ABSTRACT INCREASED!) m mama-r or mm mm manuals ' In mswssxoxs BASED on mm W comm manners By Join a. Dettoni floral development education is healing increasingly lore inportant for echoation. Laurenco Kohlberg' e approach to moral darelopent aeaeeuent is a valuable atartinc point for aaaeodng aoral developent. His approach ie too couplicated ‘ tine moms. however, for cluerooa teachers to nee. Alec. lohlberg never intonded hie acne-Int routine to he need 13 claurool teachers. A need exiata for an unobtruaive. reliable, eaeily amn- ietered and ahort loral develop-ant aaeee-ent procedure which would elicit verbaliaationa of otudente' aoral Judpenta for aaeeu-ent w a teacher. the reaearch quection or this dluerta- tion is as follows: Is it poeaiblo to incroaee the classifiahuity or etudonte' verbal atataeenta during a docuacion baaed on a aoral develop-out curricular experience? MommummWauacriptive Mtheetfectimaaotaixapproachutoaananmaloraldevel- client diacnaeion. The oix approach» were varied aa to interrogation structure, hit: and lov-atructurod oped.“ oral quationa. and to reaponae aodo, oral nepouao prior to mitten reapouaee. oral John H. Dettoni responses tollmdng written neponess, and oral responses Idthout aw written responses. Subjects were aale and fouls students in pades eight to twelve in randolly chosen schools. The “Moots had participated in a particular curricular experience of vieulng one of three tiles ilich contained aoral develop-mt asssagss. The responses of students were analysed using the following criteria: (1) W as deterdned by ease of asdgning a Kohlberg aoral developent stage to each response. (2) W as deter-ined w the relevance of the responses to Kohlberg's noral developent ache-a. and (3) m m as deter-fined by several stated mup «Una-1c principles. The data showed that four or the approaches did not elicit aoralreasoMngsthatwereeasilyclasdfiableandpraaneand that produced discussions that were easily aanaged. The last two approaches did elicit condstent results. Since the two approaches were cum-em. yet they elicited the eaee run... the writer con- cluded that other factors not essential]: related to the approaches were new. respmsibls tor the results. . It was found (1) that school and/or school and classroom atmosphere, and (2) that past experiences with aoral develop-eat baseddscussionswereprobablqlsoreiaportantthanarvotthe w: approaches. Situations which were conducive to discussions produced noral develop-ant discussions which were easily classifiable, genus and easily aanaged. Situations inch were not conducive John a. Dettoni produced aoral. discussions which were less easily classifiable, less geraane and less easily aanapd. lusrous observations were also made on the data kw the writer which were pertinent to classrocn aanageeent of moral develop-ant based discussions. Several iaplications to enrol developsnt education were mated. me basic iaplications focused around the need for a developental approach to man. we develop-eat. Kohlberg's analysis of soul develop-ant also has application to reliaous education. Various ilplioations of his approach were applied to mug... educationintenss otchangesneededtobeaadeina theistic aoral develop-ant curricula. ‘ Imam} THE WW?! 0! man. W WMCNS IN DISCUSSIONS BASED 0!! mm mm comm muons By 0‘.) 3.900 John ll. Dettoni i mssmanon A subaitted to nichigan State University in partial fulfilment of tin require-ents for the degree or moron 01" PHIIDSPHI Depart-ant of Secondary Mucstion and Curriculu- College ot Education 1976 To ny wife, Carol, our children, Elisabeth Ann and David Benn-in, and Colonel and Mrs. J. B. Lapeley this dissertation is lovingly “nude 5W3 Special recognition goes to Dr. 'red Hard, my advisor, cos-littee chairman. persmal friend and colleague. He has; hadasiyxificantroleiniwoveralldoctoralproganandin w on personal developent. A special thanks goes to our doctoral callittee, Dr. 'red Ward, chainsan, Dr. Charles Blacknsn, Dr. Hilliu Hersog, and Dr. Russell Kleis. They have been very helpful in guiding ay doctoral progran and in Wispingthis dissertation. They have acted not only as canittee aenbers but as friends. I gratefully acknowledge the Lilly Dido-em, which was responsible for the funding of the larpr research project of which this dissertation was a part. mm or comm-rs 1; , Chapter I. IlTRODJCTIOl................ Assess-eat................. Need.................... Approach.................. GeneralAssuIIptions ............ Assuaptions About Curricular hperienees . . Assuptions About Classroo- Activities . . . flSooocrrwu-a muuWeeeeeeeeeeeeeees H w “mumeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ;: p M II. MOPWMeeeeeeeeeeee P U! ValuesClarification............ Mdumeeeeeeeeseeeee IslaanandValnesClarincation: Coaparison............. Hmteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesee ‘omurgeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeee Kohlberg' s Moral Developsnt Theory . . Kohlberg's Stages and Levels - An 13W“ eeeeeeeeese Kohlbsrg's llorsl Developent Stages “Weeeeeeeeeeee ‘0”..mmw seseeeee 531388385 iv Chapter III. IV. noralDevelcpaentResearch (Koubmmd)eeeeeeee MOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO. DESICN................. Subjects.............‘... InterrogationStructure ........ Responseuode ............. Approaches............... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeees WBOIhWCeeeeseeee W.“m eeeeeeeeeee‘ Logistical Adjust-ants to the Original Dalian MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO‘ mumnnmms ........... Data.................. Judgngthehesults .......... SI-sryofData ............ Findings................ Alternative lrplanation of the Data . . Observations.'.............. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeese POGO Chapter Pm E V. IHPIJGATIONSANDW$ONSe . . e . . e Inplicationsforlducation. . . . . . . . §E 30mm». e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e Kohlberg and Religious Education . . . . . 135 common a e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e no MMXIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO... M2 MIIOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO n5 mmurmommcss....... 1153 LISTOPIAEES Overview of Kohlberg Levels and Stages . . . Definitions,Deseriptions,and Characteristics of floral Developent Levels mammaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee omornqumonUeseeeeeeeee Questions for written Respmse node . . . . Approachestothelllseusdons . . ... .. Suaryofthelloral lessees Appeal ofthe FilasAeeordngtolohlbsrg'sllcral MMMeeeeeeeeeeeee SuaryofScheolsandClaseesIntervieved. Analysis of Responses According to Schools MGWI(me)eeeeeeeeee MOrWBOIusm.eeeeee Ccaparism of Conduiveness to Findings of Clasdfiability, Ceraaneness. and Image-ant PO80 39 62 65 75 33 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page II-l Two Continua of Moral Developent Based m Piaget's Eggs; Evelm gmwgeeeeeeeeeeeeeese 25 WORK was Teaching of values and rural development is beeoaing an ever. increasing concern in the public, private and parochial sectors of North Aaeriean education. In the last few years aoral develop- nent has beeoae the focus of increasing mounts of discussions and froa tine to tiles even debate (wane. fig, 1mg Beer and Wright, 1971.). floral developent, or valnes education as it is also called, is becoming an area of increased importance for educatimal research and developsent. Numerous books have been published recently in the area of values and .2131 developent and aired at either the research mddevelopentfieldorasaidstoteachersintheaoraldevelop- nent of their students. Morale education covers a wide speetrua of teaching practices. On one side of the spectra is the "hidden curricula” (Jackson, 1968; Kohlberg. 1971b). The ”lumen curriculua' consists of the loralidng activities of teachers. Teacbrs, seningly unemsciously, 1 label certain student behaviors as good or bad. “Good" behaviors are often these which allow for ease of management of the class- room. Bad behaviors are those which make classroom management more difficult. Thus “good” students are neat; they put their books back on the shelf. "Bad" students are sloppy and do not pick up their books. The result is that teachers, often without naliaing it, help to define what is moral. floral development education is not consciously recognised w teael'nrs as a part of their curricular activities. It is "hidden" from their one: usual perception of their teaching roles. . On the other side of the moral education spectrum is the deliberate approach to analysis and enhamement of moral reasoning advocated by Lawrence Kohlberg. He has «veloped an approach based on students' aoral Judgments and the moral reasoning underlying these moral Judgments. Kohlberg's approach has been to use noral dilems to probe for students' moral thinking behind their stated moral Judg- manta. He uses a lengttw, two-hour instrunent with a complicated scoring system to probe students' moral meaning. He believes that it is possible to ascertain a student's stage of moral devel- opeent and consciously to assist him in moving to a higher stage. Other approaches to moral education fall between the "hidden curl-1min" and Kohlberg approaches. game of these, like the Values Clarification approach (Baths, heroin and Simon, 1966) . are mentioned in Chapter Two of this dissertation. W Kchlberg' e approach to moral developsent education requires that a teacher assess moral develop-ant in order to deter-ins the effectiveness of various moral develop—ant curricular experiences . Such an assessment provides a teacher Idth a bencllark against thich tomeasureanychangesinucral develoxnsntafterastudent'sexpo- sure to planned noral developent instructional experiences. One of the prise interests of Laurence Kehlherg is assess- ment of moral develcfient. His qusticnnaire is mustered to an individual student through either a written or e private oral interview. Suchaqstfimrksforaresearcherhltisnotfemue fortheclassroomteaeherineitheralmelcdayelassoraehurch- related Sunday or Saturdq teaching setting. Such teachers would find an mental-opted two-hour segmem virtually impossible toobrtain. Iftheywereahletoobtsinsuchanunusuallylonghlcck cftime, thelengthoftineitselfwouldbeapotentially confounding variables students would view this as ensuring very extraordinary end would tend .to treat the eeeeen-ent as something different from usual school activities. Thus a Hawthorne-like. effect could probably result. Teachers also wouldhave to readand score anenorsous amount of eaterial if a written questionnaire was used. This would require considerable amounts of time from their normal teeching and prepsratim time. If an oral interview vere given, a teacher would find the time requirement too burdenscae.. Also, -a teacher would have to master the complex sconng system worked out by Kohlberg and others. Finally, Kchlberg has not suggested that his instrument is for classroom use. It was developed as a research tool. It is not intended for teachers use in the classroom. Homer, Kohlberg's approach is of increasing interest to echleatialal prac- titicners. AND ON Teachers need some sort of approach that would allow them to obtain and classify students' value Judgments more easily than the one Kohlberg uses. Porter and Taylor state: F'or these teachers who are interestedinknowingat shat stage of moral reasoning their students are but lilo do not Irish to take the time to give the questionnaire and do the necessary scoring, it should be pointed out that, once an adequate under- standing of the stages of developsent is gained, moral reasoning scores can be applied to student attitudes as shoes: in their essays and discussions. However, a danger lies in taking Just a for statements a student makes and inediatsly assigning to him a given stage. With regular discussion sessions a teacher will be able to get a broader picture of a student's reasoning process (Porter and Taylor, 1972) . Porter and ruler suggest what is a basic need for the classroom teackler: an unobtrusive, reliable, easily salinistered and short moral development assessment procedure which would assist a teacher to elicit verbalizations of students' moral Judgsents for assesment of students' moral development. The particular research question on which thisdisserta- tion focused is as follows: Is it possible to increase the classifiability of students' verbal statements during a discussion based on a moral development curricular experience? In other words, can a teacher elicit students' moral Judgment statements which till help a teacher to classify the studente' moral develop- mn‘t? ThetaskunmrtaksnintMsinqurywastodevelcp several approaches to interrogation transactional between students and teacher and students and students lilich mld elicit responses that indicate students' moral Judpents. ~ The interrogation trans- actions eere designed to elicit oral stetaeents that are germane to the Kohlberg schema, easily classifiable in terms of moral cbvelcpssnt stages, and easily managed from a teacher's perspective of classroom order. The interrogation transactions were built cnapartieular curricularexperieneeco-cntoallofthe students in a elassrca. ' The research reportedinthis dissertationispartofa four-part evaluative stew funded or the Lilly mdounnt forlouth Films, Incorporated, of lashegcn, llichigml. One of the other two parts was concerned eith the overall educational firiloseplv of Kchlberg's approach to values end moral education (Stuart, 1971.). Anothsrpart usemcernedvdththeassesusntoftheimpactof thethreemotionpieturescnthemoralreascninganddevelopsntof 1The words “interrogation transactions“ end adisceesion- ldll be used interchangeably throughout this stow. youth (Roost, 1975). This dissertation is one-half of a third part that dealt ulth the resichlal effects of the three moral development films. The fourth part dealt lith teachers' and administrators' attitudes toward the films. The entire study is reported in w m: ti o t Hi col-Use ‘ am of Youth Piling, Incomted, Hard and Stewut, (1973). . w The approach used in this research was to interview studsntsinethtmughmthgl’adssinclnseroomswhohadpartici- pated in a curricular experience of vistdng one of three motion pictures that presented moral developent education messages. Each interview used one of six kinds of interrogation and response wocsdures. The oral responses were studied in terms of their 1) ger- maneness to Kohlberg's schema of moral developsent, 2) the ease of classiryingthenorelaudpents, and3) theeaseofmanagingths classroom. Each interview with a group of students, often a class- room of students, was the unit. for analysis. Each omit of analysis ens Judged by the participant-observer (P-O)1 at the end of each unit' a interrogation and response procedure. Although the brevity of exposure of the observer to each group does not merit the more precise use of the term “participant- observer,“ the data in this study vmre gathered ty one person participating as both the discussion leatbr and observer. e This research began as a methodological stuck of certain assesnent rmrtines conceived of as six approaches to eliciting oral responses within a moral developent discussion. to the findings became evident, however, it tuned to a philosophical reflection on the oughtnesa of the assessment routines. The findings raise such qmstions as the follow: Is it possible to devise procedures to. classify responses within a Iohlberg moral development eeeeee-ent routine? that kinda of edmtiooel envirouental factors influence such an assess-eat procedure? Can theproceduresba separatedfroatheenviromentintdnchtheyare used? Is it possible to use me or more pocedures across new settings and obtain consistent results? Ituitheco-sloreevidmtinchaptersIVanthhat thisreeearchdllhaveseveralhanefits. One honefltdllbean analysis of oral responses to six approaches to aoral discussions. In this regard, the focus I111 be upon the north of oral respalses menone uses agroup discussion baaadonadesdmated-oral devel; opent curricular emerience. A second benefit will hecone evident mapmmdstmmmemcatimalsetungasm iapertant influence. if not the maJor influence. involved in the discussions. W The follonng general asmptions underlie the basic design and approach of this stuchr: l. floral reasoning is the internalized process resulting fro- experiences idlich have moral leaning. They are the moral ”81112388 accepted by the student as being for hisself. floral Judgnents are the particular consequences of the moral reasoning process. The aoral reasoning process envelope through transactions dth experiences that have aoral leaning. floral Judgaents are the products of a cognitive-reflective process of the neural leanings dutch a student perceives in a given experience. Moral .1qu and soul develop-ht. are internal. cognitive, structural functicns. One cannot seasure moral Judpsnt directly nor lab statements about a person's soral develoinsnt except on inferential pounds. 2. floral reasoning can be verbalised. A student's verbal- isation of the resealing through ilich he arrives at moral smote can reflect both a student's response to a particular curricular experience and that student's level and stage of soral developent. The trained observer, teacher or researcher, can infer free: a stu- dent's verbal responses his level and stage of aural developent. 3. Kohlberg' a levels and. stages of moral develop-ant consti- tute acceptable and workable rays to conceptualise aoral develop-ant, and provide appropriate theoretical foundation for an enpdrical inquiry into effects of curricular experience. 1.. Students' verbalisations of noral Judo-ants are indica- tors of Kohlberg's schesa of moral develop-ant levels and stages. By classifying verbal responses according to .Kohlbsrg's levels and stages, it is possible to deter-ins a particular student's aorsl development level and stages. 5. Kohlbarg's assess-ant routines (Porter and Taylor, 1972) are an adequate and pregnatically deem starting point our research purposes to assess moral developant. One does not have to agree with Kohlberg' a position on coral philosophy to use his empirically derived descriptions of moral dmlopaent. ' 6. Moral develop-ant does not necessarily iaply a particu- lar eorality or moral code. (This will be discussed in Chapter II.) ea A o.\ H' v‘:. .... The follovdng are assumptions made in terns of curricular experiences: 1. Curricular experiences are identifiable portions of one's total experiences. 2. Curricular experiences can.be a stimulus for halting moral Judgments. Such eatcational experiences can constitute plamed instructional activities. These instructional experiences can tales an of a multitude of forms and contents. The ally mquinnent- is that a student is able to interact with a particular experience in tens of its moral message or messages. The moral nessages can be ' positive or negative and on oneor more levels and stages of moral “Inmate 3.” W particular curricular experience is just one of 10 man planned and mplanned curricular experiences in a total curricula. Allof one's curricular experiences go into the total composite of one's life experiences. To isolate and describe one instructional experience within one particular curricula in hopes of assessing its impact on students is a difficult if not impossible task. Nevertheless, students do verbaliss moral Judgnenta based on particular instructional experiences. Descriptive research is able to point to these indicators of moral Judpents. 1.. no moral develop-out level of a particular curricular experience lust be adequate to reach all levels and stages of noral developent represented in a potential audience... That is, all the participateinacurrlcuhrexperiencemustbeabletoperceivea nessageontheirovn maentmorallevelofdevelopnent. 