud. Erik was attracted with psychoanalysis and began to train in the field at the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute. He likewise studied child development, focused on the Montessori Method of education.
    In 1933, after graduating from the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute and after the Nazis came to power, Erik and his wife went to Denmark and later on to the United States of America. After a series of stints working at hospitals and schools, he was accepted at the Yale University. He worked in the Institute of Human Relations and became a professor at the Yale Medical School. At this time, his attention was focused on children and how their cultures tend to influence their varied sense of development. He spent a year in Sioux reservation in South Dakota and much later on, he likewise observed the children of the Lakota and Yurok Native American tribe. This proved to be a monumental discovery for Erik. He was able to observe patterns of development among children and how their environment influenced their behavior as they grow up.
    His American citizenship was granted in 1939 and officially changed his name to Erik Erikson. According to his son, Kai Erikson, this decision was made in order to establish himself as a man  of not belonging to anybody than himself. Some writers however, believed that Erik liked the idea of bearing the fathers name in the Scandinavian tradition. Hence, it may be deduced that it only means that Erik may have been the name of his real father (Boeree, n.d.).
    While dedicating his life to the pursuit of explaining human development through a theory that will be encompassing enough to cover all stages of development, Eriks wife bore him a handicapped son named Neil. The child had severe Down syndrome and was not expected to live long. Erik and his wife decided to institutionalize their son and hide this fact from their other children. While Erik may have been only protecting the interests of his other healthy children from the possible effect of having a handicapped sibling in the family, it would still be almost unbelievable for Erik  who has suffered much rejection and pain from the lies that he was brought up with, to want his children bear the same fate  by committing a lie that could have similarly induced them with the same pain and difficulties. Lawrence J. Friedman, Eriksons biographer said that Neil became the tipping point for which Erik and his wife Joan developed the theories of child development that was eventually published in Childhood and Society in 1950. 
    After his success in his book, Erik Erikson spent ten years of practice and teaching at the Austen Riggs Center, a famed psychiatric facility. His work catered to the emotionally troubled young people. In 1960, he became a professor of human development in Harvard University. In 1969 his book, Gandhis Truth received a Pulitzer Prize and a US National Book Award. In 1973, he was selected for the Jefferson lecture  the highest achievement bestowed by the US federal government for humanities. His lecture was entitled Dimensions of a New Identity.
    Erikson was a Neo-Freudian theorist. Hence, he also believed in the psychodynamic make-up of personality, including the structure of the id, ego and superego. However, he refused to adhere to the Freudian concept of ego, stating further that the ego plays a more relevant function in the formation of personality and human development. In fact, his psychology was attributed to the ego, and the struggles or crises that correspond with each life stages. Erikson expounded that in experiencing the best and worst of the crises in each stage, the individual could develop a virtue which could aid him her to the resolution of further crises. Otherwise, the individual may develop malignant tendencies of coping that would hamper his her development and social functioning.
    The following is a matrix of psychosocial stages of development according to Erik Erikson based on the 1959 issue of Identity and the Life Cycle (Psychological Issues vol. 1,  1).   

Stage (age)Psychosocial crisisSignificant relationsPsychosocial modalitiesPsychosocial virtuesMaladaptations  malignanciesI (0-1) -- infanttrust vs mistrustmotherto get, to give in returnhope, faithsensory distortion -- withdrawalII (2-3) -- toddlerautonomy vs shame and doubtparentsto hold on, to let gowill, determinationimpulsivity -- compulsionIII (3-6) -- preschoolerinitiative vs guiltfamilyto go after, to playpurpose, courageruthlessness -- inhibitionIV (7-12 or so) -- school-age childindustry vs inferiorityneighborhood and schoolto complete, to make things togethercompetencenarrow virtuosity -- inertiaV (12-18 or so) -- adolescenceego-identity vs role-confusionpeer groups, role modelsto be oneself, to share oneselffidelity, loyaltyfanaticism -- repudiationVI (the 20s) -- young adultintimacy vs isolationpartners, friendsto lose and find oneself in a anotherLovepromiscuity -- exclusivityVII (late 20s to 50s) -- middle adultgenerativity vs self-absorptionhousehold, workmatesto make be, to take care ofcareoverextension -- rejectivityVIII (50s and beyond) -- old adultintegrity vs despairmankind or my kindto be, through having been, to face not beingwisdompresumption -- despair    The aforementioned matrix provided an accurate overview of Eriksons theory. Unlike Freud, Erikson believed that development is based not only on the unconscious drive and desires, but rather, to the everyday influences brought by ones family, peer groups, culture and all other social systems within the individuals sphere. It is through each persons fulfillment of the struggle for each stage could she possibly gain the necessary virtues and values, necessary for a healthy functioning.               
