We are always reminded that as teachers, we must mold holistic and well-rounded individuals. The applications of Kohlberg's and Gilligan's theory of moral development emphasize the affective side of our students to make them the kind of individuals we want them to be. Aside from molding the cognitive and behavioral sides of our students, the affective sides must also be developed. This will make us avoid producing "intellectual giants" but "emotional dwarfs" individuals.
1. Let the students realize that they are responsible for their moral development. Present them different anecdotes or examples that will inspire and teach them to be morally responsible with their own actions.
2. Give the students opportunities to hear different perspectives especially in deciding what is right or wrong. Have discussions, forums, debates, etc. about certain issues. This will be more meaningful if the issues are related to the students' lives.
3. Discuss issues in a multicultural or global perspective. Present them how are certain issues tackled in other cultures. Through this, students can widen their understanding and learn to respect different views and beliefs.
4. Most elementary and secondary school students are said to be in the stages 1 and 4 of moral development. We can actually use this in maintaining classroom management, behavior modification and establishing routines inside the classroom.
5. Be an example to the students. We must walk our talk so to speak. Values are caught than taught. So as teachers, we must present values and attitudes worth emulating.
6. It is easier said than done. Moral development is useless if not put into action. One of the criticisms of Kohlberg's theory is that he emphasized more on the reasoning and not on the practicability of morality. This is where Gilligan comes in. Let us teach our student the value of care for other people, as well as for themselves.
Showing posts with label Lawrence Kohlberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lawrence Kohlberg. Show all posts
Friday, July 23, 2010
Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development
Lawrence Kohlberg identified that there are three levels, with 2 stages each, of moral development. If Piaget used "Piagetian tasks", Kohlberg used "moral dilemmas" in order to interpret the moral reasoning of individuals. The most famous is the "Heinz Steals the Drug". To know the story of Heinz, just refer to wikipedia.hehehe...
Level I: PreConventional. Individuals judge the morality of an action based on its direct consequence.
Stage 1: Punishment/Obedience Orientation
In this stage, individuals tend to focus on the direct consequence of an action. The consequence of an action tells what right or wrong is. When an action is punished, then that action is wrong, and if it is rewarded, that action is right.
Stage 2: Mutual Benefit
Individuals have "what's in it for me?" thinking. Individuals act based on the self advantage or benefit that one may acquire doing the action.
Level II: Conventional. Individuals judge the morality of an action by the "conventions" or norms, views and expectations of the society.
Stage 3: Social Approval Orientation
This stage is commonly called Good boy/Good girl orientation. Individuals act based on the approval or disapproval from other people, and because of their concern of how other people might see, think or say about them.
Stage 4: Law and Order
Individuals act in order to maintain the law like following the rules, doing one's duty and respecting the authority. This is done for the prevalence of order and functioning of the society.
Level III: Post Conventional. Moral reasoning precedes the law or the convention of the society rather on the principles behind the law. Individuals may disobey rules if inconsistent with their own principle.
Stage 5: Social Contract
Each person holds different opinions, rights and values and should be mutually respected. Laws that are wrong can be changed to meet the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principle
Moral reasoning is deeply internalized and is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. They act because it is right, and not because it is instrumental, expected or legal. This drives them to possess moral responsibility for societal changes.
image source: http://relong.myweb.uga.edu/index_files/image002.jpg
 |
| This is Lawrence Kohlberg...He reminds me of a hollywood star or a director...i dont know... |
Level I: PreConventional. Individuals judge the morality of an action based on its direct consequence.
Stage 1: Punishment/Obedience Orientation
In this stage, individuals tend to focus on the direct consequence of an action. The consequence of an action tells what right or wrong is. When an action is punished, then that action is wrong, and if it is rewarded, that action is right.
Stage 2: Mutual Benefit
Individuals have "what's in it for me?" thinking. Individuals act based on the self advantage or benefit that one may acquire doing the action.
Level II: Conventional. Individuals judge the morality of an action by the "conventions" or norms, views and expectations of the society.
Stage 3: Social Approval Orientation
This stage is commonly called Good boy/Good girl orientation. Individuals act based on the approval or disapproval from other people, and because of their concern of how other people might see, think or say about them.
Stage 4: Law and Order
Individuals act in order to maintain the law like following the rules, doing one's duty and respecting the authority. This is done for the prevalence of order and functioning of the society.
Level III: Post Conventional. Moral reasoning precedes the law or the convention of the society rather on the principles behind the law. Individuals may disobey rules if inconsistent with their own principle.
Stage 5: Social Contract
Each person holds different opinions, rights and values and should be mutually respected. Laws that are wrong can be changed to meet the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principle
Moral reasoning is deeply internalized and is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. They act because it is right, and not because it is instrumental, expected or legal. This drives them to possess moral responsibility for societal changes.
image source: http://relong.myweb.uga.edu/index_files/image002.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)