5. intimpicturefilncanbeusedasaplamedcurri- cularexperience. The viedngofafilmuthnoraldevelopent aessages, constitutes a particular aural develop-ant curricular experience. 6. The-oraluessages ofaparticularfilsarepartofthe givens of the curricular experience. The folloidng are «mono aada regarding classroo- activities: 1. LeadeNMpormdancaWateacherofanor-aldevel- cpment discussion based on a moral develop-ant curricular exper- ience can stimulate verbali sations pertaining to internal moral Judpants vhieh students have aade. 2. Interrogation transactions are the crux of moral devel- opent assessnsnt. Through proper questials and proper methods of questioning, a teacher will be able to elicit verbalisations of moral Judgesnta from students. From these verbalisations, a * teacher is able to infer the level and. stage of moral develop- ment of a student. I W Certain limitations in the stow trill restrict its generalisability and will color its outcass. l. TheP-Oullbevvorkingalonedthoutaidofaw impartial observers or critics. 2. TheP-OvdJlbeapersmfromcutsidetheschools. He has no‘prior knowledge of the schools, tlm Mes of a particular class, nor how the particular students characteristically respond to a discussion. 3. Uncontrolled variables sill pertain in each class. Such things as a teacher's follow-up of the particular moral devel- opment messages, the umber of films vieved 11 students prior to thisone, thewafilmuasintroducedtoaclass, theparticular purposeateacherhadinbookingafilm, andthe technical quality of the film are all parts of the glvens of each situation. These all till have had some effect at students. .Ihat that composite effect uillbeisnotopantoinquiryatthistime. 1.. The study uill not investigate the interactive effect of the curricular experience with its aoral develop-ant stages in 12 combination trith the moral development stage of the p-o and his ovn personality. 5. Her rill this study seek to discover what effect a P-O, himself a moral being not capable of pure neutrality, will have upon the verbalisations of moral Judgeents by students. 6. One class periodononlyone dayisallthetimeallowed for the P-O to be with one particular class. Given the normal amount of housekeeping chores associated vith the opening of a class period. theP-Owillbe evenmore limitedintimeto spenddtheach class. A description of each class n11 have to be drain in a relatively short amount of time. 7. Time for discussion till he reduced by the need to allow for written responses. In certain classes, approldnately one-half of the class period till he used for written responses. This will impact the time usable for discussion. 8. Theamountoftimeineachclasswillbeanuncon- trollable variable because schools have different lengths of time for each class period. The effects of varying amounts of time for discussion or discussion and writing will not be controlled nor meastn'ed. ' 9. The elicited transactions thaaelves may interact edth the level and stage of aoral development verbali cations. The result could be that one set of interrogation transactions may more easily elicit one particular moral develop-ant stage verbalisation than another. Within this stuck, this question cannot be adequately examined. Further refinement of the interrogation transactions and a more nearly experimental maia muld be needed. 10. The no will have to be able to identify the entire range of possible student moral developent responses. No one else inthe situationuillbeabletoserveasacheckontheP-O's Judaents sinceheeuill be workingalone. mu Several key terms will be used throughout this stuw. W is the totality of one's internal, cognitive and affective recesses and conclusions regarding a moral message, moral dile-a, moral question or moral issue. floral Judg- ments are comprised of two aspects: content and structure. m is the “that” of moral Judpsnt. It is the specific statement sada. Wis the'vdu" ofmoral Judy-eat. ltisthe rationale provided by an individual as support for his content statements. Wis the content ascribedtoamoral action, experience or statement In a receiver; one‘s uncbrstanding of that amoralmsssage is about; Ihat amoralmeseage is intendedto convey w the sender. 'W often ealledflfiig. is overt behavior (verbal and/or nondverbal) based upon aoral Judysent and meaning. floral behaviorisnotthe same asmoralJudpent andits two parts, content ndstructurs. floralbehcviormayormeynotbepodtively related to moral Judpents. m Classroom teachers need motical and tmstwortw .proce- dares to elicit student verbalisations of moral Juduents. This stuw sought to determine through .a descriptive study the effective- ness of certain interrogative and transactional procedlms. The major question is the feasibility of classifying the students' responses in tense of Kohlbsrg'e moral develepent schema. Certain assumptions and limitations vnich are inherent in this stow have been listed. Chapter II provides an overview of the research in moral develop-ant education. Chapter 111 describes the design of thisstudv. chapter Iv reports the data and findings. chapter v sin-arises the study, presents conclnsions, and identifies and suggests several implications for further consideration, develop- ment and application of moral development to a religious etrcation fittings 0mm The related literature vithin the arena of moral develop— ment education stretches from the highly philosophical writings of Plato, Aristotle, Kant and others to the more prapatic approach of Baths, Simon and Harlin (1966) and Siren, flows andxirschenbaus (1972). Values literature also encompasses attitude, theory, measurement, and studies in change uhich in itself has a vast and greatly increasing .ount of literature. Sears and Abeles, (1969) provide an extensive survey. The revise in Chapter 11 represents a selection of several important contributions to the topic. The mador portion of this review focuses upon Kchlberg's contribution to moral development theory. flowver, as background and contrast, Values Clarification, social learning. and Piaget are also to~be surveyed. W A significant contemporary school of thought of values education is the "values clarification" school with Baths, Herein and clean (1966) as its originators. This school of thought has gained a ride hearing and a large following among educators of the 15 16 United States and Canada. Numerous "values clarification" work.- shops are conducted throughout North America for ill-service education of teachers in the m of ”values clarification.” Stewart (1975) has suggested capitalising ”Values Clarification" because of the identification of the term with this one cluster of authors. The foundation of this approach is that all values are relative, an absolute relativity. A corollary to this absolute relativity is that it is got the values but the process by shich one obtains one's values that is important. This school believes so strongly in the process approach to values, that Baths, Harlin and Simon (1966) state that only-those items that meet their criteria. namely, their seven step process of valuing, are truly values. Aw other strongly-held factors m be attitudes, beliefs, opini.ons, ways ofthinlcing, andsoforth. andthequleadtovalues. Inandofthemselves, honver, theyarenotvaluesbecausetheydc notfitintothevaltdngprocess. as seenfromthe Values Clarifi- cation position. Theprocessofvaluingis seenashaving sevenstepe. A person-lstemployallofthese stepsbeforehecansayhehas attained a velue. These seven steps are as follows: 1. W. If something is in fact to guide one's life t or not authority is watching, it list he a re- sultoffreechoice. . . .Valuesmustbefreelyaalectad ifthayaretobareallyvalued‘bytheindividual. 2. %&K from ageing gternativea. This definition of values a cones th things t are chosen by individuals and. obviously, therecanbencchdceiftherearenotalterne- tives fru which to choose . . . . Only when a choice is possible, 17 when there is more than one alternative fru which to choose, do we say a value can result. 3. boo after th tful consideration of the cones ness of each fiternative . . . . W mtg consequences o; «35 of 5- ates-natives are clearh unbratood can one make intell- im MCCBe t. M. then we value seaething, it has a po ve tons. a price t, cherish it, esteem it, respect it, hold it dear. We are happy with our values. In our definition, values follow from:ehcices that we are glad to make. Ia prirn and cherish the guides to life that we call values. 5. . When we have chosen something freely, after c deration of the alternatives, and when we are proud of our choice, glad to be associated uith it, In are likely to affirm that choice, inenashsdaboutit. Wearsvdlldngtopublicly affirm our values. 6. Agfifi%choices....lnshort,foravalnetobe present a se .atbeaffected. lothingcanbeavalue that does not, infect, give directimlto actual living . . . . 7. ' . where something reaches the stage ofavalue, it is vary to reappear on a umber of occasions in the life oftheporsonvdlohcldsit. . . .Valuestendtohavea persistency, tend to males a pattern in a life" (Baths, Herein, and Simon, 1966). . Insunnary, Baths, Harsin and Simon define a value as based on these basic processes: 29.9.93! m, mm Choosing: g1} freely 2 from alternatives 3 after thoughtful consideration of the ccnuquences of each alternative Pridng: le cherishing, being happy with the choice 5 villing to affirm the choice publicly Acting: 6 doing something with the choice 7 repeatedly in some pattern of life (Baths, Harlin and Simon, 1966). One can understand the excite-mt :dth ilich American educators have responcbd to the Values Clarification apxlrcach. This approach avoids the difficult problems of defining morality and ethics, right and wrong, good and bad. It allows students from various backgrounds and with different sorts of ethical viewpoints to each develop their own values without pro-judging one “better" than another. The process is primarily without particular regard for the ethical outcome. The important point from the Values Clari- fication approach is that iratever values are possesses, he does so based on the processes of choosing, prising and acting. 6 The major contri buticn of the Values Clarification school of thought is the emphasis upon helping a student think through his values. This school's emphasis upon clarification of thought and actions undoubtedly provides help to any values education approach that emphasises a rational component to ethics. W The social learning or social influence school of thought in contemporary social psychology has new members. Bandura (1969), Bandura and flcDonald (1963). and Kelman (1961 and unpublished as) are some of this school's proponents. Basically this school empha- dses that values are learned from influential or significant people in one's. environment. Thus, parents, older siblings, other close relatives, peers, teachers, and contemporary societal heroes or anti- heroes provide models and influence in learning what values are instrlmlental for one's social tell-being. Society is envisioned as directly influencing the acquisiuons of one's values. Kelman's approach begins with the assumptim: 19 " . . . that opinions adopted under different conditions of social influence, and based ml different motivations, uill differ in terms of their qualitative characteristics and their subsequent histories. Thus, if we know something about the determinants and motivational bases of particular opinions, we should be able to males predictions about the conditions uncbr which they are likely to charge, and cflier behavioral consequences to which they are lilmly to lead" (Kellen, 1961). Kelman states that his interest in this direction of research was caused ty his studies of the differences between the true believer variety and brainwashing changes in a person's values. He says that three pecesses of social influence are involved: compliance, identification, and internalisaticn. e canbe eaidtooccurviienanindividual accepts influence romanetherparscnorfrmaagroupbecauaehe hopestoachieveafavorable reactionfrcmthecther. . . . What the individual learns, essentially, is to say or do the expected thing in special situations, regardless of what his private beliefs m be. Opinions adopted through compliance should be expressed only M the parent's behavior is observable by the influencing agent. den caticncanbesaidtooccurviienanindividual adopts or rivedfromanetherpersonoragroup because this behsvior is associated with a satisfying self- dafining relationship to this person or group. w a self- defining relationship I mean a relationship that forms a part of the person's self-image. Accepting influence thrmrgh identification, then, is a way of establishing or maintaining the desired relationship to the other, and the self-definiticsl thctis anchoradinthis relationshlp . . . . Finally, 1%sationcanbe saidtocccurvnenan individual accepts uence beccuse the induced behavior is cmgruent with his value system. It is the content of the induced behavior that is intrinsically renrding hers . . . . The characteristics of the influencing agent do plu an important role in internalisation . . . . It follow from this conception that behavior adopted through internalization is in some war—retinal or otherwise—integrated Idth the indi- vidual's existing values. It becaes part of a personal system, as distinguished from a system of social-role expectations. Such behavior gradually becomes independent of the external source. Its manifestation depends neither on observability by the influencing agent nor on the activation of the relevant role, but on the extent to which the underlying values have been made relevant by the issues under consideration (Isl-an, 1961) . Kelnan elm-arises his social influence theory under the following propositions: 21; The probability of is a combined function of a the relative importance to t individual of achieving a favorable social effect: (b) the relative amount of means-control possessed by the influencing agent: and (c) the extent to which the individual“ Mom of behavior has been limited. (2) The probability of identification is a cabined Motion of (a) the relative importance to the individual of estab- lishing or maintaining a satisfying self-defining relationship: Eb) the relative attractiveness of the influencing agent: and c the extent .to ailich the individual's perceptual field has been narrowed. (3) The probability of internalization is a combined function of (a) the relative importance to t5 indivinial of acquiring useful content: (b) the relative credibility of the influencing agent: and (c) the mutant to relish the individual's cognitive field has been reorganind (Kelman, unpublished manuscript, n.d.). [alman's approach moves in an entirely different direction from the Values Clarification approach discussed above. Isl-en's interest in values is related to conformity behavior. lie anevsrs thequestiona, '0ndar:i:at circumstanceshesapersonlearncon- forcing behavior and how is this behavior related to values?“ His is thus a social perspective. The Values Clarification approach cares little for such social-psychological approaches. The Values Clarification school is interested in an individual's achieving his oinvaluesfreelychosan, prised, andactadupon. The salience and valenceofexternalsourcesarenotpartoftheValuea Clarification school's scope of inquiry. me. As Piaget's coalitive developental psychology because increasingly understood. mmerous suaries and explanations are being written. (Flavell, i963 and Richmond, 1970 are Just two of new examples of such. Plavell is still probably the most thorouyt work that both synthesises and explains Piaget's writings.) These M08 along with Piaget's writings are becoeing the foundation for a renewed interest in a countive developesntal psychology, especially Kohlberg's. Piaget's prieary contribution to aoral develop-ant theory was his research on the noral developent of children (Piaget, 1965). In this work, Piaget pioneered in the 815W.“ aoral development and its parallel in copitive develop-eat. Hhat follows is a brief may of Piaget's conceptualisetim of eorel Judgnent of children taken mmemmmggmm (1965; see also Flavell, 1963). Piaget perceives four "stages" of aoral develop-ant free what he calls a "practical observatim" viewpoint and three ”stages“ free a “consumes of rules“ palnt of view. he suggests that these are reallynot search stages inatechnieal sense but contimna with indefinite borders. Children cross and reoross these borders in their continual process—regress—progess "pattern of wcontimred develop-ant toure- eoral maturity. 22 W of aoral develop-ant, according to Piaget. is fronapractical observation ofs childinabehaviorel relationship to rules. The points at which differences can be noticed regarding the w a childm regarding rules are as follows: Stage I - Motor or Individual. There are no rules. StageII-Egocentric. 'fhe childdisregerderuleethoudx he is sears of thee. Stage III - Cooperation. The child begins to be concerned about rules. llutual self-control is exercised. i drive for unifi- cationoftherulestskesplace thoughtherulesareetillsoeeehat vague. Stage IV - Codificatim of Rules. The” rules are fixed and the cock ofrulesis acknowledgedto beknombythe irole society. New and unforeseen circuetenc'es produce new rules. W of aoral develop-est, according to Piaget, is characterised Iv the genegousnees level of rules. Stage I - Rules are nan-coercive because they are either purely motor or received unconsciously; this begins at infancy and continueeuntilthedddle ofthe egocentric stageofCentinm-i. his is the m stage. Spontamous behavior without ieperatives and sense of drty characterise this stage. StageII -Rules areregerdedae sacredanduntouchable; rules eeenate free adults. Rules are heteronoleoue. Unilateral respect for adults causes obedience to rules. This stage begins at 23 the apogee of the egocentric stage and goes through the first half ofthe cooperationetageofContinmai. The childisina state of _eo_ra_lr_e__ali_g_duringthis tine. Thisisinthehetgonosous stage. Moral romeo, constraint and confornity to rules characterise this stage. This is the ”first morality“ of thich Piaget speaks. Interesdiate so... - Between Stages 1: and III of Continuu- B is an intereediate stage in which the child begins to 'interiorise" and generalise rules. This in-between stage leads to the cooperation stage (inContinuueA) intezichtheyomgpersonis abletoapply theoretical considerations to his thoughts, to the aoral rules. isposed on him in childhood, and to review his relationship with others on the basis of eutuallyagreed upon rules of conduct. It is during this period that the child begins to beeoee independent of his parents‘ authority and to scene his own authority. Heteronosw of childhood m to becoee the autoncq of adulthood through the transitional period of adolescence. StageIII-Rulesarevievedaslass becauseofco-on consent. Alteration of rules occurs also W cm consent. This stage begins in the fiddle of the cooperation stage (Stage III of Continuum A) and continues through life. This is the 93% stage. Cooperation and autonesw characterise this stage. This is the m M of illich Piaget speaks. The secondhand third stages of Continui- B are the seat ieportant for aoral educatim. Respect for the parent sets the stage for the reoepticn of aoral ideals. The last stage is the ultimate in the develoxnent of aoral cmsciousness. True mtononv appears than youth recognise the recimtz, i.e.. the nether respect. that he and others shat have in order to get along adthone another. I. Figure 11-1 presents Piaget's two continua in relation to typical ages and stages. Thaideaofmu alceyconceptinPiaget's aoral developent. Piaget sees three periods of developent of Justice inachild. Thefirst lasteuntiltheagesofV-B. Thsperiod is characterised w Justice "subordinated to aduit authority," the ' "non-differentiatim of the notions of Just and) unJust free those of duty and disobedience: whatever conforas to the dictates of the adilt authority is Just.” In the period. m amice is conceivedwthechldasmmm: themgdeer should suffer in proportion to the uhousnus of the offense. Ilost childreninths period believeinmm i.e.. that Nature itself till punish misdeeds. Justice in the period is foundintdiat Piaget calls his ”first aorality" (correspuidsto stage II on Continua B of Plane 11-1). The second period in the develop-mt of Justice occtn's betweenthesgesofB-ll. Theischaracterisedtwmfin w. W Justice and updater-y punish-heat are beingreplaeedwaseneeofpuhdlutwm. Thatis, thavgniehaentehoaidrittheeriee-inordertoheipthetrane- maaoriearnhettarehatheahoeidorahooidnetdo. Thsisthe' hgmnngofmmminthechld. ‘Inhstributive 25 Gena Janene no sense coast no nceuaeuAHennee .3335». 