The Myth of Individualism

My class in Designing Contexts for Lifelong Learning gave me the opportunity, within a group context, to apply the theories I learned in my previous class, Principles in Lifelong Learning. I was fortunate to work with three academically strong students. Although we split up the work, we reviewed and consulted with one another in person and through wikispaces. Wikispaces proved to be a great learning tool within our community of practice. Our group work was a positive experience as I learned a lot from my peers. Their understanding of certain aspects of the material helped me to more fully understand the content. Likewise, I was able to share my work experience within a prison environment which was the background vignette for our project. I was also able to relate Etienne Wenger's theory of social learning to our project since I had studied his work in my previous class. As we compared and critiqued learning theories as applied to our fictional vignette, I reflected on the fact that humans are social beings and  learn best through participation in group settings. This project caused me to ponder the amount of material I learned because of my participation in teamwork.  It was much more than I would have learned through an individual assignment.  As I reflect on this notion, I am interested in our society's focus individualism versus teamwork, and how individualism impacts on identity trajectories within communities of practice.

Teamwork is a buzz word in Canadian schools and corporations, however, it is difficult to foster within these competitive environments.   Canada, like the United States, is a nation based on individual freedom which is closely associated with individualism. 

In Canada and many Western societies, families, schools, and workplaces place a lot of importance on individual performance. Families raise their children to be independant, schools are based on knowledge acquisition, and workplaces are competitive, valuing the bottom line and not the employees. Individual achievement is a measure of success. However, excessive individualism makes for loose social connections and equates to a lack of social responsibility. Its overflow is found in our country's old-age homes, mental hospitals, prisons, and homelessness. According to a local charity for the homeless, Raise the Roof,  some non-governmental sources estimate Canada’s true homeless population, not just those living in emergency shelters, to be between 200,000 and 300,000.

In the Geert-Hofstede cultural scale of individualism versus collectivism, Canada scored 80 on a scale of 0 to 100 (with 0 being collectivism and 100 being individualism). Of the 68 countries listed, Canada is the fourth for individualism.  See full list here. So what is individualism? Basically, it is the pursuit of personal happiness and independence rather than collective goals or interests. It is the belief that society exists for the benefit of individual people and not vice versa. Essentially, individualism equates with freedom. However, I would argue that individualism is an oppressive force hidden within the power structures of our society. It targets identity formation as seen in materialism and consumerism. Individualism is so ingrained in our culture that we rarely take note of its existence, let alone judge it as an oppressive reality.

The myth of individualism falls in line with Paulo Freire's notion of manipulation: "The people are manipulated by yet another myth: the model of itself which the bourgeoisie presents to the people as the possibility for their own ascent (Freire, 1970, p. 147) here. This is evident considering the personal debt load held by many Canadians. According to the TransUnion, a Chicago-based credit specialist, "the average Canadian had almost $26,000 on his or her credit card, bank lines of credit and other borrowing vehicles — excluding mortgages — during the January-to-March [2011] period. That amount represented a jump of more than $1,200 compared to the same three months one year earlier [2010]". See article here. Debt is viewed as a natural consequence in society as people acquire the material goods that the media purports as necessary for the good life. Thus lies the contradiction between individualism and freedom. 

The scientific method of education taught in schools contributes to the myth of individualism. In essence, students are taught what to think and not how to think while their participation in the classroom community of practice emphasizes good behaviour, competition and individual achievement. The scientific method falls in line with Paulo Freire's banking approach to education where the teacher has all of the knowledge and the students are empty receptacles waiting to be filled (Freire, 1970, p. 73). However, students arrive at a community with the knowledge that they have gained from their families and other communities of practice. Unfortunately, knowledge attained in an informal setting is not valued in our society.

Consequently, educators make assumptions about what the students need to learn as they plan a prescribed curriculum that aligns with the power interests in society. Our group project identified reasons why the scientific model does not work in a prison setting. Most importantly, the educator does not involve the learner in the planning stages of program development. Inmates are told that they need to internalize knowledge and skills to make them pro-social. This is not so different from school where as students, they were told what to learn in order to be successful. According to Wenger, the experience merely extends the trajectory and institutional identity that schooling has offered them (Wenger, 1998, p. 270) here.

When learning conflicts with meaningful identity, some learners form identity trajectories to the margins of society. The embedded notions of individualism are responsible for fostering the attitude that society cannot or should not be changed. Blame is nearly always directed toward the individuals: the homeless, the poor, the offender, the bankrupt. The discourse centres around the individuals to change and become contributing members of society rather than making changes to society.  However, it is society that needs to change in an effort to support the collective.  Unfortunately, the assumption is that bad individuals make up a bad society. But where do these individuals come from? They come out of an educational system that does not meet their needs.