Question

Select a stage of development in Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Reasoning. Explain the challenges of the stage. Answer one of the following:

Which parenting style (authoritarian, authoritative or permissive) would promote higher moral or social development? Why?

Apart from parenting styles, how can moral development be fostered in children?

What can promote better moral development in young adults?

How can moral development be fostered in middle aged adults?

Can moral development be fostered in elder adults? How?

Answer 1

Pre-conventional morality

At the pre-conventional level (most nine-year-olds and younger, some over nine), we don’t have a personal code of morality. Instead, our moral code is shaped by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking their rules.

Authority is outside the individual and reasoning is based on the physical consequences of actions.

• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. The child/individual is good in order to avoid being punished. If a person is punished, they must have done wrong.eople make decisions based on what is best for themselves, without regard for others' needs or feelings. They obey rules only if established by more powerful individuals; they may disobey if they aren't likely to get caught. "Wrong" behaviors are those that will be punished.

• Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange. At this stage, children recognize that there is not just one right view that is handed down by the authorities. Different individuals have different viewpoints.People recognize that others also have needs. They may try to satisfy others' needs if their own needs are also met ("you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours"). They continue to define right and wrong primarily in terms of consequences to themselves.

BEST PARENTING STYLE - AUTHORITATIVE

while retaining authority and control these parents are warmer and more communicative than authoritarian parents. authoritative parents seek a balance betweeb the teens desires for independence and the parents desire to be listened too. these parents are demanding and responsive. they are assertive but not intursive or restrictive. they want their child to be assertive as well as socially responsible and self regulative as well as corporative.

how can moral development be fostered in children?

Early childhood education should address the moral development of the child, especially the caring and compassionate aspects of morality. What could be more important than teaching our children a sense of caring and social responsibility? We might teach them reading, writing, math, and computer skills. We might teach them about business, history, and geography. But if we neglect to teach them to be caring and compassionate, have we really given them all they need for fulfilling their potential and achieving a sense of joy and satisfaction in their lives?

the teaching of these values doesn’t seem to be happening, as evidenced by the behaviors and attitudes of many adults in our society. A recent book by David Callahan (The Cheating Culture: Why More Americans Are Doing Wrong to Get Ahead, 2004) presents a volume of research data on the selfish nature of our

culture today and people’s willingness to “do wrong” to get ahead. As Callahan’s work indicates, our current culture reflects a serious lack of social responsibility and an unhealthy compulsion to succeed at any cost. Addressing this moral crisis will take more than the assumption – or wish – that children will just naturally evolve into caring adults who choose to make socially responsible decisions.

As positive moral characteristics do not appear spontaneously (Berkowitch & Grych, 1998), addressing our cultural moral crisis will take the commitment and involvement of many elements of society, including early childhood education. Community involvement is especially important in light of the fact that “many children are not taught much about ethics and honesty at home…Worse, many parents may be caught up in the cheating culture themselves and set a negative example for their children” (Callahan, 2004, p. 286). Many educators are aware of the cultural moral crisis and feel a need to promote ethical development in the classroom (Callahan, 2004; Halverson, 2004). Determining the best way to do this, however, isn’t always understood.

promoting moral development

1. Help children understand the reason behind rules
2. Match your response to conflict situations to the children’s level of cognitive and social development
3. Attend to the victim first when one child hurts another.
4. Use children’s literature to share examples of caring.
5. Include animals in the classroom and involve children in the care of the animals.
6. Model, encourage, and reward acts of caring.

IN ADULTS

?a longitudinal investigation of moral judgement and reported moral experience, and an outcome study on the impact of a moral intervention project with adult undergraduate students. In the first study, 29 middle?class, primarily white, well?educated adults, ranging in age from 18 to 80 were administered Standard Form Moral Judgment interviews 4 years apart and were asked to describe their own moral events that had occurred. The average moral judgement score on the hypothetical dilemmas was Stage Four. The reasoning in the spontaneously reported moral events was significantly lower, although the two scores were highly correlated. Difference scores between the two were not related to dilemma scores. While there were no significant gender differences in scores on the hypothetical dilemmas, there were in scores on spontaneous?reported events favouring males. The ethical quality of the reported events could be easily categorised by traditional moral?philosophic categories. About half the events contained traditional deontic moral content (moral right); the other half contained material defined as the moral good. The context of most events was interpersonal, as opposed to societal. The second study investigated the reported impact on mostly white, middle?and upper?class undergraduate students who participated in a mentor programme in an inner?city high school, a programme designed to impact both moral thinking and moral sentiments (motivation). Thirty?nine adults, ranging in age from 20 to 57 participated, of which 26 were female and 13 were male. In both short? and long?term follow?up surveys, most participants reported major changes in their thinking about and motivation to address social justice issues.