3320 one. no Gunfire .288." enema: no eoneav overflow .m ...L. manna—"goo TE... W _ “ cargoes... _ shed-2.. androgen cash Mo 35:83 H3308.— ona .eedfi no seaweed—fine s5 838.3 refine one. no €258 288a .eeweee .3 8.3.: Sense .4 _ _ _ _ L .1 esofleedflooa . snoaeenomoooe _ eoflhdeoouwe _ 5335! H: i «.....5. an. __ he; olo be E: .._.....|QEEI as... arm no a Vang .32 no 3258 HIHH 550E 26 Justice, a sense of $1.13! is the first idea that a chld has: all-est betreatedthe sens. At alateragem or special pleading and circuestences, teeper a chld's equalitarianise. The second period corresponds roughly to the interesdiete stage in Figure II-l, Continuum B. The thrd period in the avelopent of Justice occurs somewhere around the ages of 11-12. It is characterised by purely equalitarian Justice being teepered by carsiderations of 8252' In the period, "equity cmsists in determining what are the attenuating circustancee . . . . [It] consists in taking account of ‘ age, of previous services rendered, etc.; in short, in establishing equality. Pull diatribe—tin Justice based on M is achieved. The period corresponds to Stage III in Continua B of Figure II-l. . Piaget's concept of M is worth of note. Redwocity is basically mtual respect and mpathy. It is the ahlity to “get into the other person's shoes" and see things froe he perspective. Reciprocity occurs ”then mtusl respect is strong enough to sales the individual feel froe within the desire to treat others as he himself would wish to be treated. Autonomy therefore appears only with reciprocity." Reciprocity thus goes hand in hand with the developent of entonosv and full distributive Justice (equalitarianise with eqhty) . Piaget points out that aoral development roughly parallels cognitive developent. Piaget says "Logic is the aorality of 27 thoughthust as norality is the logic of action“ (1965). is a child develops cognitively, he is able to uploy higher cognitive functions that enable his to move from a eensorieotor cognitive stage (that corresponds to the may stage of aoral develop-ant, Continnue B, Stage I of Figure 11-1) through preoperationsl, concrete operations and formal operations stages. It is quite obviousthatachildienot abletodevelopshighdegree of reciprocity apart free acheving the cognitive developent stage of fornal operations. A child must be able to do foreal operations such as subordinating reality to possibility, i.e., take the other person' s views; aanipulate concepts and relations; differentiate and deal with past, present and future: and deal with caplet hush relationshpse m Kohlberg is indebted to Piaget on two counts. First, Kohlherg has built he theoretical systee uptn Piaget' a cognitive developnental psychology. Secondly, Iohlberg has built on and extended Piaget's research and theory of aoral deveiepaent of chldren. Kohlberg is indebted also to John Dewey's progessive educational psychology and philosoplv. Kohlberg states that he has based he on thinking on three of Denny's esJor points, naaely, . . . (1) that intelligent thought about the echrcation of social traits and value required a phloeophic caicept of norality and aoral developsnt, tench is a very different concept free 'eocial adJustaent' or 'eental health'; (2) that aoral develo nt passed through invariant qualitative stages; and (3 that the stieuulation of aoral developeent, like other foras of ubvelopent, rested on the stimulation of thinking and problem-solving w the chld (Kohlberg, 1972a) . [ohlberg's gage—l Develom 3.291 rohiberg has stated eight theoretical assuptions or naJor tenets of his developental approach. (1) "Basic develop-ant involves basic transforeations of coguitive structure . . . . " Theycsmotbeexplsinedordenned in tense of cautiguity, repetition, reinforce-mt and other elenents of aseooiatim learning theory. Instead, fivelopnt is explained as a motion of the n.d.tations of 'organisstiaual wholes or cysts-a of internal relations.” ' (2) "Developent of cognitive structure is the result of processes of Mg between the structure of the organise and the structure of the environ-ant, rather than being the direct result of saturation or the direct result of learning." ~ (3) 'Coyuitive structures are elm structures (scheaata) of m. Uhle coyuitive activities aove free the sensoriaotor to the eyebolic to verbal-propositiaual nodes, the organisatiau of these nodes is always an organisation of actions upau obJects." (1.) "The direction of developent of cognitive structure is toward greater ethibriu- in this organin-enviromsnt inter- action." Equilibriu- is defined as a balance or recipecity between eutual interactiaus of the subJect and obJect. In oonition, the organise perceives that it acts upon the obJect of perception as well as the perceived obJect actsvupon the subJect. The result is a 29 basic stability or conservation of a cognitive act even whle being under apparent transforeati at. During transformation, develormuent both cmserves what has been transferred and widens the transformation. (5) "Affective developnent and functiming, cud cognitive development and Motiohng are not distinct realas. Affective andcognitive developeentareparallel. . . . " (6) The ego, or self, is the fundamental unifying person- ality orgsni rational and developmental actor. “Social develop-ant is, in essence, the restructuring of the 1) concept of self, 2) in its relationship to concepts of other people, 3) conceived as beinginaco-sonsocislworldwithsocialstenderde . . . ." (7) Role-taking is alunys involvedin social coydtion. Role—taking is the ability to perceive that another is like oneself in some ways and that the perceived responds to the perceiver within a systen of complementary expectations. is one develops in social self reflection, he also develops in conceptions of the social world. (8) "The direction of 'developent in social self reflection and the social world is towards a reciprocity between the self's actiaus and those of others towards oneself." Reciprocity is the ultimate definer of eorality, "conceived as principles of Justice, i.e., of reciprocity or equality. In its individualised fore it defines relationships of love, i.e., of mutuality and reciprocal intimacy . . ." (Kohlbors. 1969). Kohlberg also defines "structure" as he uses it in the first statement above. Structure is an internal coguitive fuunction that supplies "ruules for processing information.” Structure refers to the general characteristics of shape, pattern or organization or response . . . . COgnitive structure refers to rules for processing information or for connecting experienced events. Cogniticsu (as nest clearly reflected in thinking) means putting thngs together or relating events . . . . In part this means that connections are formed by selective and active processes of attention, information-gathering strategies, motivated thinking, etc. More basically, it scans that the process of relating particular events depends upon prior general nodes of relating developed by the organism (Kohlberg, 1969). In the second statement above, Iohlberg said that cogiitive «velar-em is interactional. By this he means that " . . . basic eental structure is the product of the patterning of the interaction between the orgahsn and the enviroment" (Kohlberg, 1969). Mental structures are neither innate patterns nor patterns caused w events in the environment. Structures are the result of the organism's organisation of experiences. Kohlberg insists that one should recoguise the definite and inseparable relationship between coalition and moral deve10peent . Socialization and moral develoment occur because they are based in cognition. ". . . m description of shape or pattern of a structure or social responses necessarily entail some cognitive dimensions" (rohlberg, 1969). rohlberg also points out that theoretical social psychology, namely, various cognitive balance theories, recognise that ". . . affective coaponsnt of attitudes is largely shaped and changed by the comitive organisation of these attitudes" (Kohlberg, 31 1969). Thus, attitudes and the entire affective domain cannot be conceived of properly apart from their interaction udth the cognitive domain. Krathwohl, Bloom and Basin (196k) state: "the fact that we attempt to analyse the affective area separately from the cognitive is not intended to suggest that there is a fundamental separation. There is none." Rokeach has also stated a sihlar idea. He said that the use of the words “I believe . . . ." and "I feel. , . .« (e.g., "I believe segregation is wrong" and "I feel segregation is wrong.") interchangeably suggest the " . . . assumption that every emotion has its cognitive counterpart, and every cognition its emotional counterpart . . . . If the assumption is correct. . . then we should be able to reach down into the complexities of man's emotional life via a stucb' of his coguitive processes! (1960). rohlberg has stated his position similarly to that of Krathwohl and Rokeach with regard to the relationshp between the cognitive and affective domains. He ties affect to cognitive - structural developnent in (the following was The cognitive-developmental view holds that ' cognition' and 'affect' are different aspects of, or perspectives on, the same mental events, that all mental events have both cognitive and affective aspects, and that the development of mental disposition reflects structural changes recognisable in both cognitive and affective perspectives. It is evident that moral Judgnents often involve strong emotiaual components. It is also evident that the presence of strong emotion in no way reduces the cognitive component of moral Judgment, although it w imply a somewhat different fmctiohng of the cognitive cmponent than is implied in moral neutral areas e . . . In general, then, the quality (as opposed to the quantity,) of affects involved in moral Judgment is deterhned by its comitive—structural development, a developsent which is part and parcel with the general development of the child's con- ceptions of a moral order (Kohlberg, 1971b). 32 Kohlberg is careful to distinguish in his theory between moral developent ad cogntive developeent. He states that cog- nitive development and affective develmment have a comeon struc- tural base whichare parallsltoeachotherbutarsnotoneandthe some. He does not mean to say that moral development is cognitive butthat". . . theedstence ofmoralstagesimpliesthatmoral developent has a basic structural competent. Hhile motives and affects are involved in moral developeent, the development of these motives and effects is largely mediated by changes in thought patterns" (Kohlberg, 1969). ‘l'he implications of this follow: 1. There should be an empirical correlation between moral Judgment maturity and non-moral aspects of cognitive development. 2. floral Judpent stages or sequences are to be described in cognitive-structm'al terms even in regard to 'affective' aspects of moral Judgeent, like guilt, empatlw, etc. 3. There should be an empirical correlation between maturity on 'affective' and coalitive aspects of morality, even if affective maturity is assessed by projective test or interview methods not explicitly focused on moral Judgeent. It. the w in which moral Judy-ant influences action should also be charscterisable in cognitive-structural tone. 5. ‘rhe socio-envirouental influences favorable to moral Judgment developent should be influences characterieable in cepitive—structural terms, for , in terms of role- taking opportunities (Kohlberg, 1969 .- naturity of moral Judgemts is conceived by Kohlberg as a powerful and meanngful predictor of moral action. floral develop- ment maturity is a predictor of moral behavior because it contributes to a ". . . icogrdtive' definition of the situation rather than . because strong attitudinal or affective expressions of moral values activate behavior” (Kohlberg, 1969). Moral develop-ant thus brings reasonedmoralprinciples to bearuponamoral ale-ea. 33 Kohlberg distinguishes between a content verbalisation and a verbalised structural indication. ". . . Situational action is not usually a direct mirror of structm‘al-develOpmental change" (Kohlberg, 1969). Situations or moral Judgments, per se, or moral behavior are, the content of moral developent. They are not direct indicators of moral development maturity or mm. In order to get to moral development maturity, that is, the structure behind or underlying the content, one must use comitive assessment pro- cedures to determine the logic or rationale that supports the moral Judasent. Moral development stages " . . . represent interaction batman the child' s structures, tendencies and the structural features of the environment” (Kohlberg, 197lh) . The reason my a child inter- actsinthiswayis because ". . . we all, evenandespecisllyyomg children, aremoralphilosophers . . . . The childhasamorality of his own" (Kohlberg, 1971b) with which he interacts with his enviroment. This leads Kohlberg to say: The cognitive-developmental . . . view claims that, at heart, morality represents a set of rational rinci s g; u nt and decision valid for every mture, the ciples of Euman more and Justice. The lists of rules and conand- msnts draw: up w cultures and schools are more or less arbi- trary, and hence their teaching tends to rely upon authority rather than reason. Moral principles, however, represent a rational organisation of the child's on moral experience. ...Ourresearchintothestagesinthedevelopentof moral reasoning, then, provides the key to a new approach to ‘ moral education: as the stimulation of children's moral Judpent to the next stage of development, as the stimulation of the child's ability to act condstently in accordance tith his on moral Judgment. This approach generates a new 'Socratic' way for the teacher to conduct discussions about values . . . (Kohlberg, 1972). The argmnent for Justice being conceived as the basic moral principle is annealed in eight statements by Kohlberg: l. Psycholo cally, both welfare concerns (role-taldng, empatw, or sympathy and Justice concerns are present at the firth of morality and at every succeeding stage. 2. Both welfare concerns and Justice concerns take on more fifferentiated, integrated, and unlversali ad forms at each step of dsvelopsent. 3. However, at the highest stage of development mly Justice takes on the character of a principle, that is, becomes some- thing that is ohligatory, categorical, and takes precedence over law and other consideratims, including welfare. 1.. ”Principles" other than Justice m be tried out by those seeldng to transcend either cmventional or contractual-con- sensual (Stage 5) morality but they do not work because either (a) they do not resolve moral conflicts, or (b) they resolve themianrsthat seemintuitivelywrong. ‘ 5. The intuitive feeling of new firilosophers that Justice is the only satisfactory principle corresponds to the fact that itistheonlyonethat'doesJueticeto' theviable cereof lower stages of morality. 6. This becomes most evident in situations of civil disobedience for vitich Justice, but not other moral principles, provides a rationale which respects and can cope with the Stage 5 contrac- tual legelistie argnent that civil dsobedence is alqu wrong. . 7. Philosophers have doubted the claim of Justice to be ”the" moral principle because they have loobd for a principle broader in scope than the sphere of moral or principled indi- vidualchoiceintheformalsense (thatis, theyhavelooloed for a principle for a teleological "general theory of value and decision"). This does not contradict the facts that the fighest principle of morality to be taught is Justice, or that it wouldbemorallywrongtoteachJusticeinthe schoolsinanun- Justww 8. Burial of the claims of Justice as the central principle of morality, then, coincides with a definition of morality thich has various ape and fallacies in tons of metaetllical criteria (Kohlberg, 1971b). 2—m- 's m a male -- W The function of a cognitive-developental approach is to provide a program of analysis of behavior. Behavioral changes that are structural changes proceed "through sequential stages" which 35 other behavioral changes do not do. Such structural. change procedures are universal, progressive and irreversible, according to Kohlberg. These changes require a definition or change "in the shape, pattern or organisation of responses" (Xohlberg, 1969). These changes overtimeare changesnotinstrengthbutincoyutive struc- ture or shape. Such qualitative structural changes Just described are in a developmentalist's teninology called (stages. Kohlberg - ststes that ”stage notions are essentially idsal-typological constructs designed to represent different psychological organisations at varying points in developsnt" (Kohlberg, 1969) . The stages are sequential, (one stage leads to another,) and cuulative, (one stage is not dropped but is integrated into the next higher one.) Kohlberg, follovdng Piaget, sI-arised the characteristics of cognitive developmental stages as follows: 1. Stages imply distinct or t vs differences in children's modes of thinking or of same problem at different ages. 2. These different modes of thought form an inEant $29.2! order, or succession in individual development. cultural factors an speed up, slow (ban, or stop develop- ment, they do not change its sequence. 3. Each of these different and sequential modes of thought forms a 'safiured whole.