Drawing from our experiances with formal education , we have come to agree with Rogers to some degree, but also disagree with some of the points that he made concerning freedom in the classroom. There are many components of the theory that would be helpful to the learning process of the student. Rogers believed that the student should be faced with a real problem that holds some ?meaning and relevance for him/her.? (Rogers & Stevens, 53) This would be the first step in facilitating freedom in the classroom.
According to Rogers, teachers are very responsible in the creation of the student?s inner freedom. Teachers must have many qualities that will allow for self actualization. First, the teacher has to gain confidence in his/her students so that the he/she can allow for freedom in the classroom without feeling that the situation would get out of control. Second, the teacher must be ?real?. (Rogers & Stevens, 54) This means that the teacher is able to show his/her true feelings and emotions in the classroom. Third, the teacher has to be fully accepting of the student?s thoughts and opinions, even if they are not perfect. And last, the teacher must show empathy towards the student?s fellings. Each of these components allow for inner freedom, helping the student to believe in him/herself.
Although we believe that these components do have their place in the classroom, we began to lose confidence in the thoery when looking at the last two facilitating components of inner freedom. According to Rogers, there is no need for any type of structure in the classroom. His theory did not include room for lesson plans, organized lectures, homework assignments, tests, or grades. All students should be allowed freedom in the classroom, but only to a certain extent.