This paper examines Adlerian counseling psychology theory and its relevance to professional student development. Drawing on Corey (2013), Halbur and Halbur (2011), and Tan (2011), the paper reviews Alfred Adler's core principles — including social interest, individual psychology, and the drive for cooperation — and contrasts them with the biological determinism of Freud. The paper also traces Adler's historical influence on modern therapeutic approaches such as cognitive behavioral therapy and narrative therapy, and considers how Adlerian principles can be practically applied in educational and counseling environments to support student growth, self-discovery, and professional development.
This paper explores Adlerian counseling psychology theory as it relates to professional student development. The Adlerian viewpoint will be compared and contrasted against the perspectives of Corey, Halbur and Halbur, and Tan, all of whom offered substantive input on the subject between 2011 and 2013. A definitive theoretical orientation will not be asserted here. However, there will be a thorough review of the Adlerian position alongside the views of these authors and the perspective of this paper's author. While many are skeptical of the Adlerian view that people are interconnected by nature and thus predisposed to cooperation, this paper asserts that numerous other visionaries in science and psychology have echoed this view, and that Adlerian principles remain alive and relevant when it comes to professional student development.
As a brief overview of the Adlerian position, Alfred Adler essentially asserted that all living things were connected through natural proclivities that demanded and encouraged cooperation. This overarching theory has been related to other frameworks such as chaos theory and autopoiesis. The latter term refers to the autonomous, self-renewing, and self-directing nature of all life forms. Adler held a worldview that was largely antithetical to those who embraced conflict-based or feminist views of sociology. He instead maintained a deeply humanistic and optimistic perspective on life. He "offered a value-oriented psychology that envisioned human beings as capable of profound cooperation in living together and striving for self-improvement" (Stein & Edwards, 2015).
Adler had direct interaction with — and drew inspiration from — some of the most influential figures in the field of psychology. One of those figures was no less than Sigmund Freud. Indeed, Adler and Freud worked together for the better part of a decade before parting ways. After the split, Freud labeled Adler a "heretic," though this condemnation appeared to stem largely from the fact that Adler had departed as a colleague. Adler did suffer professionally as a result, resigning from the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society in 1911. However, he remained largely unshaken in his beliefs. As Corey describes, Adler stressed the unity of personality and contended that people can only be understood as whole and complete human beings. After Adler's death in 1937, Rudolf Dreikurs became a pivotal figure in bringing Adlerian psychology to broader prominence. Dreikurs asserted that Adler's principles could and should be applied to education, as well as to individual therapy, group therapy, and family counseling — applications that have clear relevance to the idea that Adlerian counseling psychology can serve as a tool for developing the professional minds of students (Corey, 2013).
Returning to the Freud-versus-Adler divergence, the two men differed substantially in their views of human nature. Adler held that Freud's foundational theories were too narrowly focused on biological and instinctual determinism. He did not dismiss these factors entirely, but argued that there is more to what a person does, why they do it, and how they develop over time given particular stimuli and environmental influences. These distinctions carry obvious implications for learning and educational environments. It is apparent that tendencies toward shyness, withdrawal, or social reticence can negatively affect a person's experience as a student and learner. However, Adler asserted that the human yearning for cooperation and connection can help overcome these biologically and psychologically rooted proclivities, thereby enabling progress that might not otherwise occur without external influence and encouragement. Even if a person is conditioned to withdraw from group settings, the proper application of Adlerian psychology can help break that pattern.
What is particularly striking about Freud and Adler is that they grew up in the same city, in the same era, and attended the same school — yet arrived at entirely different conclusions about the psychology of human behavior. As noted above, Adler adopted a more positive and expansive view, while Freud maintained that human behavior was largely a product of biological and psychological impulses. In the broader scheme, it is fair to acknowledge that many people do act on the impulses Freud described. However, people can rise above those impulses, especially with the assistance and encouragement of the right environment and the right people. Viewed through an Adlerian lens, the Adlerian approach will naturally support those who are already predisposed to cooperation, while also drawing in those who desire connection but are inhibited by shyness or social anxiety (Corey, 2013).
"CBT, narrative therapy, and Halbur's ten orientations"
"Adler's child guidance clinics and educational advocacy"
Stein, H., & Edwards, M. (2015). Classical Adlerian theory and practice. Adlerian.us. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from http://www.adlerian.us/theoprac.htm
Tan, S. (2011). Counseling and psychotherapy. Baker Academic.
You’re 48% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.