‘ A given stage-response on a task does not J represent a specific response determined by knowledge and familiarity ulth that task or tasks similar to it. Rather it represents an underlying thought-orgafisation . . . vmich determines responses to tasks which are not manifestly m e e e e h. Conitive stages are hierarchial to at . Stages form an order of increasingly a ate grated structures to fulfill a comson function. The general adapta- tiomal functions of coalitive structures are always the same (for Piaget the maintenance of an equilibri- between the ganismandthe environment, definedasabalanoeef 36 assimilation and acco-nodation) . ‘ 'Accordingly figher steps displace (or rather reintegrate) the structures found at lower stages. is an example, formal operatimxal thought includes all the structural features of concrete Operational thought but at a new level of organisation. Concrete operational thought or even sensorimotor thought does not disappear when fornel thouylt arises, but cmtinues to be used in concrete situations where it is adequate or when efforts at solution w formal thought have failed. However, there is a hierarefial preference uitfin the individual, i.e., a disposition to prefer a solution of a problen at the highest level available to him. It is this disposition which partially accounts for the oasis- tency postulated as our third criterion (Kohlberg, 1969). Whereas certain changes occur which do not fit the criteria above, those changes in development that do are stage changes. Tim latter changes can thus be placed on an ordinal scale and described. Alltrulydevelopmsntalchangeisofthisstagechmnge. Other changes in coalition and socialisation are not truly structured and enduring stage changes. Based on his cum doctoral research in 1958, xohlberg identified six stages combined into three maJor levels as being adequate to describe his observations of moral developent. aibse- quently, he has made sipificant adJustments to his system of stages and levels. He has added sub-stays wfich are labelled 'u- or "B”. Sub-stage A represents a cognitive equililrium and Sub-stage 8 represents a moral equilibrium. “3" is the more equilibrated. It is not necessary for a person to go through both substages before achieving a higher stage. Often a person will go from one Sub-stage itothenexthigherSub-stageifithoutpessingthroughtheBofthe earlier stage. Quite often a person‘will terminate at the B Sub-stage rather than at the i one. This is not, however, altmys the case. in authoritarian, for example, would tend to remain at Stage 3-i Prime 37 and never reach Stage B. Another change in Kohlberg's thinking is that most of what he had labelled Stage 6 thinking in his-subJects was in reality 3880 SB. Iohlberg sue new that he has not found any subJects on Stage 5 until at least age 23. "Fully principled or m 5 and especially Stage 6 thinking is an adult development, typically not reached until late twenties or later" (Kohlberg, 1973a). In the field work of his research, Kohlberg has not found mono reaching Stage 6 before the age of thirty. Kohlberg also described an intermediate stage he calls 1;}. This is a transitional stage of ethical-relativism and egoism between Stages 1. and 5. It is mostly found in college students and not in high school graduates who enter the working world. He sees kissastagenotsllpersonsenterintoasadevelopmenttouard 8“” 5. Onemvwonderhowapersoncanbedescribedasbeing "in" or ”at" only one stage. Kohlberg does not suggest this is necessary. In fact, he says that about 50 per cent of a person's moral developent tends to fall into a single step. The rest is distributed to other stages as one moves successively further away mtheordinal scalefromthe dominant stage. Tluuan'individual's response profile“ represents a pattern cmposed of: the dominant stageheisin, astageheisleavingbututdlichheisstill fmotioningsomewhat, andaetageheismovingintobutonwhich he has not yet “crystallised" (Kohlberg, 1969). gohlberg' a floral Develoant Stms and Evels In reference tolxohlberg's stages and levels of moral developent, several things need to be remembered: (l) the ages given at each stage are not to be understood as determinant. One should not think that a child who does not meet the characteristics 6 of a given age on the Kohlberg moral denlopment scale is somehow not normal. The ages are only broad guidelines. ‘ Individuals will deviate considerably. (2) Not all individuals fill develop to Level III (Principled Morality). In fact, a good may people in North America will never acfieve Level 11, Stage LA or B. (3) A person is considered to have reached a certain stage if his normal moral thinking has stabilised on a certain stage's characteristics. This does not mean that a person £1.31! shows these characteristics in all moral Judpents. Stewart (Hard and Stevmrt, 1973 and Stewart, 1971.) has compiled an extremely helpful synthesis of Kohlberg's descriptions of moral developent stages and levels. Table 11-2 provides an overview of Kohlberg's stages and levels, and itwill help to understsnd the su-aries of Table 11-3. 39 28330." no 30.3.33 noun no pecans. nacho 3 0.B< 330.330." _ mafia-.3 733 ..neooum ...—80.” me 0305”" 3:00.330." doauoa hoanfinezm 8383.38 earshot". a. x. .8. In. .8. n.__.s.wu....oo 3:328.— 383 53033.5 1.88 Hanson tons-o 473 3.3.5.688 as .895 o5 :3 r amen a $333 983 “0.38:3 «and 53354.5 Isnomo Hence.— .«eSHnee 313” 033.8080 HonosaonBfiH m 09.5 Hanan 4335500 no means“ mm a?” emoaamnomo 338:3 0.7.0 gauge; 30.830 93.2.30 1. 035338 goo-season N 53m .90 38300 on: 3 38 8.333 1. 9.3.3.95 menu 9 no m can» 1.8.3.3599 .33.": on .n 093 m H05: .nsm 3.335 o8 38 $.53... 3.50338." 0 gone on o§0§ we 0936 78.8.8 mlo owenm .nsm 1:300 Inseam one nevus—.8033. 4 3 3:03 03$ field «no gum common Acheson.“ o as» Iledqdlsaodfll «an an: .033... 05a gala 53m 90mm: 358.34 a 424 a g “a a NIHH an. 33 53.3... Ba P35 a a. £3338 .3 .3233 30 8.3030 050330 0 .8 has 0 ~23 £93 38.8% 38.. 38 1» 03.400." 03.303093 “09830 30a 0033 8.30303 . «a 98:2. .5 duo." 08323 39.35 «Egg 1350 3080.: 0 ans” 053300 .05»... 00.30.30» .0093 no 3830:3300 .nooulqum .3330 a m $3.. 03483 93833. 2:» .95 £33 a .8 3.1.! 83.805 .osuBuooaafiaab. 1.88 3.8m 38 ha 3% 3.03 380:8 :38 m g 33.8: no gm .8 2§8§< 18335838 no 0308 Inna 42.04 33.9. I; gals .luloouu; dual... $4 .fi._.oufi. luau: 28: m 33 009E803 . 0&03 009.3 . 32¢ , x 83088 .NIHH an rm 11-3 ‘ 2.1: my. m E W Morality, per as, has no meaning. In early part (sensorinotor) of period the child's actions are his Judgesnts. Later begins to be able to think about his actions, but not in a copitive or social sense. m u - Anoral §tm Gemral age range: Birth to about [put Kohlberg's Socio-ltoral Perspective: lot applicable. No aoral perspective possible- Definition of stage: Not a moral stage. Moral questions have no leaning. Actions are Judpents. B-Preuoral or entric nt Generalagerange: Fros'aboutb-fitoaelate‘asoor7 Definition of Stay: the child makes Jndpents of good on the basis of what he likes and wants or what helps his, and bad onthe badsofuhathedoesnotlilusoruhathm'tshin. Hehasnoconcept or rules or of obligations to obey or confor- inchpendent or his wish. Egocentric valuing. At this level, the child is responsive to cultural males and labels or good and bad, right and among, but he interprets the labels in terns of either the physical or hedonistic consequences of action (pmdshnent, relard. exchange of favors) or the plusicsl power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. The level is divided into the following tvo stages: 1'1'hs material in this Table is excerpted Iith a few soditications tron Hard and Stewart, 1973 (also in Stewart, 1971.) which is a compilation of various Kohlberg tutorials. 1+2 TABLE 11-3 (contimed) M Q The Punisbent and Obedience Elentation Generelagerange: FronaboutSorotoabouthorlz Definition of Stage: The Purdshnent and obedience orientation. The Ibysicel consequences of action detersdne its goodness or badness regardless of the hunan leaning or value of these consequences. Avoidance of punishent and muestionlng deference to power are values in their on right, not interns of respect for an under- lying aoral order supported by pmislment and authority (the letter is Stage 1.). W - The lfi'l—“EEE anti-List Orientatim Generelagerange: Pruebout'lorstoaboutlz-lh Definition of Stage: The instrI-entel relativist orientation. Right action consists of what instrumentally satisfies one's on: needs and occadonally the needs of others. Hanan relations are viewed in tons such as those of the nerket place. Elements of fairness, reci- procity, and equal sharing are present, but they are alwus inter- preted in a physical, magnetic war. Reciprocity is a setter of "you scratch sy back and I'll scratch yours," not loyalty. gratitude 01' Justice. . n-oo no '1'! it this level, the individual perceives the saintenance of the expectations of his family, group, or nation as valuable in its on right, regardless of inediate and obvious consequences. The attitude is not only one of conformity to personal expectations and social order, but of loyalty to it, of actively maintaining, sumor'ting, ad Justifying the order and identifying with the persons or group involved in it. Behavior based on non-confonity to stereotyped and traditional role expectations. norel value is in perforeing good or right roles. (nierecterised by fusion of person and role. llorel Judgeents at this level are based on role-taking and legitinetely perceived expectations. Praise and blue, and approval and disapproval are very important. Moral stereotyping is canon- in finish good and bed are defined in terns of socially-accepted categories of virtues and vices. Positive, active, and eupathic aoral behavior becoses possible. Dutyendnorel goodness definedinterns goingbeyond nere obedience to an actual service to other persons or institution, or to a concern about the feelings of others. Responsibility becoees subjective at this level to the extent that standards of sotivatim (to confess) have been largely internali-d. However. standards of A3 TABLE II -3 (continued) Judgsent are still external. This level cadets of the follovdng two stages: m2 - The lntemrsonel Concordance Orientation General age range: From about 10 or ll on, but starts to beco-e more prevalent and predasinant beginning about 12 or 13. lo upper limit because new people never get beyond this stage, or if they do they retaineanyofits characteristicsauealoenanvsoral Judy-ants a: this basis. ' Definition of Stage: The interpersonal concordance or "good boy- nice girl" orientation. Good behavior is what pleases or helps others and is approved hathen. There is such confornity to stereo- typical images of what is majority or ”natural" behavior. Behavior is frequently Judged by intention—“he Ileana well” becones iaportent for the first time, and is frequently used. One earns approval by being ”race". This stage is easily observable in much typical teenage behavior, the peer group ethic, and the "one of the boys' phenomenon. The socialization process for females in our society has, until recently, been overshelsdngly oriented to Stage 3 norality. It is at this stage that the Golden Rule first becomes meaningful and operationaliseble, even though it is an inature application involving "putting yourself in the other guy's shoes”, but without cmsidering alltheclainsobjectivelyasfronthestandpodntofnotknodng _ which place would be yours. 5.2531: - The Law and Order (or Conscientious) Orientation General age range: Sons adolescents 12 to ll. are beginning to noveintothis stage, buttheyarenoreliioelytoeromdls, loorl']. ThisisthenodslstegeinthellnitedStates, andisateninal stage for new people. Definition of Stage: The "law and order“ orientation. The individual is oriented tonrd authority, fixed rules, and the maintenance of the social order. Right behavior consists of doing one's dew, showing respect for authority, and saintaining the given social order for its on sales. Orientation to society's point of view, to the perspec- tive of the generalised other or the Isadority, and to saintaining a stable social systea and one's own character. (Hhere an apparently 96880 H Prise orientation clearly rests on this point of view, it is scored 811830 1+. The 3m. 1: orientation need not be riddly rule- oriented, however.) A consideration of consequences for the group or society including the impact of the act upon the general expectations of members of society. Doesnot necessarily near: that one's orienta- tion is to the ”establishment" society. One can be en anti-estab- list-entStegekpersonendepplythesanorientationtoecounteb TABIJ 11-3 (contimed) society. For exanple, one could be a radical Harriet Stage I. who cmceives society as a Handst Utopia. The central issue is that the Stage 1: person sees society itself as an entity that takes pre- cedence over the individual. The individual exists to serve society. This is the view of society as outlined ty the great sociologist, mle Durkheim, earlier in this century. The nein problon with the Stage I. norality is that it subordinates, or even ignore s, the indi- vidual and civil rights of nan. This is a genuine taking-the-per- spective-of-the—systan orientation. But, relatively speaking, this is a pretty high-level and sophisticated paint of view. The individual sakes a clear effort to define norel value and principles that have validity and application apart free the author- ityofthe groupeorpersonsholdingthanandapartfroathe indviduel's on identification with the groups. This is a lau- naking and anthropocentric orientation. Law is distinguished from aoral principle. Sees law as being rationally (created for the benefit of society and mankind and to protect the rights of the individual. Laws are not sacred and can be changed for Just cause. Recognises the possibility of conflict between diet is rationally right for the individual and what is legally riglt according to society. Individual is Justified in breaking the law‘shen the law is moral or maust: e.g., when the law violates moral principles that deal with funds-ental human rights. Recognises true worth of individual and his role in society. Responsibility becones coapletely subjective in that both standards of Judmt and stan- chrds of activation are internal. - Gill 0 c entetion General age range: Kohlberg now believes this to be an adult stage that is not likely to develop until the aiddle or late m's. he nintains that the earliest he has seen Stage 5 in any of his research subjects is age 23. Definition of Stage: The social-contract legalistic orientation (generally with utilitarian overtones). Right action tends to be defined in terns of general individual rights and of standards that have been critically emined and agreed upon by the uhole society. There is a clear awareness of the reletivisn of personal values and opinions and a corresponding emphasis upon procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside from what is constitutionally and deno- cretically agreed upon, right action is a setter of personal values and opinions and a corresponding emphasis upon procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside fro- what is constitutionally and deno- 45 TAKE 11-3 (continued) cretically speed upon, right action is a setter of personal values and opinions. The result is an emphasis upon the "legal point of view”, but with an additional emphasis upon the possibility of changng the law in terns of rational considerations of social utility (rather than freezing it in tons of Stage 1. ”law and"order"). Outside the legal reels, free agreement, and contract, is the binding element of obligation. The "official" sorelity of the Aserican goverment and Constitution is at this stage. Theoretical and abstract view of society as existing for and orgarrl.sed to serve people, the general welfare of all people, and to facilitate hues existence. nistinction between person and role. ‘ m - The mm Meal Princigl_e_ Orientegm General age range: This is an adult developental stage that is not liloelytocoseuntilthelate 20'sattheveryearliest, dsoro liloely in the 30's or beyond. Kohlberg sainteins that this is a veryrare stageatteinedtyonlyeuallpercentage ofthepo lation in our culture. Sosa cultures have no Stage 6 people or Stage 5 either). Definition of Stage: The wiversal ethal—pinciple orientation. Right is defired by the decision of conscience in accord with self- chosen ethical principles that appeal to logical conprehonsivaness, universality, and consistency. These winciples are abstract and ethical (the Golden Rule, the categorical isperetive): they are not concrete soral rules like the Ten Cos-enacts. At heart, these are universal principles of Justice, of the reciprocity and equality of the huan rights, and of respect for the clarity of huan beings as individual persons. in orientation to respect for huan person- ality (treat each as an end, not a seans) and to principles of Justice (equity or aoral equality of persons) as principles defining decisions and duties. As principles, the values of respect for persons and Justice are used as consistent prisary grounds of deci- sions which are universalisable and vizich represent a universal “aoral point of view”. There is a clear awareness, and resolution of, the problen of ethical relativity and shepticiss 1y appeal to such universalisable principle of husan aorelity. This viewpoint integrates the Stage 5 and 5-D perspectives. 1:6 MEG Moan. ggflrm Pros ties to tine, seasuresent of soral developent beco‘nes a focal issue. In the late 1920's Hartshorne and May (1928, 1929. 1930) reported a etuw of aoral values and behavior. Havinghurst and Tabs (191.9) reported a study in the early 1.0's. In both studies, sorelity was considered in terse of what Kohlberg has called a “bag of virtues". That is, the concern was for the person's sorelly acceptable traits and behavior such as honesty, J trustfulness, and loyalty, etc. Kohlberg obJects to the ”bag of virtues" approach to soral developsent and assesssent because he save, There are no such things. Virtues and vices are labels w which people award praise or blase to others, but the ways people use praise and bless toward others are not the We in which they think when saluting soral decisions the-selves. Youendlsvnotfindehell'sAngeltrulyhcnest, buthe say find hisself so (Kohlberg, l970e) . It is not surprising to Kohlberg then that the studies in soral develop-ant and assess-ant have shots: the ”bag of virtues" approach to be grossly lacking. Kohlberg and Turiel have marked the findings of the Hartshorne and Hey studies with the following: (1) The world cemot be divided into honest and dishonest people . . . . Cheating is distributed around an average level of moderate cheating with only few people never cheating or cheating at alsost every opportunity. (2) If a person cheats in one situation, it does not seen he will or sill not cheat in another. There is very little correlation .ong cheating tests in different situations. 1:7 (3) People's verbal aoral values about honesty have nothing to do with how they act. People who cheat express as such or sore sorel disapproval of cheating as those who M't chest. (1.) There is little correlation betvnen teachers' ratings of honesty and actual experisental seasures of honesty. (5) The decision to cheat or not is largely detersined by expediency. The tendency to cheat depended upon the degree of risk of detectim and the effort required to cheat . . . . (6) Ivan when honest behavior is not dictated by concern about purist-ant or detection, it is largely detersined by i-ediate situatiaiel factors of group approval and e as opposed to being detersined by internal sorel values . . . . 7) Uhere honesty is detersined by cultural value-forces, these values are relative or specific to the child's social class “ mp e e e e The findings obtainedbynartshorne andllaywere not restricted to honesty. lastly the ease results were ob- tained in experisental studies of altruiss (or service) and self-control. More recent researchers, stuchring aoral behavior under the title of "soral interneli ration," "conscience," or ”resistance to tesptation,“ have essentially used Hertshorne and flay's seasuresent procedures and have obtained essentially the ease results (Kohlberg and Turiel, 1971). Neitherweachingandensplenorpunishentorrewardere sufficient to produce wood: behits or sorel character. lluch in the bone and school ehich have traditionally been associated with the developsent of aoral character have been found to be relatively unproductive. According to Kohlborg, extensive research on parental practices has fond no positive or consistent relationships between earliness and count ofperentaldesendsortreiningingoodhabits (obedience, caring for poperty, perfcrsing chores, neetness, or avoidance for cheating) and their children' s actual obedience, responsibility and honesty. Asomt of use of praise, of deprivation of physical rewards, or of msical purist-ant is also not fond torelate consistently or positively to seasures of aoral character (Kohlberg, 1966). The research of hartshorne and m (1921:, 1929. 