II. Current Theoretical Research
    It is said that Erikson developed his theory out of his personal experiences concerning his identity. Thus the stage of ego identity versus role confusion became one of the central concepts that have been developed  not only of Erikson but also of other developmental psychologists who have chosen to follow his footsteps. Barbara Angler, the author of Personality Theories (2006) placed much regard to the development of identity to the ability of one person to be a productive member of society. Thus, while fidelity and loyalty may provide a person with the necessary quality to resolve his her challenges in life, the development of fanaticism or repudiation may lead to a loss of identity  a sense of confusion, of not knowing the purpose of his her existence as a person. She may resort to unproductive mechanisms such as drugs and alcohol, just so she could fill the void in his her person.
    Certain empirical researches have likewise ensued in order to lay down the necessary scientific proof for Eriksons theories. Most notable among these researches is the study conducted by James Marcia, who further expounded on the importance of ones capacity to resolve the crisis of identity at the adolescent period of human development.
    James Marcia further expounded this specific stage in the psychosocial human development by stating that the quest for identity does not encompass the extreme forms of knowing and confusion. Rather, such stage is composed of four major groups of identity status. These are identity diffusion, identity foreclosure, identity moratorium, and identity achievement. According to his paper published in 1984, identity achievement is when a person, who has undergone crisis in the identity managed to resolve it and commit to such identity. Identity diffusion on the other hand, is a status where individuals who have not yet experienced a crisis and have not yet made a commitment to their identity either. Identity foreclosure is a status where individuals who have not yet gone through a crisis already decided to make a commitment. This  in part may due to the influences that their parents have imparted to them in the course of their life. Finally, identity moratorium is a status where adolescents who have already been struggling in a crisis still refuse to take a stand or commit to their own respective identities. The crises that may be involved in this stage of development do not only involve those that directly affect them  such as their families or peer groups. This may even be regarding more abstract ideologies on politics, occupation or religion. The struggle may also be centered on their own conception of self  their gender roles and the expectations that the society may have bestowed upon them which they do not want to fulfill.
    While James Marcia focused on these developments in the adolescence period, Erikson maintained that the quest for identity is a lifelong struggle. From infancy, the child gradually develops a sense of awareness of self. She would gradually learn the I, and how I or me is different from them or others. This awareness is incorporated with the development and realization of ones skills and abilities, coupled with physical, emotional and cognitive changes as one ages.
    Erikson likewise hold similar belief with Piaget in a sense that, both believed that the emergence of abstract reasoning abilities occur at the time when one is in full control of hisher basic concrete logical skills. This capacity entails an adolescent to take full control of his her beliefs, to gain full cognizance of reality, to explore the world and create ones niche in it. Whether one chooses to get to know himherself better or rebel against the social institutions that reared him her is a manifestation of a personal choice to establish ones identity in the society.
III. Field Experience
    The researcher has been fortunate to have had the chance to interview a professor of social work from a reputable university in the Philippines. The following has been the course of our interview
    Q. What subjects are you currently teaching
    A. I am teaching two subjects, social welfare perspectives for third year college students and mental hygiene for fourth year college students. My students age range is about 17-19 years old  all in their late adolescents.
