As proposed by LAWRENCE KOHLBERG MORAL DEVELOPMENT As proposed by LAWRENCE KOHLBERG Adriane Smith & Ryan Crane

BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION 1927: born inBronxville, New York Andover Academy: private H.S. for bright and wealthy students Israeli cause before attending college 1948: University of Chicago Bachelor’s degree in one year Graduate work in psychology Initially wanted to become clinical psychologist Interest in Piaget changed this Began interviewing children and adolescents on moral issues 1958: doctoral degree Dissertation – first delivered his stage theory of moral development

BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION 1959-1961: associate professor of psychology at Yale University 1962: taught in the Committee on Human Development University of Chicago 1968: professor of education and social psychology at Harvard University Here, met Carol Gilligan – became colleague and eventual critic 1969: visit to Israel encouraged the Cluster School 1971: cross-cultural work in Belize contracted tropical parasite - depression and physical pain for the rest of his life 1987: reportedly committed suicide by drowning

KOHLBERG’S STAGE THEORY PRECONVENTIONAL Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange CONVENTIONAL Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships Stage 4: Maintaining Social Order POSTCONVENTIONAL Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights Stage 6: Universal Principles

PRECONVENTIONAL Individual is responsive to cultural rules and labels of good/bad, right/wrong, but interprets the labels in terms of consequences no identification with the values of the family or community 1. Obedience and Punishment - assumes authorities hand down fixed set of rules which must unquestioningly obey 2. Individualism and Exchange - not just one right view that is handed down by the authorities "If you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours."

CONVENTIONAL Individual has loyalty to family, group, or nation, regardless of consequences Attitude of actively maintaining, supporting, and justifying order while identifying with the persons or group involved 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships – people should live up to expectations of family and community and behave in "good" ways Good behavior = having good motives and feelings (love, empathy, trust, and concern for others) 4. Maintaining Social Order - concerned with society as a whole. emphasis is on obeying laws, respecting authority, and performing one's duties in order to maintain social order

POSTCONVENTINAL Individual makes effort to define moral values apart from authority and apart from the individual's own identification with the group 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights - want to keep society functioning; smoothly functioning society not necessarily a good one Conception of the good society 6. Universal Principles - defines the principles by which we achieve justice

UNIVERSAL SEQUENCE Stage are cross-cultural universals Different cultures DO teach different beliefs, but his stages refer NOT to beliefs but to underlying modes of reasoning. Although different beliefs in different societies, individuals will still reason about it in the same way.

OUR PROBLEM Will a child’s academic status have an effect on their placement in Kohlberg’s moral stages? Will Kohlberg’s stages be held universally across different ethnicities?

HYPOTHESES We believe that a child’s academic status will effect their placement in Kohlberg’s stages. There will be a general increase in moral reasoning with an increase of academic class. We think that there will be a comparable difference in a child’s placement, when looking at ethnicities.

PROCEDURE North Hills Preparatory, Aftercare Program Large student population of Indian descent Interviewed twenty-one 1st – 5th grade students of both American and Indian descent Proposed two of Kohlberg’s moral dilemmas with corresponding questions Evaluated student responses, according to our developed rubric

“HEINZ DILEMMA” In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $400 for the radium and charged $4,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So, having tried every legal means, Heinz gets desperate and considers breaking into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.

HEINZ DILEMMA ?’s 1. Should Heinz steal the drug? Why or why not? 2. Is it actually right or wrong for him to steal the drug? Why is it right, or why is it wrong? 3. It is against the law for Heinz to steal the drug. Does that make it morally wrong? 4. Is it more important to save another person’s life or obey the law?

“DAD DILEMMA” Joe is a fourteen-year-old boy who wanted to go to camp very much. His father promised him he could go if he saved up the money for it himself. So Joe worked hard at his paper route and saved up the forty dollars it cost to go to camp, and a little more besides. But just before camp was going to start, his father changed his mind. Some of his friends decided to go on a special fishing trip, and Joe's father was short of the money it would cost. So he told Joe to give him the money he had saved from the paper route. Joe didn't want to give up going to camp, so he thinks of refusing to give his father the money.

DAD DILEMMA ?’s 1. Should Joe refuse to give his father the money? Why or why not? 2. Does the father have the right to tell Joe to give him the money? 3. Does giving the money have anything to do with being a good son? 4. Is the fact that Joe earned the money himself important in this situation?

“Heinz can steal it because he asked first and it’s not like he stole something big; he wont get punished” “Joe should give his father the money because his dad will punish him if he doesn’t” - Assumes authorities hand down fixed set of rules which must unquestionably obey - Preconventional thought expressed Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment - Not just one right view that is handed down by the authorities - The role of punishment weakens “maybe they had children and he might need someone at home to look after them. But maybe he shouldn’t steal it because they might put him in prison for more years than he could stand” “Joe should not give his dad the money because he wants to go to camp.” Stage 2: Individualism & Exchange - One should live up to expectations of family and community and behave in “good” ways - “Good boy/ Nice girl” orientation - Good behavior = having good motives & feelings Heinz’s motives good/druggist’s bad. “only interested in himself, not another life” Joe should give his dad the money because he wants to maintain a good relationship with him. Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships -Concerned with society as a whole. - Not only does a child say whether a certain action is right or wrong, they explore the reasons why “Joe should give his dad the money because his dad was wrong to break a promise. If everyone goes around breaking promises, the family couldn’t function.” Stage 4: Maintaining Social Order It is the husband’s duty to save his wife. The fact that her life is in danger transcends every other standard you might use to judge his action. Life is more important than property. - Conception of the good society - An individual's moral judgment is motivated by community respect, respecting social order, and respect for legally determined laws Stage 5: Social Contract & Individual Rights “Veil of ignorance” Joe should give is father the money. Promises of any sort, even those made to an enemy, must be kept Stage 6: Social Contract & Individual Rights - Defines the principles by which we achieve justice

SOME EXAMPLES Stage 1: “Because he (Joe) has to give his money to his father or else he could get in very big trouble!” (Q.4) Stage 2: “Because he (Joe) really wanted to go to the camp. Now it was his chance to go to the camp.” (Q.1) Stage 4: “It (stealing) is wrong because it is against the Ten Commandments.” (Q.2)

RESULTS Student Stage Qualification

Can NOT generalize a trend CONCLUSIONS There was no significant trend in the increase of stage according to grade level Not big enough sample Unequal students within each grade Age provided limitations Can NOT generalize a trend across the sample

Student Stage Qualifications according to ethnicity RESULTS Student Stage Qualifications according to ethnicity Stage 1: 2 students Stage 2: 4 students Stage 3: 5 students Stage 3: 4 students

CONCLUSIONS Kohlberg was RIGHT, we were wrong! His stages are universal When comparing the two nationalities across the board….nearly EXACT number of students in each stage!

LIMITATIONS & PROBLEMS Uncontrolled environment Extreme distractions Unfinished surveys Limited age group Unreliable demographics Self-reported grades Unequal number of students within each grade Needed a better scaling system, rather than simple average Larger sample