1930) and Havinghurst and hay (191:9) has a probles as viewed frcs a develop- sental viewpoint. It centers on the content of soral developsent and behavior rather than on the structure of sorel «bvelopsent. Once structural-developsentel assesssents have been sede using a cognitive approach, situational behavior, or sorel behavior can be defined. ”For ample, consistent non—cheating becoses a 'sile- stone' behavior for Stage 5" (Kohlberg, 1969). Kohlberg would suggest that assesssent of aoral develop- ' sent stages (structure) should precede seasuresent of sorel be- havior. Certain kinds of aoral Judpents and behaviors are sore in keeping sith certain stages of aoral developsent. Unless a certain stage has been reached, a parent will tend not to express aoral content and behavior conscnsit slth that stage. Thus, stage develop-ant precedes sorel cmtent and behavior. helping a child risefrosthelowerstegesoflandZtoBendhwhenheis cogni- tively ready till be sore effective in producing aoral behavior than screlising, preaching, and threatening of such ccntesporary sorel education in schools, religious institutions and hoses. ' . (Kohlberg-oriented) Kohlberg's aoral chvelopent theory is becosing sore widely recognised. It does have, however, sufficient espiricel research associated sith it to sales a review of a few relevant studies eorthehiie. ' Kohlberg useelf began his research in his 1958 doctoral £9 dissertation with interviews of 75 sales batman the ages of 10 - 16 years. Kohlberg has continued he test these sass sales at three year intervals since 1958. In addition, Kohlberg reports additional develop-ant studies in other cultures, and Kohlberg and others have perforsed experissntel studies in several areas of aoral developsent. Turiel (1966) found that Kohlbsrg' s stages did fors an invariant sequence and that each stage represents a reorganisation of the preceding stage. Turiel exposed his subJects to equally rational argusents Justifying two contradictory positions. These arguents were presented at one stage below (-1) the .meects' dosinentsorsldevelopsent stageendetaiesndtwo stages above (+1 and +2). Those subJects exposed to the +1 treatsent sade the scat dgiificant change in aoral chvelopsont by saving the subJects up one stage. Blatt (1969: Blatt and Kohlberg, 1971: Kohlbarg, 1969: Best, 1711:) took Turiel's laboratory experisent (Turiel, 1966) and applied it to a classroos situatisi. Blatt held a weekly aoral developsent class with sixth graders during a three sonth period. His procechre was to present aoral dilues and initiate probing questions. The rest of the ties he ssnepd the dacusaicns between students. His saJor senageriel role was to assist children on one stagetointeract withthoseone etegehigherendtoprovide Stage 5 erguentstotheentireclass. The renaltnsthstldllrcont of thestudentssovedupsne stage, cosparedwitthercsntina control group, and 10 per cent of the students soved up two stages. A post-test a year later showed that the hove-est to a hgher step of aoral development reasoning was ssintained. This experisent was replicated in five groups, all with sisilar results. Several aspects of Blatt's research are gerssne for the research being undertahsn for this dissertation. Blett used an intact classroos situation. he role was as facilitator and sena- ger, not «the prisary aoral educator or teacher. He sought by diecuuion between stubnts and between students and hisself to increase student aoral developent as assessed on Iohlberg's soral developent stages and levels. Blett needed to be assessing con- stantly the aoral Judgsont verbalisetiais beingoco-unicated by students to each other lid to he. The fact that he was able to do all of this. suggests that others can a likewise. Blatt's research differs, however, fru tin research associated with the dissertation. he spent a weekly session with the students for three sonths in order to attespt to affect a shft in their soral developsent. Ths dissertation'e research will not try to affect changes in aoral developent stages. Instead, the research sill seek to elicit aoral developsent Judgsents on .whch stage deter-inatiais can be sede. Also, the “luxury‘ of a weekly eessiai for 3 sonths is not part of the design. In Best's unpublished doctoral dissertation (1968) reported by Kohlberg (1969). and in Best, m1 and Iohlberg (1969) subJects were tested to detersine their cosprehendon of steps above and 51 below their own through a recapitulation procedure. All subJects were found to be able to correctly recapitulate in their on words all stage seesages at or below their on stage. Generally, they could correctly recapitulate sose but not all stage seesages one stage above their on, but they could not recapitulate seesages two stages above their on. Thus sorel stage cmhension extends frosthe stageetwhchapersoniepressntlytoellstages below hisendforscsetoestegeme, oretsost, twoabove his. Ife stuant was able to cosprehend a hgher stage, he usually chose a hghor stage solutimtothesorel hleuespresentedtohsin Best's research. Kohlberg cites he own cross-cultural research of aoral developsent stages to provide evidence for he theory's uhversel cleis. His cross-cultural research is not fully reported but is referred to in several of his writings (Kohlberg, 1966 and 1969). Studies were done with children in Taiwan, Great Britain, huico, Turkey, and the United States. The studies included siddle and lower class boys and Ire-literate and sari-literate villagers in Turkey, a Mayan group in hsxico and an Atml group in Taiwan. "In general, the cross-cultural studies suggest a sisilar sequence of developent in all cultrn-es, although they suggest that the last two stages of aoral thought do not develop clearly in pro-literate village or tribal co-snities' (Kohlberg, 1966) . 52 The indicatiaie frm the above studies ty Kohlborg, Turiel, Blatt and Best, are that (l) Kohlberg's schosa sect the criteria set previously for em stage melopent theory, (2) they are universal in their scope, and (3) they can housed in both a curtrolle’d laboratory environ-ant as well as a classroos to assist in aoral developsent education. A few others such as Peder (1971), Krahn (1971). and hogan and nickstein (1971) have published research using Kohlberg's soral developsent stages, but their research is not directly relevant to this study. m The significant theoretical literature in the area of aoral developsent has been fros Piaget, Kohlberg and others associated with Kohlberg. The Values Clarification literature tends to be less theoretical and sore oriented to a pragsetic exssinaticn of one's on values. The social learning school's literature focuses upon the role of social relatimships and their force in values and aoral developsent. The social learning approachdoesnct, however, goboyondcontsntofbeheviortothe structure of thought that underlies the content. Kohlberg and he associates have developed a rather detailed description of a coyitive—developental approach to soral Judgsent. Stewart has provided an exhaustive review of Kohlberg's work to date, relating it to the larger field of sore1 deveiopeeht theory. The research associated with Kohlberg sill be used as the 53 eshrical basis for the research reported in the dissertation. Kohlberg provides both the echoatimel researcher and teacher with a theory of how sorel Judperrts are sede. Iohlberg's approach stands in contrast to the Values Clarification approach. Cosparing the Values Clarification writings of Baths, Sison, Benin, gt 9.1.. to Kohlberg's is an instructive experience. whereas Kohlberg is deliberate and philosophcel, pondering both ultisete and inediate foci of aoral Judgsent, Baths, 3; g are sore superficial and pregsetic, shaming the sorel and values surface but never getting near the answer to the question of wly sose values are better than others . Golly observed that ”the values clarification approach concentrates on the careful choice of values but has no underlying theoretical structure.“ In contrast, 'lohlberg' s approach to values . . . is based on a cognitive theory which specifies how aoral developsent occurs” (Colby 1975). The Values Clarificatim approach does not provide a philosophcel basis for values or aoral developqnt, nor does it see]: to explain the basis of aoral Judpents. Iohlberg on the other hand, does show the cognitive and structural nature of sorel reasoning. He also seeks to relate the cognitive and structural cosponents to a philosophical position in viiich Justice is defined as the soot adequate conception of right end wrmg. Kohlberg's theory eesse persisonious while not being overly sisple. Iohlherg views sorsl developent found on three levels: (1) internal :dthout reference to externals, (2) external without reference to internals, (3) internal with reference to external principles. Thus Kohlberg provides a sore integrated approach to the world of values and sorel developsent than other schools of thought. He avoids being either overly sisple or overly cosplex. Kohlberg provides a balanced approach. he also avoids the trap of such aoral developsent research, nasely, focusing on content without attention to fore and stricture of Judgsent. Thus Kohlberg provides classroos teachers with a theoretical fr-ework that has leaning for understanding the developont of floral Judo-ant. Also, Kohlberg'e associates have caducted experiseMs in laboratory and classroos situations. The classroos situations especially have acne sisilerity to the desip of this dissertation's research. The purpose of this research ees to describe we to increase the classifiahdlity of studssrts' verbali sstions about aoral Judg- aents. the soda of inquiry is descriptive research. Descriptive researchhasaclsarfhctioninthelistofnndsofe-mrical. research. Cal-pater (1969) states that the purpose of descriptive research . . . is to establish a clear description of ssterials and pheno-ena under investigation. 'fhe ulti-ate ai- is to classify events so that later research can elploy an uneqdvocal ters- inology and to lessen the confusion coring fro- ad hoc defin- itions. Observation is esphasised. Intensive and prolonged observations of the couple: phenoesna in education sees essential for building the messes-y order for later research. melhart (1972) said that descriptive research is the prenquisite for experimental research. Unless experiesntal research is preceded by descriptive research, ”the result inevitably, is i-eture, half-habd, degeetic, and for the lost part eorthless‘ theory." Descriptive research then, is the foundation for eapednentalx‘research. Carpenter (1969) takes educational research to task for insufficient 55 descriptive research: ”In education . . . we have not developed description sufficiently to shape our eaterials in an crcbrly framework and to define variables as part of a standard language systen.” I the function of this particular descriptive research is to describe what happens when different approaches are used to elicit noral ,1th responses in a noral developent discussion sith young people; The expectation is that this inquiry sill suggest several twpotheses for testing that should use an experinental research design. The fieldnrkforthis researchsas dmeinrandonlychoscn schools in intact classrooms of students rho were in grades 8 - 12. Oral interview were used to atenine the ease of classifying an oralresponsetoaasofdxnoral developentinterrogetionproce- dures. The entire field work actually consisted of two saJor tasks which were intended to be 'acconplished sieultaneously. One task was to fulfill the require-ants of the larger stucw of an evahration of the high-school-use files of Youth Files, Incorporated as narr- tioned above in Chapter I. hritten respmses were used ineonbina- tion with oral responses to gather data to fulfill this purpose. The written responses will not be reported in this dissertation, however. The second task was to gether data for the research re- ported in this dissertation. 57 W The subJects snre sale and fenale students in grades eight to twelve in thirty-six randonly chosen schools fron across the United States. The subjects had participated in a particular curricular experience, the rioting of a notion picture. First, twelve school sites were chosen based on the showing of the file “High on the W1 hot-ooh March 1. 1973 - any 31. 1973. The schools were chosen to include one per week over a twelve week period of ties. Site visits to each school occurred no sooner than five days afterthefilnus shonendnonore thantwo weeks after the sharing. This established the ties true in “Oh the filnbookings uretooocurinorcbrtobeincludsdinthetotal nuberof schoolsqualinedforinclusionintherandons-ple. Secaid, after twelve Iain sites were selected at randon, twentyh-fcur additional school sites eithin a rumble travel distance to each prinary site were chosen. These twenty-far additionelschoolsqualifiedsincetheyhadshomoneofthree noral development mu within'the amounted tine trust stated above. Thetwoalnsinadditionto'HiQIOnTheCaews" are'l'lip Side' and “Hey There, Vandal-1 The total author of schools chosen nubered thirty-six. The subjects, sale and fenele youth in grades eiyat through twehe in private and public schools, were all in intact classes or coupe. The nmbsr of classes or groups contacted bytheP-Odependedmhoeaanygroupsinaschoolviewedone lmsoribed in Appendix I ofthefilns, theavailabilityofclsssestotheP-O, andthe aeount of ties schemled for the M at each particular school. In most cases subjects not with the P-O bring the earning. ipossiblycmfoundngvariablewestheanountoftiee avdlahleineechclassperiod. The schoolsveriedgreatlyfron twenty ninutes on the low side to seventy-five ninutes on the high m. The variability on... tins was not costume in this study. The anomt of ties devoted to actual discussion was also a variable that was not controlled. Discussion ties was dependent on three variable factors: (1) the ascent of ties per class period, (2) the ascent of tiee censusd w "housekeeplng' chores such as attendance taking, announce-en“, etc., and (3) leather or not witten responses were also used with a particular class. Tine becones one of several saJor factors that an interact with the results of this stow. n... um be said in chapter Iv about tins and its possible effects on the findings. itypicaltinsfrsneoftstatoccurredineachclassisas follows: 1) fivetotenlinutes openngchorescmductedbythe teacher concluding in introduction of the P-O, 2) two-four Iimrtes ofintrochrctoryrenrkstytheP-Oreletedtothepurposeefthe interview, 3) 'renainder of £1.88 tine m- oraldiscussion and/or written responses. 59 IMMTION m The interrogtion structure deals trith the specificity of the opening oral questims that were asked in relation to each response node. A himurred 9m gr_a_l_ mstion was specific and pointed. It focused on one particular event and/or lord devel- opsent nessage of a file. It directed students to think along the lines of what the M was thinking. It left little or no room for individuality in focusing upon the file and its noral development seesages. It as thus very chliniting in scope. There was, never- theless, freedoa for a student to answer as he wanted in response to high-structured questions. The structure ties in the question itself. Structure did not purposefully enter into structuring the students' responses. Thus, the high—structured opening oral questions were open-ended. The subjects were sslosd to respond to the questions in their on words. multiple choice or forced choice answers fron which the subjects met respond were not given by the 9-0. .Por ample, the following is a high-structured opening oral question: What did the opening and closing graveyard scenes say to you?" agaructured 222.155 are; metions were in contrast to the mgr-structured questions. Lon-structured ones provided only a rim of direct focus for the students regarding the file viewed. Very general questions were asked that could have been interpreted and answered in various saneers by the students. The only- constraint in the question was that the students were asked to respard with theirthoughtsandfeslingstotheparticularcurricularexperiences of this stw. For exasple, a low-structured question was What (b youthinkofthefilnthichyousavrecentlycalled'lflghonthe, Gupus'?" Payne (1951) has noted the assets and liabilities of low- structured questims. As assets he states that the low-structured question is mnnfluenced, it elicits a tide variety of responses, it sakes a good introduction to a subject, it provides background for interpreting answers to other questions. It can be used to solicit suggestims, to obtain elaborations, to elicit reasons, to evaluate arguents, to explore knowledge and nenory, and to classify respondents . . . . It gives the respondentachancetohavehisornssyh-so... .Itisa preliminary step to preparing questions on em unexplored issue . . -. . Audit providesquotable quotesrnichnqadd sparkle and credbuity to the final report. The liabilities of e lee-structured question are as follows: The approach and sectional conditions set by the inter- viewer are najor factors in the quantity and quality of the replies. Respondents who are sore articulate will express th-selves lore fully and over a broader range thnr those who are less articulate. Sole respondents nay unit their obvious first answer and give a sore couple: but less pertinent reply. Respondents m refuse to elaborate their answer lies asked “m (Pane, 1951). In all of the oral proceduru, regardless of the structural natureoftheopening mammandregardleesoftheresponsenode, 61 . responses were probed. Once responses had been given to one or sore opening oral cautions, regardless of structure, probing qrestions were used to seek to elicit noral judgnents about events and noral development seesages in the file. In addition, probing questions were used to seek to deternine the cognitive aoral devel- opsent reasoning behind the aoral judpents. Thus all opening oral questions were intended to probe into the subject's aoral judpsnt and aoral reasoning. For exanple, a student' s response to the low-structured question ”what was the file trying to ac?“ was Asoeething like, "It was suing that we shouldn't use drugs.“ The P-O asked, ”m is that?“ ”that nakee you say that?" After a reply to this question from the student, the P-O asked, "m b you feel that getting arrested for using drugs is bad?" The stuchnt replied in an of several ways, revealing clues about Kohlberg stages: (1) "It hurts ne ptyeically getting rouytcd up by cops" (Stage 1), or (2) "I don't nnna' get shoved in jail: I want ny frecdon" (Stage 2), or (3) "my parents would completely go to pieces if I got put in jail. I don't want to disappoint then" (Stage 3), or (1.) "Drug use is against the law. If everyone did that he vented to, we'd all be hurting each other" (Stage A)- TableIII-lprovidesasu-Iaryofthehighandlowopening questions. 62 TABLE III - 1 0? ORAL ON I. The oral group interviews associated with written responses used two kinds of questions: high-structured and low-structured. A. The low-smd gglstions were the sees for all schools. These are as follows: 1. 2. 3. Ihat didyouthinkofthe file? Howdidyoulikethefiln? that :nsthefilntryingtosay? The Mmtmd mstions were as followe: 1. ”HIGH OI m “”9 (a) howdidthefilesqdrugs were bad? (b) what serts of problens were associated with drug abuse? (c) How did the file shew parents were involved tith their childreWs drug nobles? (d) "Peanuts" nother threw his out. Should she have done the? W W not? - (e) Ihat place didGodhaveinthe lives of sons ofthe file's characters? (f) that did the opening and closing graveyard scenes say to you? (g) After each of these questions, this researcher asked iftheyagreedornotwiththefilnandwlw, inorder to get to sons oftheirnoral reasming. 63 TABLE III-l (continued) 2. ”MP SIDE“ (a) How did the file show that drugs were bad? (b) How did the fill point out that parent-child relatims were behind sons of the probleas presented? (c) What place did the fill suggest that God or Jesus Christ should have in a person's life? (d) hhat were sons of the problees and solutions presented in the fill? (a) After each question, this researcher asked if the laments agreedcrnotuththefihandflv, inorfir to get at their reasoning. 