    Q. I am actually making a paper about Eriksons theory of psychosocial development. Could you say that the crises presented  particularly in the stage of identity vs. role confusion are manifested by your students
    A. Part of the social work curriculum is actually the study of Eriksons psychosocial theory and I am rather fortunate to be able to witness how my students become educated of the crises that they are undergoing. Each student has a special reason for pursuing social work as a degree  considering that in our country, social work is not a very celebrated profession. Four or five of my students studied social work because it was already predetermined by their parents, some of them failed in their first career choice and some  well, they are the ones who honestly believe that they could make a difference through helping others. I believe that in their journey to establish their own identity  to create their own place in our society, the students grow and eventually discover who they are and what they really want in their lives. Some time before graduation, they usually experience this sense of confusion, or even fear. What if they could not pass the licensure exams for social workers when they graduate Could they truly make a difference Is this really the life that they want Most of the students  in their experience with others will then realize the meaning of their profession, their passions and patience are tested and if they emerge to be enthusiastic in spite of all of these, they know that they have somehow made the right choice. 
    Q. Do you think then that Erikson is correct in his assumptions
    A. I admire Erikson as much as I admire other prominent psychologists in their field Maslow, Rogers, Skinner, Freud, Piaget, Frankl, Kohlberg and even Freire. Basically, Erikson stood out because he has provided an almost complete road map of human development in the psychosocial context. His observations and his hypotheses were flawless, and somehow, each person is able to relate with the theory that he presented.
    Q. Aside from that, what do you think is Eriksons major contribution in the study of human development
    A. Erikson brought people to a cognizance that they have the capacity to shape their future according to how they resolve their struggles, that development is not as mystical or unconscious as Freud and Jung may assume, but rather it is made up of conscious choices and opinions.
    During the interview, the researcher has observed the significance of the knowledge on Eriksons theory to how the professor deals with her students. In the course of the discussion, the professor said that she regard her students as not only mere recipients of knowledge, but as capable and thinking individuals and systems who have their own set of identities and struggles. Because of this, she avoids stereotyping each behavior manifestation made by her students. They are perceived as unique  and in their uniqueness they are able to carve their own significance  not only in their own future but as part of others as well.
IV. Assessment of Theory
    The theory is heuristic in the sense that Erikson spent most of his life by carefully observing the dynamics of children from different set of cultures. His critics may have found his studies lacking scientific depth and precision, but one could not deny that his set of principles provided a profound influence in the study of human behavior. As there are certain facts that could not be quantified by mere use of experiments and statistical treatments, it could be deduced that Erikson is one of those who has proven themselves to succeed without the necessary scientific background that a study usually requires.
    Eriksons ego psychology provided one of the most exhaustive explanations of human development  its framework based upon realistic virtues and malignancies that people tend to develop as they fail or succeed in resolving their own issues. The development tends to be chronological in a sense that each stage of life is marked by a corresponding crisis. Though many social scientists disagree with the linear rather than the more agreeable cyclical progression of development, one could not agree that most of the studies that later on developed used Eriksons theory as one of their foundations. Eriksons theory likewise provided a fresh take to psychoanalysis after the dark Freudian theme of libido and instincts.
    Upon studying the theory, I could not help but look back and examine the significant aspects of my life that may have been reflected in the psychosocial theory of Erik Erikson. I realized that my life is made up of conscious choices and such consciousness in turn has a significant impact to the influences of the organizations which I became a part. I have struggled in these crises as well, though my childhood memory does not provide for an accurate illustration of such struggles. I only remember random thoughts but I am glad to have realized that every step I make, every decisions that I undertake, all of my mistakes, my failures and successes contribute to who I am right now.
    Just as Erikson had succeeded in placing childhood in the context of society, I believe that my own childhood was comprised of the experiences that I gained and the expectations, insights and prejudices that I have developed.
    At the course of studying Erik Eriksons life and work, one could arrive into conclusion that his lifes work only reflected the kind of life that he had, the kind of principles that he possessed, and the kind of philosophy that governed his actions. Like the crises in his psyschosocial theory of development, he was also beset with such crises  particularly in terms of establishing his own identity. Fortunately, he became a living evidence of his assumption, at the time when he decided to become Erik Erikson.