More handpicked essays just for you.
Reflection on kohlberg's stages of moral development
Reflection on kohlberg's stages of moral development
Reflection on kohlberg's stages of moral development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Reflection on kohlberg's stages of moral development
In my obersvations of the yong students compared to the older students, I would have to say the young students based their reactions on the obedience orientation stage of Kohlbergrs theory. Which states, you must obey rules becacuse if you don't you will get in trouble. The young ones did not suggest an alternvies to help Steve they instantly said you do this so you won't have bad consquence. However, as the video played the older students said no Steve should not cheat, however they suggested aternative methods or ideas Steve could of done. Which were, to explain his situation to the teacher or ask for extra time regarding the exam. That being said, Carol Gilligan's theory stated that moral development is an "ethnic care". She suggested
This subject is relevant to the audience who are in their early twenties to thirties, Ken makes his main statement to the audience when he declares: Our educational systems need to be more tailored to the student, instead of the student catering to the system. When Ken spoke the audience’s reactions were as that of little kids on Christmas day, they were highly receptive to what he said. He used a personal story to further their interest to his topic, he told a story about a fireman he met at the bookstore. The fireman talked about how when he was in high school his teacher told him that he should be something rather than a fireman the teacher made fun of his student.. Six months after the student became a fireman he ended saving his teachers life. Children have ideals, and we should be careful to tread lightly on
In order to become a well rounded individual you must be aware of the moral problems in society and be able to evaluate them. Respectively, this class has allowed me to do so, through readings and videos, providing my own insight on many moral issues. This class has shown me there are many different interpretations to right and wrong, and hard evidence must be agued to be persuasive. Throughout the course of this class we looked into multiple philosophers such as Kant, Aristotle, and Sandel, a professor at Harvard.
The case study on Kevin Miller is very challenging. Kevin Miller is White 5th grade student, and his parent are very supportive. Kevin has a problem with attention span; consequently, he I has been identified as a candidate for Greentree Elementary School Gifted and Talented Program. I will attempt to describe the issues related to Kevin’s moral judgement and self-concept; furthermore, I will make recommendations on his part.
Bandura’s social cognitive theory, relates to the way Student A acts. Bandura’s theory focuses on observational learning like imitating and modeling, which Student A does through out the days I have observed. When the teacher teaches her how to say a word, student A imitates the lip movement and sounds the teacher makes. “People acquire a wide range of behaviors, thought, and feelings through observing others’ behaviors and that these observations form an important part of children’s development” (Santrock, 2010, p. 31). As I observed Student A, I saw how she always focused on what the teacher was doing, she would do exactly what the teacher was doing, on my fourth observation, when they were doing math, student A was doing exactly
The film A Class Divided was designed to show students why it is important not to judge people by how they look but rather who they are inside. This is a very important lesson to learn people spend too much time looking at people not for who they are but for what ETHNITICY they are. One VARIABLE that I liked about the film is that it should the children how it felt to be on both sides of the spectrum. The HYPOTHESIS of the workshop was that if you out a child and let them experience what it is like to be in the group that is not wanted because of how they look and then make the other group the better people group that the child will have a better understanding of not to judge a person because of how they look but instead who they are as people. I liked the workshop because it made everyone that participated in it even the adults that took it later on realize that you can REHABILITAE ones way of thinking. The exercise showed how a child that never had any RASIZM towards them in the exercise they turned against their friends because of the color of their eyes. The children for those two days got the chance to experience both sides of DISCRMINATION. The children once day felt SEGRIGATED and inferior to the children that were placed in the group with more privilege. Then the next day the children that were placed in the privileged group were in the SEGRIGATED group. The theory is if you can teach a child how to DISCRIMINATE against a person that you can just as easily teach them how not to. Sometimes a person needs to feel what another person feels to understand how they treat people.
McCarthy went against the societal values by performing an operation on a living dog. Most people in society would view this as animal cruelty just because the animal being used is a dog. Why is there a difference in using monkey’s whereas to dogs for experimentation for the advancement of humankind? She performed the operation because she wanted to be indifferent to animals used in experimentation and said “Maybe it’s not a matter of deciding which animals I feel comfortable killing” (McCarthy 731). This displays that society itself is never indifferent to others. It always favors one and looks down upon another. Who should decide on the ethical question of what animal experimentation should allowed and by what means can that person justify his decision. Callahan agrees that cheating has become a social norm that is accepted by everyone. Everyone has taken shortcuts at least once in their lives. That is why he says “Their best hope is to cast cheating as an issue of justice” (Callahan). Students may do what it takes to be successful, but they still do about fairness. Hence he believes that cheating is nothing if not unfair. If educational systems want to eliminate cheating, they should caste this as an issue of justice and make the students realize that some else is taking their equal chance of success by cheating. By this cheating will be
“If you would just get up and teach them instead of handing them a packet. There’s kids in here that don’t learn like that. They need to learn face to face. I’m telling you what you need to do. You can’t expect a kid to change if all you do is just tell ‘em.” Texas student, Jeff Bliss, decided to take a stand against the lack of teaching going on in his class (Broderick).