3. want rm mm:- (a) W did Vonda carry her Bible and read it? (b) how helpful is God to a person? (c) Wdidthe bayonet ll'eakuptheasselhly? II. The oral interviews lithout aw written responses used both low and high-structured opening questions, too. i. Lew-structured om metions were as followa: 1. that as the file's nessage? 2. How did you like the fill? 3. howdoyoudeteMnerightfroI-wrongf? 3- W .... «ho-on tro- the appropriate list of questions in the high-structured list above. MESS mg The response node was divided into written and oral responses. The written responses were further sub-divided by oral discussion respmses either E9}: to or subsmnt to written responses. The questions in the written rem; node in all cases were highly structured for all subjects. Each subject was to write his responses privately and snow-ously to questions in the written response nods. Table III—2 lists the questions in the :nitten response node. niscussion prior and subsequent to responses in the mitten response node follovnd the high/low-structured questions out- lined above under interrogation structure. This discussion, was an open discussion with the entire group or class invited to participate. The oral rum node was used without any written respm— ass. This node was used with an entire group or class of students. They were free to participate as they wanted. The opening oral questions in this node followed within a high or low structure. Table III-l, part II, lists these questions. The written responses were snployed for two priaary reasons. First, they provided data for the evaluative research project of which this dissertation as a part. Second, they were used to focus attention in Approaches III and IV (See description of the six approaches follouing.). The focus of this particular dissertation is on the elicitation of oral resparses. Thus the written responses will not be analysed and reported here. They are analysed and reported in hard and Stenrt, 1973, Chapter v. l. 2. 3. lo. 5. 6. 7. 65 rm III-2 O 5 1'0 11‘ mm A whet dd the :11. try to say: that is, what was/were its nessage(s) or nsin idea(s)? Do you agree or disagree with the nessage(s) or idea(s)? Why or In not? hhat effect dd the file have on you? Hhat dd it do to you? Did you like or dslike the file? How such did the following help you in decidng that is right and wrong? (a) Very arch lluch Sons None 1 2 3 l. (1) Physical here (2) lental, elotiwal har- (psychological) (3) Good feelings (1.) AW of friends (5) Approval of parents (6) Approval of other adults (7) 108.11” (8) Into-111v (9) Approval of society (10) Approval of nnkind (11) Other (what?) (k) W did you check "very lunch“ and ”Itch“ above? Ifyounakeapronise, wouldyouhreakit? morwhynot? Aw other co-ents. W Table III-3 gives an overview of the opening oral interro- gation structures and the response nodes used in each approach. Descriptive research, to be valuable, should look for sonething inparticularaswellasbeopentounexpsctedand serendipitous findngs. The research herein reported had a set of expectations or seninsl lurpothsses associated with each approach. The writer has chosen to use the word "expectations" to describe what he expected to decover in the research. These expectations are listed below under each description of each of the six approaches. The approaches were carceptualised as the independent variables. Gludfiahlity, gensnsnees and asnagsnsnt were the dependent variables. m; consists of a hgh-structured opening dscussion with written responses following the dscussien. In the regard, it as expected that tie oral responses of the students would have been easy to classify «cording to Kohlbsrg's aoral developsnt stages, the oral responses would have been gernans, and 1esdsrsh1p tasks would have been ssinly to askthe proper hgh-structured questions. Thedscussimwouldmbablyhaveactedasastimlustoelicit further written respurses fru the students. M consisted of low-structured opening dscussion with written responses follodng the dscussion. The approach was expected to produce less gereane and less easily classifiable oral responses. The low-structured opening discussia: was enacted to produce responses fron those who found it easy to enter into a 67 class-sized dscusdon. . Thus the ”class clover“ as well as the truly articulate persons would have tended to doninate the dscusdon. The sore intensely these kinds of students felt about the subject being dscussed, the greater they would have doninated the dscusdon and the less other neubsrs of the class meld have participated. Amch III consisted of written responses followed by a high-structured opening interrogation procedure with dscusdon after the writing. The was expected to produce gernane and easily classi- fiable written responses. Homver, it was not expected to produce a large aeount of dscusdon because the students would have, in all likelihood, felt they had said all they wanted to in their written answers. It we expected that nauaging the leadershp of the approach would have required sore skill to atteept to draw out fro- students what they had alreaw written. hhat discussion developed ens expected to be gar-me and sadly classifiable. Mach IV consisted of written responses followed by a dscusdon using a low-structured opening interrogation procedure and occuring after the writing. The expectation was that these oral re- sponses would have been less sadly classifiable and less gar-ans to the Kohlberg aoral developsent levels and stages. The approach was expected to produce sore dscusdon than Approach III, but less than either Approaches I and II. Ieaderehp nsnageeent in the fourth Approach was expected to be more dfficult. It ens expected that the (dscussion would have tended to ranble. The sane tendencies of nonopolieation of the dscussion tore expected as nsnhoned in Approach II. Approach v consisted of oral discussim in class using high-structured opening questions. This approach was expected to be smwhat stilted, tending to a question-answer for-at nu: the leader providing all of the direction for the students. The responses were expected to be easy to classify and to be germane. The probleas associated ulth the discussion antiqued . in Approach II shows were anticipated in the approach, too. However, the high-structured questions were expected to htigate against the beconingas seriousaproblen asinApproachVI below. W consisted of oral discussion using low-structured opening interrogation questions. Ths approach was expected to pro- duce the lost difficulty in elnssifying responses according to aoral developsent stages, to be less gernane, and to produce the nest probleas in trying to aansge the discussion. All of the probleas associated nith discussion in Approach II were expected to be even nore apparent in this last approach. ' W. Theroleoftheresearcherwasas a participant-observer (M). As was stated in Chapter I,“ the brevity of exposure to each group does not nerit the sore precise use of the tern "Participant-observer.” Nevertheless, the data were gathered by one person who participated as a discussion leader, facilitator for clarifying responses, and observer. Thus the ten participant-observer is used to describe the role of the researcher in the interviews. 69 M The research described in the stuchr sought through, the interrogation structure and the response nodes to answer a basic question. That question was, given several ways to lead a aoral develop-ant oriented discussion, whch one or ones provide the nest easily classifiable responses, the lost genane responses, and would bsthenostaansgeable? Inordertodetemneths, aseries of discussions was arranged. Bach discussion enployed one of six Approaches described above and smarised in Table III-3. These six Approaches were the independent variables associated with the research and clashfiahlity, genanenees and aanagenent the dependent variables. W The oral responses of the subJects are described for each approach in terns of the following categories: (1) classifiahlity, (2) geraaneness, and (3) discussion aanagenent. These three cats- gories were the dependent variables of the research. (1) Wmaumwmmoruum a Kohlberg aoral developent stage to each response. These responses whch were clearly identified by the 9-0 during the discussion as a stage inxohlberg's ache-a were WW. As an exanple, responses that stressed that taking drugs was "wrong becauu the plvsical consequences were her-ml to one's body” were coded as easily classifiable. Other responses that clearly fit into one of Iohlberg's descriptions of six stages of OPWG ORAL INTEROGATION STRICTURE HIGH 10“ mm III-3 W 32 IE ...—WSW 0N3 RESPONSE 10D! wan-rm ORAL MSCUSSION DISCUSSIGI PRIOR mm T0 T0 HBITIM HEITING I III V Discussion Prior written Respons Oral Response High Opening Discussion High Opening Structure Following Structure Written Response High Opening Structure If F TI Discussion Prior written Response, Oral Response Low Opening mscuesion Low Opening Structure Following Stmcture written Response LowOpehng aoral developnsnt were coded as easily classifiable. These responses that did not. fit Kohlberg's scheaa a- that seemed to fall between stages are coded as less easi_._ly classifiable. For sample, responses that stressed content of aoral Judgnent, ”drugs are bad,“ but did not have no structural reasons for the Judaents were coded as being less easily classi- fiable. Aresponsesuchas"nru_gsarebadbecausetheydaasgs yourbowandthey thn't do awthingforyou' wasjudgedto fall between stages (Stages 1 and 2 in the sxanple) and, therefore, were Md less easily classifiable. (2) G_enanensse was Judged in terns of the relevance of the responses to coghtive aoral reasoning as described by Kohlberg'e cognitive aoral developent stages. Those responses that were clearly verbali rations of cognitive aoral reasoning and not Just noral content Judgaents were clashfied as gar-us. For exanple, a state-enteuchas'Tahngdmgsietn'ongbecauseithllaaloeyour parentsupsetsndldon'twanttoupsetqparents; Ilovethen toomch; Theyden'texpectaetogetintodrugtrouble." is clearly a verbaliaation of Kohlberg'e Stage 3 aoral develop-ant. All responses that were clearly verbalisstione of aoral develop- sent according to Kohlberg's description cure coded L...’ Responses that were irrelevant or were not clearly verbalisations of cognitive aoral reasoning were classified as W. Into the last category were placed all aoral Judgnents that did not 72 have cognitive aoral reasoning etateaents to support than. All content responses without coyzitive structure responses were classified as less gar-ans, also. For ample, a response such as I'I think all people {want to have a happy life," as coded less geraane. Also, responses such as "The file eaid drugs were bad for you and I agree,” which had no cognitive, structural reasoning elicited were coded less geraane. (3) W was described in terns of the fellotdng general characteristics of group interaction: (a) freedo- frou donination w one student, (b) contributims froa acre than one-half of the students in the class, (c) voicing of contrary viewpoints by students, (d) relative spontaneity of discussion, and (e) continuance of discussion by subjects without proapting by the participant-observer. Each of the six Approaches is a node of eliciting responses fron students. The responses of each approach are analysed according to the three criteria of (l) ease of classifiahlity of responses tithin Kohlberg's echo-a, (2) geraaneness to Kohlberg's scheaa, and (3) ease of nanagsnent of the group discussion. W Thethreefilasthatwereshotnhavebeenanalysedinteras of Kohlberg'e aoral develop-ant echena. This was done to provide an understanding of the aoral develop-ant seesages in each file and to help the researcher to know the stages of the seesages which students verbalise in the discussim and written responses. 73 A staff of five knowledgeable researchers (doctoral students and university faculty) who were working in related research uith Kohlberg'e aoral developsent scheme not and viewed each file expressly to assig: a Kohlberg noral developent stage to each moral aessage perceived. Each person worloed individually and privately in Judging each norsl aessage unit of the fill. After each unit was Judged privately, each Judge announced his dehsion to the others for con- parison. In aost cases, all Judges agreed. In those few cases where there was disagree-ant, discussion prevailed until a consensus was reached by all. After consensus was reached for one unit, the Judges viewed the next one and ashmed a aoral developsent stage nuber (from Kohlberg) to that unit. The ease reporting and con- sensus procedure above was followed throughout each file. The scoring of each unit was done in accordance with the aoral develop-ant scoring procedures outlined by Porter and Tvlor (1972) . Theirs was the wily published aaterial available at that tine that explained how to assign Kohlberg's aoral development scores. Inanalyaingeachofthe files, thetotalinpactofa scene was considered. The inclubs the verbal script, the setting, characters, cineaatic effects, photograplv, colors, and nusic. The Judges sought to view each file in terns of the aoral seesages being coununicated. The aoral nsesage unit consisted of scenes and parts of scenes. When sons scenes contained aore than one aoral aessage, each aoral aeseage was considered as a unit withn a given scene. 7h The Judges consciously and purposefully avoided the tenptation to ”read into" the file the intentions of the file director and producer. The analysis is reported in Tables III-5 and 6, using Iohlberg's aoral developsent scheaa as presented in Chapter II. Table III-l, ,1... ratings in percentages of each run noral seesages whch were assigned to each of Kohlberg's stages. Each file's aoral developent level was calculated by adding together the percentagesofallstagesineachlevel. host of the first file, "High on the Capra," was strongly oriented to Level I asseape. It stressed mist-ant and obedience, plwaical and psychological warnings and threats, and inetrunental aspects of both life in general and religion in particular. Another portion of the file was alnost entirely oriented to Stage 3 in terse of stereotypical role expectations fron fanily and friends. The other Stages (It-6) had none or practically no scenes oriented to than. The second fill, "Flip Side,” followed "high on the Caapus" interns ofbeingliloehse orientedstronglytoLevelI (Stagesland 2) and partly to Stage 3. It was sasemt stronger in its orientation toStageBthan'Bighonthecallpus". The thrd fill, "Hey There, Vandal” had a sell orientation toStagelmdacmhderableanounttoStage 2. Allostone-halfof the scerres were oriented to Stage 3. There one a weak orientation to Stage I. m the ma. ' 75 TABLE III-1t mu 9.! 39:. 19% w .....APPm 9.1: it w Mom 29. W $9.14 W $11.29; Kohlberg Stage “High on the "Flip Side” ”Hey There, Cums“ Vonda!" °r “”1 Total floral nos- Total horsl Mes— Total Moral Mes- sage Units: 1.5 sage Units: 57 use Unite: 13 Stage 1 29“ 23% 10$ Stage 2 51% 1.3% 38% Level I 76% 66$ m Stage 3 20% 30% 1.6% Stage I. 1f — 6% Stage Id 1% 2% — Level II M 311‘ 52$ =====_ Stage 5 2% 11 .. Stage 6 -- 11 .... Level III Zfi — r—‘fl Modal Stage 2 2 3 *Percentages are in terns of the percentages of scenes in each film which were assigned to a particular stage. 76 Generally, then, as can be observed fron the nodal stages in Table III-6, two of the fills are heavily oriented to Kohlberg's Level I (especially Stage 2) "Instrmsental Relativiet Orientation.” The third file is priaerily oriented to Stage 3, "Interpersonal Concordance Orientation" but with a strong secondary orientation to Stage2,aleo. LOGI U T Several changes occurred during the twelve weeks of data collection. Oneoftherandoalychosenschoolsiteswasinafar western aountain state. Two additional school sites could not be found that would have shovel am of the three fills ("High on the Canopus,“ ”Flip Side,” and ”Hey There, Vondal") in the ustern state withn the proper tine lilits laid deter w the etuchr. The high costs involvrtdintravelingtothisone randon site andthe lack of am other sites ulthn a reasonable distance nade the net's inter- views prohhtive fron a cost-benefit viewpoint. Consequently, that were trip was cancelled. This us to have been the sixth week of interviews. ‘ Problsns also arose in setting up the interviews for the eighth week. Very little lead tine was available between the con— tacting of the schools and the actual interviews, usually not sore than one week. It was discovered during the routine arrangenente, that the schools chosen to: the eighth week could not be contacted because of Spring vacations peculiar to that area. An attespt was made to find substitute schools. As it turned out, no others were available. The observatials for was]: eight, therefore, were can- celled. . The result of cancelling the trips for the sixth and eighth weeks was to reduce the eagle sise to 83$ of the original sample sise. The is generally considered to be sore than adequate to nest the require-onto of rsndoniaation. Another change resulted when the P-O arrived at a school for the interviews only to discover that their aovis proJector had recently been stolenandhadnot beenreplaced. Theyhadnot shown the file. Therefore no interview are possible in that school (9-2). No school could be found for the 9-3 assign-ant whch would nest the established criteria for showing one of the three files. Consequently, a school us chosen whch had booked another file fron the ease scam ulth a sinilar aoral aesssge. The researcher hadnotpu-eviewedthefila, sohewentintothe schoolwithonlvthe very briefest verbal su-ary of the fill. me of the stipulations for site selection stated that ”students uill have viewed one of the files not less than five days nor sore than two weeks before the interviews." Schools nodify their schedules to fit their con weds, however. As a result, three schools showed "high on the Canpus' only‘two days prior to the interviews. One school abound the file the day before the interview. These were 78 the only schools that deviated froa this criterion. It was Judged that the did not create a simificant difference in responses. Data for these schools are included. I In another school (10-2) the only class intended for vietdng ofthefilndidnotneetonthedaytheinterviewmtooccur. The questionstobeansweredbythe etudentswere tapedbytheP-O and a tn-itten copy was left with the teacher. The teacher administered the taped question to be annexed in writing by the class. The class received tb questions amroxiaately three weeks after viewing the filaandone week after the inter- viewer was present. Since no oral discussion was conducted with the class, no data are reported for the school (lo-2). Tape recordings were attelpted during the class inter- views. These were found to be technically infeasible for several reasons. The plwsical situations varied treaendously free school to school. The place for the interviews ranged hes a usual classroos to various-sised libraries, cafeterias, auditorium, and gymasims. Merely atteapting to pick up voices becaae techni- cally inpossible. Further, on the several occasions the taping was attenpted in a noraal classroos situation, it seened to produce in the students a reticence to discuss. For these reasons, than, taping was discontinued. 