Kohlberg is a well-known theorist in social development, who built on to Jean Piaget’s theory of moral development. Piaget’s theory was based on two-stages of moral development, however Kohlberg’s theory is based on six stages with in three levels of moral development. Kohlberg wanted to develop his ideas further with the hopes of discovering the ways in which children develop moral reasoning and how it changes as they grow older. People can only pass through these levels in the order given. Each new stage replaces the reasoning of the earlier stage. And not everyone achieves all the
A world that demands perfection is only more likely to create imperfections. In the article “Who’s Cheating Whom?” written by Alfie Kohn, he deconstructs cheating in school from why students cheat to the underlining cause. He sheds light on the fact that cheating could in fact be mainly caused by the environment our culture has created for students. Cheating is most often seen in situations where students find what they’re learning to be boring or something they have no interest in. Many social scientists also believe cheating is a result of both the educational system and society valuing and rewarding the high grades over actual learning and teaching. Due to this competitive environment created in school
The Theory of moral development was founded by the psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg. He argued that starting from infancy extending throughout adulthood, we develop a moral compass that guides us through our life. Each moral judgment can be categorized into three levels, pre-conventional morality, conventional morality, and post-conventional morality, with each level encompassing two stages. As we grow older and gain new experiences, we begin to view the world differently and the moral reasoning for our choices evolves.
The first student was Nathan, who struggled with phonemic awareness. I was interesting in seeing Nathan’s problems rhyming and how that was how his disability was diagnosed. His disabily was only seen in his written language and did not influence his communication skills. I thought that it was interested in hearing that a student’s avoidance of something that’s hard can be commonly mistaken for attentional issues. While I was watching the video I came up with ideas that I thought that the special education teacher should do with Nathan. Some of my ideas were for Nathan to work on
While this theory does explain my own development from the influence of the decisions made during my undergraduate studies, Stage 2 and Stage 5 allowed me to develop a better sense of myself and how my moral evolved. By applying my parents’ decision to my own goals and achievements, I learned from areas where it failed me before. I moved onward from the decisions created and identified my own aspects and beliefs from my parents’ morals. In return, I grew into a bigger aspect of myself and learned. As I reflect back on Kohlberg’s theory of moral development and my own personal cognitive development during my undergraduate years until today, I can say that there might be conflicting aspects that impacted my development and growth. In Stage 1, while it was easy for me to understand my parents’ decision, it failed to describe the conflicting decisions I had to make moving onward to Stage 2. While Stage 3 and Stage 5 were more easily acknowledged, I felt that the theory did not describe my development as a whole. There were certain parts of the theory that were accurate, Kohlberg’s theory allowed some room for error in being generalizable toward the student
Lawrence Kohlberg was born in Bronxville, New York on October 25, 1927. He was born into a wealthy family and enjoyed all of the luxuries that the rich lifestyle had to offer including the finest college prep schools. However, Kohlberg was not too concerned with this lifestyle. Instead he became a sailor with the merchant marines. During World War II, Kohlberg played an instrumental role in smuggling Jews through a British blockade in Palestine. It was during these times that Kohlberg first began thinking about moral reasoning, a subject that would later make him famous. After this Kohlberg enrolled at the University of Chicago where he scored so high on admission test that he only had to take a limited number of courses to earn his bachelor’s degree. This he did in one year. Kohlberg remained at the University Chicago as a graduate student. In 1958, Kohlberg completed his Ph.D. which dealt with moral decision making and was based primarily on the earlier work of Jean Piaget. The result was his doctoral dissertation, the first rendition of his new stage theory. Later he served as an assistant professor at Yale University from 1959 to 1961, began teaching at the University of Chicago in 1963. He remained at Chicago until his 1967 appointment to the faculty of Harvard University, where he served as professor of education and social psychology until his death in 1987.
However, I will not give immediate assistance during tasks. I will also promote positivity, and encourage them to think about things on the positive side. I will also give them examples of how things can be positive and negative at the same time, and then ask them to come up with their own examples (promote self-evaluation). To add, I will also assess their family background and received parenting style if possible, and see if it influences they way children’s temperament (Hockenberry, 2014b). On the other hand, according to Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, grade 5 students are at level 2 (Conventional stage) , and they are experiencing good boy/nice girl orientation and having law and order morality. They make decisions based on what actions will please others, especially authority figures (teachers & popular peers) and they are often concerned about maintaining relationships through sharing, trust, and loyalty. They also take other people 's perspectives and intentions into account when making decisions. In addition, they know rules are necessary for keeping society running smoothly and believe it is their "duty" to obey them. However, they perceive rules to be inflexible (rules do not change as the society change) (McDevitt, & Ormrod, 2010). According to Piaget’s theory of moral development, grade 5 children have autonomous morality, and they becomes aware that rules and laws are created by people; in judging an action, one should consider actor’s intentions as well as consequences. Also, they expect immanent justice (if a rule is broken, punishment will be applied immediately) (Santrock, 2007). In art workshop, a child said“ look, you could do it this way” to one of his classmates and offered help after he finished his own painting. All of them said“ thank you" after I helped them. They also had a clear understanding when the teacher said“ no talking or no chrome
Kohlberg stated, “although knowing what behaviors are right and wrong is important, it is much less important than understanding and appreciating why the behaviors should or should not be exhibited” (James, et al., 2013, p. 58). Kohlberg presented situations to participants in his study to determine moral judgment. He classified levels and stages based upon age and responses he received from the moral dilemmas he presented (James et al., 2013, p. 58). Although children are all raised differently, according to Kohlberg, they all advance through the stages. He also argued that some individuals might not reach the highest stages of