79 M The design for the research called for written and/or oral responses to discussions with intact groups of students in grades eight through twelve in randonly chosen schools across the United States. The students were to have vist one of three aoral developnnt files at least five days but not rare than two weeks prior to the interviews. Six elicitation approaches with differences in interrogation structure and response nodes were used. Analysis of oral responses were in terns of ease of classifia- bility of responses in Kohlberg's ache-a, games of respcslses to Kohlberg's levels and stages of aoral develop-ant, and the relative ease of discussion aensgenent. cm IV W Responses froa students are gathered by interviews of classes in randmly chosen schOOls throughout the United States. The participant-observer, acting as interviewer, usually spent a few hours each lowing at each school in order to acconplish the tasks associated with the descriptive research being reported in the dissertation and the broader evaluative research reported in hard and Stewart, Chapter V (1973). The students in the classes to be interviewed usually were not forewarned that they would be interviewed. Each interview with a class began hth the teacher intro- ducingtheP-O. TbeP-O wouldthsnintroduoe hisreasonfor being inthe claseandsetthe stage fortheinterview. stouldseekto establish rapport w assuring students that the interview was in no way associated vdth their grades. Nor was be looking for any specific kinds of answers. Rather, he told then he was desirous of obtaining their on: ideas and responses to the file, (the curricular experience). The students responded to the interviewer very positively throughout the research pr'oJect. At no tile was classroos behavior nor "discussim" a problea. Students sealed to want to express their opinions, ideas and thoughts. A emery of the Approaches used throughout the study are as follows: APPROACH I - oral response using a high opening interro- gation structure procedure, written responses followed; APPROACHII—oral response usingalowopeninginterro— gation structure procedtn'e‘, mitten responses followed; APPROACH III — written responses preceding oral response using a hgh opening interrogation structure mam: APPROACH IV - written response preceding oral discussion using a low opening interrogatiar structure WM: APPROACH V - oral discussion using a hgh interrogation procedure, no written responses; APPROACH VI — oral discussion using a low interrogation procedure, no written response. 82 Approaches III and IV were in actual practice not a clear contrast with Approaches I and II. Approaches III and IV were designd to use a mitten exercise tdth subsequent discussion. In actual operation, Approaches III and IV had to be prefaced with several co-ents to the students; to insure that they were all thinking about the sans file. The reason for the was that the shoungofvariousfillssingradesStolZisvsryfrequent. Sale classes saw at least one fill each week. One class had seen six files in the last six due before their interview. Several other classes had viewed two or three drug educstion files after viewing'flighontheCIpus", thuseasilyoonfusing'hgronthe Capos” with an of then. It was therefore iaperative, no matter inch approach, to sales sure that the students were recalling and discussingthessnefill. Usuallythswasdonebyashngthe students what the file as about. If they showed either confusion or lack of recall, they were pronpted about the content. Alsost uithout exception, students then claiaed to recall. In fact, sons students who had not seen the file reneabered their friends' deecriptiars of the files. The process of asking sure that the students recalled the correct file my have "contuinated" Approaches III and IV to an unspecifiable degree. It was Judged, however, that a certain aaount of contamination was better than no response or worse yet, a respmse to an extraneous curricular experience. gig Table IV-l provides a may of the classes and schools involved in the stuchr. In sons cases an estisate is used to indicate the umber of students involved in classroos interviews. The is done because no actual nusber was reported tor the teacher. InsosecasestheP-Ohadtosakeaquickcomtpriortoorsubss- quent to he interviexing the class. A school and class or group are denigrated on the tables in the chapter ty a set of morals and letters whch correspond to the took of the interview, tb orbr that weak in which the school was visited, and the class. Thus l-l scans the first week of inter- views and the first school that week. when necessary, individual classes or groups within a particular school till he dengnated by lower case letters "a,b,o" etc. Thus ll-2b would seen the eleventh week of interviews, the secmd school that week, and the second class interviewed that dc. Atotalof29schoolstnreinvolved. DatafrosSIclass- rooss or intact poupssrereported. Sons ofthe intact groups were stw hall groups, plvsical ethicahmgclassss and health education classes. Other groups were coshnatioas of several classroos sets. All groups were cosposed of students in grades eight through twelve. Twenty-seven schools were public schools. Two were Rosan Catholic parochial schools. A total of appradsstely 1731. students were interviewed. Of these, 238 students gave mly oral respalees 8h rm lv -1 em 9: M £2 w W nix or PUELIC/ calms mm or row. um PABOCHIAL mil W GLASSES W8 1-1 Public ace 8 l 36' l-2 Public soc 9.11, 6e-t 121* 1-3 Public soc 8 l 16* 2-1 Public mo 10 l 31 2-2 Public PS 8, 9 2a, b 31.. 2-3 Public m 11,12 1 35 3-1 Public mo 8 2a,b 1.3 3-2 Public P3 9, 11,12 5e-e-H-+ 93 3-3 Public P3 8+ 2., b.- 139 15-1 Public mo 10 l #3 b—Z Public P8 8 2a, b 33 10-3 Public 100 10 2a, b 53 5-1 Public m 9.lo,ll 3s-c 210» 5-2 Public 100 9-12 23, b 68 5-3 Public P3 11, ll ’ 2a, b 18 6 (Interviews cancelled for the ask) 0 0 7-1 Public m0 11,12 3a-c-H- is 7-2 Public P8 9 l 93 7-3 Public [Dc 8 2a, b 61 8 (Interviews cancelled for this week) 0 0 9-1 Public m lo,ll 2a,b 69 9-2 (Pil- not shom) —-— 0 O - 0 9-3 Public ll! 8 2a, b 51, 10-1 Parochial me 10 2a, b 57 10-2 Public m 8 l" 20 10-3 Public m 9-12 2a.,b 37 11-1 Parochial me lo 2c,b 57 11-2 Public ‘ m a 2a,b 5:. 11-3 Public P3 11 2a, b is 12-1 Public mo 8 l 52 12-2 Public P8 10, ll, 12 l 55' 12-3 Public my 3 l 56 Abbreviations: ”we” is an abbreviation for “High on the Geepus". ”P8" is an abbreviation for ”Flip Side". “HT?” is an abbreviation for “hey There, Vanda!" "HP” is en abbreviation for misfits". Notes: * Bstieste. Duct nuber not available. *5 Iritten responses only. No discussial. lo data reported . for ‘hae +0nlyons clssshasorsldataincluded. ++Onlytwo classeshave oreldetaincluded. +++ any four classes have oral data included. 85 (14.2.3: 2-1,2) and 175 students gave written responses only (3-2b8 3-31); 10-2; 10-3: end b). The written responses will not be reported for reasons alreaw steted in Chapter III. School 10-3 provided a specialproblel to this inter- viewer's own norel Judpsnt and sense of Justice. In school 10-3 the studentstobeinterviewedwereinastthll. A mnberoi’thsswersplannngonusingtheir stuckhellperiod forworkduethat dsy. Theprincipelhednottorewarnedthen thettheywouldnot have astWhallonthedu. It bees-s. obvious thet the interviewer's presence wee going to be e proble- for a great nueber of then. It wee the reseerchsr'e Judpent thet itwouldbegroeslyuni’airtothe studentetousurptheirentin class period for an interview. He decided to quickly aflnister the written response questions without aw discussion. Hence no orel deta were generated for the group (school 10-3). One ens-girls' [health education cless (3-3b) did not have an oral discussion. The girls wrote a greet deal, asked 41 number of cleritying questions, and gensrslly took the entire period responding to the written questions. Amroech III wee being ettesprted, but could not be coupleted because the clue period ended. Consequently, no orel deta were generated by the class end hence no date will be reported. In classes 3-2b, 7-1b, 7-1c approaches 111 end IV Iere being attelptsd, the clesses slso took up too such tine writing their responses. The result was that the class period was over before discussion could begin. Therefore, no oral deta were generated in these classes. One possibly confounding, recurring occurrence was that not ellofthe classeswere abletoviswtheentire fills. Both'hgh ontheCanpus' and'Pliphde' were toolongtofitinto school periods of less then 55 Iinutee. lar-lolly wwhsre froe 5 - lo linutes of a class period is consusd at the beginning with record- taking, snnouncesente, and other such non-acadelic activities. Even a 55-minute period would be too short to show a 52-hnute filo. The effects of not viewing the entire file were not neasured. The length of ”High on the Cupus" end “Flip Side" precluded any follow-up diecussim by host teachers i-sedietely after their classes viewed the file. If a teacher was using the filnasaconetructive curriculerexperience, beorsheueuallyhad to wait until the nexttine the class net to proceed uith discussing the file. W The oral discussions were Judged in accordance with the stated criteria in Chapter III of the dissertation end Mud below. Isnediately after each class or group interview, the P-O would rate the students' discussion in terns of classifiahlity, gerlsenenese and sanagelent. The P-O did the with rates which described each. class or group shit. he interviewed. ’ Those responses fro stuants which, in the .1th of the P-O, were clearly identifiable as a stage in Kohlberg's schena, were labelled easily classifiable. Other responses velich did not fit into Kohlberg's schela or that fell batman stages were classifiedbytheP-Oasless easilyclassifiable. TheP-Ohad' to be continually alert to the responses being aven by students. he had to Judge unether they were aoral reasoning etatenente or not. Imoss norel reasosnng state-ants are then Judged as being easily or less easily classifiable. Theresponseswerealso JudgedtytheP-Ointernsof gen-aneness. Gersaneness as defined as responses that were clearly verbalisations or cognitive sci-cl reasoning and not Just aoral content Judgnents. Those that fitted the category were classified gel-ens. These responses that were not cognitive aoral reasoning responses were classified as less gar-ans. ‘ _ Discussion susgenent as Judged by the P-O using the follow- ingcriteriae (l) Delinanoe woneortwo etudentsledtothe Judg- aent that the discussion as less easily nansged. Discussions uith lackofdoainsncewere Judgedaseasilynsnaged. (2)1nvolveaentof approzdnatelyone-halforaore oftheclaseorgl'oupinthehecuesion led to the Judgslent that the discussim us easily managed. hscussion in which less than one-half were involved were Judged as less easily Ienaged. (3) If students voiced contrary views to each other the discussionwae Judgedto beeasilynsnaged. Where little orno contrary views were expensesd, the discussion was classified as less sadly nanagsd. (a) hen the discus'don was relatively spontaneous and did not require continued or frequent direction fronthe P-O, itwas Judgedto beeasilyeansged. Hhen the oppo- site was true, the discussionwasJudgedtobe less easily-an- sged. (5) Those discussions that ndntained theaeelvse without prouptingorlsadershpfrontheP-O were Judgedeasdlyclassifia- ble. when the oppodte Ill true, u. discussion was Judged as less sadly asnagsd. W Tables IY-2a-dprovide a su-aryofthe data eonpiled according to the analysis table described in Chapter III of the dissertation. The unit of analysis is a classroos or other intact group. Each figirs in the table represents a distinct, intect classroom or group which participated in an oral interview. The concern of the study was to deter-ins an effective approach to elicit oral verbalisation of claedfiable responses to a aoral developsent discusdon. The written responses were used prinerily for the larger part of the stuw associated with the interview and not .. port of} this dissertation. Thorefcre, only those intact groups which produced orel responses are reported in Tables IV-z-d. Thus, 81‘0“?! 3-2b, 3-3b, 7-lb, 7-1:, 10-2, lO-3b, are not included in Table Ill-2. 89 is §M he on he in MM 2 M 33 no u m mM m m M m m 38 no u on.“ «i. on...“ «i. M an on.“ me «i. 8:96 _ 18 concede sui oui smi ow...“ M 08 cal 25 balm on». Ta 3i Ta 3i M 8a and E Si N 65.5 a u a . o a a *3 u M mo in M no u 33 no u o h. M o i. M o p 33 no u . baud baud M as hand” «.3 £13 «.3 find M 2 uafi . 08 adj but: uni. out: oi. M PB and 8: hi. had snap oi. oi. M E and on. uni. .1. or.“ .1. .3 M E .1 as .3 aces . M .3 someone onto film out: 3A M 8: onus on: pain no... col 11 sale 3A M 8: on} 2: 3A H 883% lien need em— ofiiuec one.” oneness M . ..-em -efl cg M g _ allege-Gullah: o QJaaflolo—mflgggmmg nNI>H an. is b. .2. M on do. s. M . 33.. o h on m .3 n 38 no n $3 PE «.3 Ta." 13 73 08 73 nan... pal... m: nnur out; own: up out: , 33..» 8 ... .... 3 .n... 8: 3 e. .... .. .a... .3. a... .1. 2 a... on. .1. 3...H z . . a uni onum calm AA 2 firm as nun . scams .3 .3 m .3 .3 a u m .8 u «a u go» no u m 4 m o m o .33 no u .3... RA. . mu cod loch saln o1. out: o1. >5 out: can one .8 cans sat: a... 3...: me said 8: and accused owl ATS pmun 3.3 2 omum ca: 3.3 . Hm“: - .NA 3.2 hum , 3.3 2 .1 8: 3.3 635% base 83 hide Boohoo ..3 seeds hiss 83 . . a announces: cease-shoe hvgsdfleeae agaggflaaag an>H an. 91 .3 mac $3 “83 3 «02* H m m a «a a ndlm E ndlm ndlm dud “x! HIN HIN H H H o o 2509» o u v .3 v o o «0330 an..." 8.3 a a mnz INIH Cal... 09.— GNIH H> f; “In“ Hid did 08 did 64E . 3 _l|.|.|ll. .83 w “83 3 «02* 4 _ 4 _ 4 u. . calm calm PE 31 392» nfllfl anN mm pain .8 .m.a \ 3:... \ mm 8mm ....3. mid MIA . 08 Mid +72 33.3 ..3 33.3 F8958 ..3 8.3.8 _ 3.83 83 .338. > €8.95 305538 _ 33,333.39 .8397: fillm§_J flaggfiggag 3.33.. 92 = Hula as E 3.... “Ba *3 “a g 238 «u an AN on ..N on we .A<§ a m o m o a E. o 4‘ o 4 o é b o 4 b m N. m >H n +~ m 4 m 4 EH m m m n m n HH o N. o v o p H 3.38 :3 .5»:— .528 :3 83.8 an 33 Eu.“ 1% 8 88.28 hafifludfifio- . Bang 3 Mm a Mm g. 3"le an. 93 Tables IV-Za and Iv-2d show that Approach I produced an almost equal distribution of responses in terns of ease of classi- fiability, gemneness and management. The results were that seven classes pro4 3-3 ll-2b 3-2:: 9-11: a5 3-2a h—zs ll-3a a 5-3b t—3b 5-2. ll-2a Total-7 9-la Total-6 nor mam 3-2b 9-3a lt-l ~ 9-3b uooosmm ro t-zb llu-la h—Ba ll-lb oouwcrvnmss 7-2 12-1 9-lb 12-2 11;? only reflect the lack of precise control of the variable conduciveness. Twelve grouups could not be categorized with regard to conduciveness because of lack of information. The table supports the findings which suggest that easily classifiable, germane and easily managed discussiaus are related to conduciveness of the classroom atmosphere. There is some ambivalence to this finding, however, because seven groups had high conduciveness buut were less easily classifiable, etc. and twelve groups could not be categorised. Thus a cautious conclusion would be that conducivene as did have a significant effect in the responses elicited. Future research will need to measure or control the variable of conduciveness. BIBLIOGRAPHIAND (EMU-WES BIBLIOGRAPHY AND GENERAL REFERENCES Adkins, Dorothy 0., Payne, Frank D. and O'Halley, J. Michael. "Moral Develo nt" in Fred N. Kerlingen and John B. Carroll (eds. Review of Research in Education, 2, 1971., Washington, D. 6., American Educational Research Association. Allport, C. H., Vernon, P. E., and Lindsey, A. Stu§ of Values. Boston: Houghton—Mifflin Co., revised, 1. Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics. Baltimore: Penguin Books, Inc" 953e Bachmyer, T. J. ”The Golden Rule and Developing Moral Judpent,“ Religous Education, Vol. 68, #3, Nay-June 1973, pp. 31.8-365. Beer, Donald M. and Wright, John C. ”Developuontal Psycholoy," in Mark R. Rosenzweig and Iymen N. Porter (eds.) Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 25, 19%, Palo Alto: Califor- nia: Annual Reviews Inc., 1971.. Baier, Kurt. 3’32 Noral Point of View. New York: Random House, 1968. Baier, Kurt and Rescher, Nicholas (eds.) Values and the Future. New York: The Free Press, 1969. Baker, Robert K. and Ball, Sandra J. Nass Nadia and Violence. National Oomaission on tie Causes and Prevention 3 Vio- lence, Nashingtcn, D. 6., 1969. Baldwin, J. N. a1 and Ethical Inte tetions in Mental Develo ment. New Yo 3 he and ., . Bandura, Albert. "Social Learning of Moral Judgsente," Journal of geraggutz and social ggcholog, 1965, VoIZ'TI,‘ , PP- 275.279e Bandura, Albert, and McDonald, F. J. “Influence of Social Reinforce- ment and the Behavior of Models in Shaping Children's Moral Judgesnts." of Abnormal and al P cholo , 701. 67' 1%3. ppm It. 0 Barr, Robert D. Eggs-s and Youth. Nashington, D. 0.: National Council. for the Studies, 1971. 11.8 1A9 Barrett, Donald N. (ed.) Values in America. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1961. Bateson, Gregory. "Information, Codification, and Metacomunica- tion," in Alfred G. Smith (ed.) Communication and Culture. New York: Holt, Rinohartmand Rust—m, 1966. pp. W26e Beck, Clive. "Value Education Notes," Reli%ous Education, Vol. 69, #3, May-June 1971,, pp. 3 9- . Bergman, Marvin. "Moral Decision Making in the Light of Kohlberg and Bonhoeffer: A Comparison,” Religous Education, Vol. 69, #2, March-April 1971., pp. 227-2153. Barman, Louise M. New Priorities in the Curriculum. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publiafii-g Co., 1%. Blatt, M. M. and Kohlberg, L. The Effects of Classroom Moral Discussion Upon Children's Level of Moral Develoant. Cambridge, Mass.: Laboratory of Human Development, Harvard University, 1971. Blatt, M. The Efforts of Classroom Discussion Proms Umn Children's Level of Moral Judgnt. Unpublishe doctoral dissertation, University 0 C cage, 1969. Blatt, M. and Kohlberg, L. "The Effect of Classroom Discussion on the Development of Moral Judy-ant" in Collected Pa rs on Moral Develo nt., Cambridge: Laboratory of Human Deficpment, 1973. Bradley, P. N. Ethical finches. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1951. Bull, Norma J. Mgral Education. Beverly Hills, California: Sage, Publications, 1969a. Bull, Norma J. Moral Jugmnt from Childhood to sdolescence. London: R dge and Kegan , . Burnhane, David T., Jr. "The Attitude-Behavior Discrepancy Problem: Revisited,” %erlz Journal of mach, Dec. 1971, Vol. 57, #1" pp. “8". e 150 Carpenter, Finley. ”Heated: More Descriptive Research in Education,” in William J. Cephart and Robert B. Ingle (eds.) Educational Research Selected Readings. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merril Publishing Co., 1969. Catton, William B., Jr. “Changing Cognitive Structure as a Basis for the 'Sleeper Effect,” Social Forces, Vol. 38 Cernik, Helen C. "Leaming Purposes of High School Youth in Relation to Five Destirw Areas," Character Potential, Vol. 1,, #3, pp. 1.9-53. Chaffee, Stephen H. and Lindner, Joseph H. “Three Processes of Value Change Hithout Behavior Chmge,” Journal of Communication, Vol. 19, #1, March 1969, pp. $1.10. Chazan, Barry I. and Soltis, Jones I". (eds.) oral Education. New York: Teachers College Press, 1 3. Colby, Anne. Book reviews of Values and Teaching by Louis E. Raths, Merrill Harmin and Sidney E. Simon and Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strateges for Teachers and Students in Harvard Educational Review, Vol. AS, , Feb. 1975, pp. 1% 3e Colby, Benjamin N. ”Behavioral Rechmdancey," in Alfred G. Smith (ed.) Co-unication and Cul ure New York: Holt, Rinehart and atom, . Costanso, Philip R., 33; _e_l. ”A Ito—examination of the Effect of Intent and Consequences on Children's Moral Judpent," Child 2101021115, V°1e M. #1. arch 1973' pp. ISM-13:. Cowan, Philip, Langer, Jonas, Heavenrich, Judith, and Nathanson, Marjorie, “Social Learning and Piaget's Cognitive Theory of Moral Development," 1% of Personalitz and Social chholog, Vol. 11, #3, , pp. - . Craig, Robert. ”An Analysis of the Psychology of Moral Deve10pment of Lawrence Kohlberg" W, Vol. 17, #1, ”be 1W2. pp. 10- e Crittenden, Brian. gore and Content g mral 5%catim. Toronto: Ontariolns tuteforSt sin caon, 1972. 151 Dewey, John. Moral Princiges in Education. New York: Philo- sophical Library edition, 1959, originally published in 1909. Dewey, John. EXErience and Nature. La Selle, Illinois: The Open Court Pu shing 00., 1925. Dewey, John. Theogz of Valuation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1939. Durkheim, Enile. Moral Education. Everett K. Wilson, (ed.) New York: The Pros Press of Glencoe, 1961. Edell, Abraham. Ethical Juggent: The Use of Science in Ethics. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1955. Englehart, Max D. Methods of Educational Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1972. Engle, David E. ”Some Issues in Teaching Values,” Reli ous Education. Jan-Feb. 1970, #1, pp. 9-13. Flavell, John H. The Develo ent P cholo of Jean Pi at. New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1&3. Fodor, Eugene M. ”Resistance to Social Influence Among Adoles- cents as a Function of Level of Moral Developeent," The Jourfi of gcial Psycholog, 1971, Vol. 85, pp. 121- . Galbrarth, R. E. and Jones, Timothy. "Teaching Strategies for Moral mlemes: An Application of Kohlberg' s Theory of Moral _ Development to the Social Studies Classroom." Social mention. V01. 39' Jme 1W5, PP. 16-22. Gall, Meredith D. -"The Use of Questions in Teaching,“ Review of floatimg mung V01. ‘60. 1970. We 707-721» Getsels, J. H. ”The Acquisition of Values in School and Society," 1". 3. Chase and H. A. Anderson (eds.) The High School in the New Era. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 19 . Glassco, Judith A., Milgram, Norman A., and Youniss, James. ”Stability of Training Effects on Intentionality in Moral Judgment in Children," Journal of Personality and Social PawOIOH, 1970' V01. ’ ’ ppe 3 5e Goldman, Ronald. Re%ous mm Prom Childhood to Adolescence. London: R dgeandKeganPa , l . 152 Grainger, A. J. The Bullrigg. London: Pergamon, 1970. Grim, P., Kohlberg, L. and White, 8. "Some Relationships Between Conscience and Attentional Processes,” Journal of Personality and Social Ps cholo , 1968, pp. 239-253. Handy, Rollo. Value Theo and the Behavioral Sciences. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publishers, 1969. Handy, Rollo. The Measurement of Values: Behavioral Science and Philosoggcal Apgoaches. St. Louis: Warren H. Green, Inc., 197 . Hartman, Robert 5. gm Structure of Value. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 1967. Hartnack, gigstus. Philosophical Problem. Cepenhagen: Munksgaard, 1 2. Hartshorne, Hugh and May, A. Mark. Studies in the Nature of Character, Vol. I: Studies in Deceit, l9 3 Vol. II: Studies in Service and Self-Control, 1929: Vol. III: Studies in Or anization of Character. New York: Mam. , figo. Havelock, Ronald G. P12% For Innovation. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Institute for Sod. Researc , Center for Research on Utilisation of Scientific Knowledge, 1969. Havelock, Ronald C. Research Utilization Remrt: Maia of M $53192- Institute for Social Research ditto), Am Arbor, Michigan, 1961:. Havinghurst, Robert J. and Taba, Hilda. Adolescent Character and Personality. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., l9h9. Henshel, Ame-Malia, "The Relationship Between Values and Behavior: A Develolsnental Hypothesis," Child Develoggnt, Vol. 1:2, “9 Res 1971' ppe lm-m e Hightower, Pleasant R. Biblical Information in Relation to Character and Conduct. Iowa y: U ver y o owa Stu es Character, III, #2, 1930. Hill, Brian V. "Education for Rational Morality or Moral Rationality, " Educational Theo , Vol. 22, #3, Summer 1972, pp. 286-292. Hoffman, M. C. “Moral Developent,“ in P. Mussen (ed) Carmichael's - of Child cholo . (3rd edition) Vol. 2, pp. 261- 3.9, N." York! Jam '1 ‘nd 8033' Ince' 1970e ~ 153 Hogan, Robert and Dickstein, Ellen. ”A Measure of Moral Values," Journal of Consulti and Clinical Ps cholo , Vol. 39, E, October 1972, pp. 210-211,. Holy Bible: The New International Version, The New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1973. Hunt, D. E. "A Conceptual Systems Change Model and Its Application to Education," in 0. J. Harvey (ed.) flushes, Structure and Adaptability. New York: Springer, 1 , pp. 277-302. Jacob, P. E. Chm Values in Colleg: An Exploratory Stucb' of the Impact of College Teaching. New York: Harper, 1957. Janis, Irving L. "Effects of Fear Arousal on Attitude Change: Recent Develoments in Theory and Experimntal Research," in Berkowits, Leonard, Advances in Emanuel §_gcial Psycholog, New York: Acade c Press, 1 7, pp. 7-225. Kant. Immuel- W- M Selle. Illinois: The Open Court Publishing Co., 1902. Kant, Imanual. The Fundamental Principles of the Metaflsic of Ethics. New York: Appleton-Century—Cro s, Inc. 193 . Kant, Immanuel. Criti e of Pure Reason. New York: E. P. mtton and Co. Inc., Everyman's Ebrary edition, 1951.. ‘ Kata, Daniel, (ed.) ”Attitude Change," Public Gaga: Quarterly, Sumner, 1960, Vol. 21., #2. Hats, Daniel. The Functional Approach‘to the Stutw of Attitudes", in Bernard Berelson and Morris Janouts, (eds.) Reader In Public DEEon _a_:_:d Communication. New York: Free Press, 1 , pp. 51 . Eats, Martin. Decision and V use: A tionale for hool Guidance. ' New York: Co ge Entrance Examination Board, 1 3. Kecskemeti, Paul. Mea?%, Comunlcation and Value. Chicago: University 0 cage Press, 952. Kelman, Herbert C. "Process of Opinion Change," Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences, reprinted from Public omen 9m, Vol. 25, Spring, 1961. Kellen, Herbert G. EflggnceI Identification _an_d I_J_:ternali zation. Unpublished manuscript, :1. 15h Kluckhohn, Clyde, gt 31.... "Values and Value Orientation in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in Definition and Classification." in Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils (eds.) Toward a General Theory of Action. New York: Harper Torchbooks, Harper and Row, Publ., 1962, (originally published by Harvard University Press, 1951) pp. 3884.33. Kohlberg, L. The Develoment of Moral Thi%g in the Years from Ten to Sixteen. Unpublishe tor ssertation, Univer- sity of Chicago, 1958. Kohlberg, L. "The Development of Children' s Orientations Toward a Moral Order: I. Sequences in the Development of Moral Thought," Vita Humane, 1963a, ' Vol. 6, pp. 11-33. Kohlberg, L. "Moral DevelOpment and Identification," in H. H. Stevenson (ed.) Yearbook of the National Societ for the St of Education: Part I C 1d P cholo . Chicago: Uauveraty of Chicago Press, 1¥3b., pp. 277-332. Kohlberg, L. "Development of Moral Character and Moral Ideology," in M. Herman and L. H. Hoffman (eds.) Review of Research in Child Eulognt, Vol. I, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1 . Kohlberg, L. Moral Education in the School: A Developsental V10"... gm 2:20". VOJ-e 7‘" #1. 1%6. ppe 1.30e Kohlberg, L. "Moral and Religious Education and the Public Schools: A Developssntal View," in T. Sizer (ed.) Reli on and Public Education. Boston: Houfiflcn—Mifflin, 1 7. Kchlberg, L. “The Child as a Moral Philosopher," Psychology m. 19$. V01. 7' PP. 25'30e Kohlberg, L. ”Stage and Sequence: the Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Socialization," in D. A. Goslin (ed.) Handbook of Socialisation Theo and Research. Chicago: Rand MON-5m SE 50., Iggy pp. Ei-me Kohlberg, L. ”Education For Justice: A Modern Statement of the Platonic View," in Moral ' tion Five ctures, by James M. Gustafson, gt. Cam dge: Harvar U versity Press, 1970‘, PP. 57 . Kohlberg, L. "The Moral Atmosphere of the School," in Norman V. Overly (ed.) The Unstudied Curriculum: Its Im ct on Children. Us on, D. 0.: Association for Supervision and Curriculu Developsent, NEA, 1970b, pp. 101,-127 . 155 Kohlberg, L. "From Ought to Is,” in T. Mischel (ed.) Genetic Epistemolog. New York: Acacbedc Pro ss, 1971a. Kohlberg, L. “Stages of Moral Develcpent as a Basis for Moral Education," in Clive Beck, Brian S. Crittendon and Edmund V. Sullivan (eds.) Moral Education: Interdisci Approaches. New York: Neuan es, 971, pp. 23-92. Xohlberg, L. "A Cognitive-Develoynental Approach to Moral Educa- tion,” The Humanist, Nov-Dec. 1972a, Vol. 32, #6, pp. 13- 1 . Kohlberg, L. (with Hhitten, Phillip) "Understanding the Hidden Curriculm," M03235, DOC. 1972be Kohlberg, L. "From is to Ought: How to Consult the Naturalistic Fallacy and Get Away with it in the Stucb' of Moral Develop- ment," Cambridge: Laboratory of Human Development, Harvard University, 1972c. Kohlberg, L. "Continuities in Childhood and Adult Moral Development Revisited," Cambridge: 1973a, paper available from Laboratory of Human Development, Harvard University. Kohlberg, L. ”Moral Develcment and the New Social Studies," Mal Educatigg, Vol. 37, May 1973b, pp. 368-375. Kohlberg, L. "Education, Moral Developent and Faith," Journal of Moral Education, Vol. 1:, #1, 1971., pp. 5-16. Kohlberg, L. "The Cagrdtive-DeveIOpmental Approach to Moral Education," Phi Delta Km Vol. 56, #10, June 1975, pp. 670-677. Kohlberg, L. and Mayer, Rochelle. ”Developnent as the Aim of Education, " Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 1.2, #h, NOV- 19729 Pp. “H e Kohlberg, L. and Turiel, Elliott. Mo a1 Develo t and Moral Education. in G. has” (odd Psychology and Educa- tion—oi Practice. Chicago: Scott, Foresman, 1971, pp. e Konopka, Gisela, "Formation of Values in the Developing Person," rican ournal of Orth chia , Vol. 1.3, Jan. 1973, PP. e Krahn, John H. ”A Comparison of Kohlberg's and Piaget's Type I Morality” Religous Education, Vol. 66, Sept. - Oct. 19719 pp. 373'375e 156 Krathwohl, David R., Bloom, BenJamin S., and Masia, Bertram B. Taxonomy of Echlcational Objectizgs, The Classification of Educational Goals Handbook I Affective Domain. New York: Dav-id McKay Co., 19613.. Lack, Clarence A. ”Love as a Basis for Organizing the Curriculum," Educational Leadershi , Vol. 26, #7, April 1969, pp. 693- 701+. Ladas, H. and Osti, L. ”Asking Questions: A Strategy for Teachers," High School Journal, Vol. 56, Jan. 1973, pp. 171,-189. Langford, Glenn and O'Connor, D. J. (eds.) New Essays in the Philoso of Education. Boston: Routledge and Kegan PE 5%. Le Furgy, William G. and Holoshin, Gerald H. “Ismediate and Long- Term Effects of mperimentally Induced Social Influences in the Modification of Adolescents' Moral Judgments,” Journal of Personality: and Social chholcg, 1969, V01. 12' ”e lab- as Lewis, C. S. More Christianity. London: Geoffrey Rice, 1952. Lief, JW and Young, Pamela. A Marleen of Intellectual and Ethical Evelgmnt in Female Students From a "Traditional" vs an " rimental" Hi 01. Unpublished A.B. Thesis, Homeley % 133$; 8°: 3° 9 Mass., 1975. Linton, R., at g. ture and Po t Three ctures to Educators. H on, D. 0.: American CouneiE on Educa- m. McLaugxlin, J. A. and Stephens, A. "Interrelationships Among Reasoning, Moral Judgments and Moral Conduct," American ournal of ficien Vol. 79, Sept. l97""'"""’z., pp. e Maddock, James N. “Morality and Individual Developmnt: A Basis for Value Education, a rag Coordinator, Vol. 21, #3. July 19729 PP. 291-302. Marsh, Robert M. Com ative olo Codification of Cross- etsl s. New Yor Hare , Brace or d, Inc. 7. Mead, G. H. m glf and Society from the Slam of a Social Behavicrist. Chicago: Univer ty of cage Press, . 157 Metcalf, Lawrence E. (ed.) Values Educatio Rationale Strate ice and Procedures. National Counc for the So a1 Stu fee, Alst Yearbook, 1971. Miller, Gerald R. ”A Crucial Problem in Attitude Research," Qua__r_tery Journal of Space. Vol. 53, #51, Oct. 1967, pp. 135-1A0. _ Moore, George Edward. Ethics. London: Oxford University Press, 1901. Moore, George Edward. Princiga Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 911. Mueller, Doris E. "Teacher Questioning Practice in Reading," Readigg Hcrld, Vol. 12, #2, Dec. 1972, pp. l36-1A5. Newcomb, T. N. Perggfltz and Social Gm. New York: Dryden Pflu’ 3e Pme, Stanley L. The Art of A% Qgestions. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Univer ty Press, 1951. Peck, R. F. and Havinghurst, R. J. The P chol of Character gulcm . New York: John He§ey and Sons, 1965. Piaget, Jean. The Moral ,Eugg t of the Child. New York: The Free Press, . Orianal mglish translation published in 191.8.) Piaget, Jean. The Child's Conceflon of the Norld. Totowa, New Jersey: Little eld, Admas and Co., 1972. (First published in the English language kw Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1929.) Piaget, Jean. ience of Education and the Pa cholo of the Child. New Yor'fi Th; Viking Press, Inc., 1%. (First translated into English in 1970.) Piaget, Jean and Inhelder, B. The P cholo of the Child. New York: Basic Books, 1E9. Plato. The Remblic. New York: Oxford University Press, 19!:5. Porter, Nancy and Tquor, Nancy. How to Assess the Moral Reasonig of Students. Ontario: 0 o In tute or Studies in fication, 1972. Prentice, Nansen M. ”The Influence of Life and Symbolic Modeling on Promoting Moral Judgnent of Adolescent Delinquents,” Journal of Abnormal chholog, Vol. 80, #2, Oct. 1972, pp. 157-1 . 158 Rader, Melvin. The Enduri cations Problems of Philo- ”my. New Y : Henry H t and 0., . Raths, Louis E., Harmin, Merrill, and Simon, Sidney B. Values and Teaglliflg: Horlcigg with Values in the Classroom. 00W. 0 08 Ch” 1°. Be “emu Publimhing 00., 1966. ’ Rest, J. Develomtal Hierarcgz in Preference and Gammon ,_ of Moral Ju nt. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of oficago, 1968. Rest, J. "Hierarcldal Nature of Moral Judgment: A Study of Patterns of Comprehension and Preference of Moral St a,“ Journal of Personality, Vol. 1.1, March 1973, pp. 8 109. Rest, J. "Developmental Psychology as a Guide to Values Education," .1 Review of Educational guarch, Vol. Mt, Spring 1971:, PD. “'2 e . . Rest, J. Turiel, Elliott, and Kohlberg, Lawrence. "Relations Between . Level of Moral Judgment and Preference and Comprehension of the Moral Judanent of Others." Journal of Personality, Vol. 37. #2. I’m 1%9' pp. 225-2 2e 31mm. P e Ge tmacuon to P1 to N." York: Bade BOOKS, Inc. PubA'Enshers, 1W5. Rogers, Carl R. Freedom to _L_earn. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. ”Quill P“ m 00., 1%9. ppe 239-257e Rokeach, Milton. The gnu and Closed m. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Pu share, 1 . Rokeach, Milton. BeliefsI Attitudes, and Values: A Theory of W. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1 . Rokeach, Milton. W. New York: Free Press, 1 . Rokeach, Milton and Rattan, Gilbert. ”The Principle of Belief Congruences and the Congruity Principle as Models of mmuv. Imnctime. Puma]. ”'1'", 1965' Vol. 11, #2, pp. 13-1A2. Roost, H. Charles. Instrument for see -- -; I .. ct of Curricular , :5 km on i u... “up“ . a d e '6‘“. ’ 'urt‘ on. Min : . State -versity: East Lansing, Michigan, 1975. 159 Rowen, Samuel F. "A Theological Approach to Kohlberg'a Theory of Moral Judgment," 1975, unpublished paper. Rucker, N. Ray, Arnspiger, V. Clyde, and Brodbeck, Arthur J. Human Values in Education. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall-Hunt Pumas; 00., 1&9. Sanford, Nevdtt. ”Social Science or Social Reform.“ Journal of Social Science, April 1965, Vol. 21, pp. She-70. Sarnoff, Irving, Hats, Daniel, and McClintock, Charles. "Attitude- Change Procedures and Motivating Patterns," in Kata, Daniel et al (eds.) Public OEnicn and Propaganda. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Ninstcn, 1951:, pp. 305-312. Sax, Gilbert. En%ca1 Foundations of Educatimal Research. Englewood fs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968. Schmidt, Stephen A. "Law-Gospel: Toward a Model of Moral Education," Religcus Education, Nov-Dec. 1970, Vol. 65, pp. AVA-1.82. Scheibe, Karl E. Beliefs and Values. New York: Holt, Rinehart Sears, David O. and Abeles, Ronald P. "Attitude and Opiudons," meal Mew of :mholog, Vol. 30, 1969, pp. 253-288. Selig, Sidney and Teller, Gerald. ”The Moral Development of Children in Three Different School Settings," Religous Education, V01. 70' 1“, July-Ange 1WS' we MSe Selman, Robert. "The Relation of Role-Taking to the Development or Moral Judpent in Children," Child Want, 1971, Vol. up #2. PP. 79'92e Selman, Robert. The Relatia: of as of ia1 Role-T to Moral Devel nt: A Theoretical and c s. Cam dge, Mass.: Laboratory 0 HumanDeve opment, Harvard University, 1973. Selman, Robert. Book review of Th1% Goes to §ghool: Piagetis Theory in Practice In Hans an Harry ache, in Harvard Educational Review, Vol. A5, #1. pp. 127-13., February 97 . Severy, Lawrence J. ”Procedures and Issues in the Measurement of Attitudes," Princeton, New Jersey: mac Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurements and EValuation, Dec. 1971:, TM Report 30. 160 Sherif, Carolyn V., Sherif, Musafer, and Negergall, Roger E. Attitude and Attitude Chfii The gicial lama-In— Volvement A . Phi phia: am B. Saunders, 1935. Sholl, Douglas. "The Contributions of Lawrence Kohlberg t0 Reli- gious and Moral Education," Religous Education. Vol. 66, Sept.-0ct. 1971, pp. 361,-372. Simon, Sidney, Howe, Leland H. and Kirschenbaum, Hot-rd. Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Stratefies for Teachers and Mute. New Yor Hart ng 00., Inc., 1972. Smith, John E. Value Convictions and Highgr Education. New Haven: Hazan Foundation, . Srvder, Cornelia. "Projective Mirror Technique," Character POtOnua-le VOIe by fit, me m5e Speemr, Graeme H. "Church Program and Moral Education," Religous Educatig, N0v.-Dec. 1970, V01. 65, pp. 1:854:92. Stern, George G. ”Measuring Noncognitive Variables in Research on Teachin " in Ned L. Gap, Handbook of Research on Teach- ing (ed. Chicago: Rand McNEfi 00., 1563. pp. 3m . Stewart, John S. award a Theo for alues vslo . Unpub- lished sserta on. Mi an State University, 1971.. Stewart, John S. "Clarifying Values Clarification: A Critique,” Phi 1 K V01. 56, #10, June 1975. Sugarman, Barry. "Moral Education and the Social Structure of the School.“ gournal of Curriculum Studies. Vol. 1, #1, Nov. 1%8. w. 1.7 . Sugarman, Barry. The $001 and M__0_ra1 ”0%. New York: Barnes and N0 , . Sullivan, Echeund V. Moral Learnigg. New York: Paramus Press, 1975. Sullivan, Edmund V., McCullough George, and Stager, Mary. "A Developmental Study of the Relationship Between Conceptual, Ego, and Moral Development," Child Develo t, .Vol. 1.1, fl, Jm 1W0. pp. BMe Symposium: Some Aspects of Moral Education," 3011 one Educatio V01. 65’ “. "We.m30 1970' me ‘67-‘92. 161 Taba, Hilda, and Elkins, D. With Focus on Human Relations. Nashington, D. 0.: American m on Educafion, 1950. Taba, Hilda. Curriculum Develo nt: Theo and Practice. New York: Harcourt, Draco and Marla Inc., 1932. Taylor, Marvin J. Reliéous and Moral Education. New York: Center for Applied Research in Echlcation, 1965. Turiel, E. ”An Experimental Test of the Sequentiality 0f Develop- mental Stages in the Child's Moral Judgment," Journal of Personali¥ and Social chholog, Vol. 3, l , pp. 1 . Turiel, E. ”Developmental Processes in the Child's Moral Thinldng," J. Heavenrich, P. Mussen, and J. Langer, (eds.) New Directions in Develo ntal P cholo . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Minston, 1W. Turiel, E. "Stage Transition in Moral Development" in R. M. H. Travers (ed.) cond Handbook of arch in Teachi . cu”! m “GRID-y. e Turiel, Elliot and Rothman, Golda R. ”The Influence of Reasoning 0n Behavioral Choices at Different Stages of Moral Developent.“ Child Noam, V010 [‘3’ #3, apte 1712. We 7W756e Tyler, Ralph N. Elf Princigis 0f QEIAculum and énstrugtim. Chicago: D ver ty 0 cage es, . galues and the Curriculum. International Curriculum Conference, Na Association, Hashington, D. C. 1969. Von Mering, Otto. A Groomer of Human Values. Pitt sburgl: Univer- sity of Pittsburgh Press, . Hard, Ted and Harmon, Robert. "Outlook of Youth.” Human learning Research Institute, Michigan State University, 1969. Hard, Ted H. and Stewart, John S. Evaluative Stun 0f the Nih- SWM;I-I".'I.- I ....n.. East Lansing, - chigan: ’1 3. Heinstein, Gerald and Fantini, Mario D. (eds.) Towards Humanistic Educatiog A %§_lgum 0f Affect. New York: Praeger Publishers, . Hilson, John. "Appoach toMcral Education," Reliéous Education, . V01. 65. “We-mas 1970' PP- “674.730 ’ 162 Wilson, John. Practical Methods of Moral Education. New York: Crane, Bus and Co. 2. Wilson, John, in winiams, Norman and Sugarman, Barry (ed.) Introduction to Moral Education. Lmdon: Penguin Books, 1 7. Zinbardo, Philip and Ebbesen, Ebbe B. Influencgg Attitudes and Chanégg Behavior. Reading, Nessa Addison-Ne y Publishing Co., 1969.