1. MORAL DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION: A GUIDE TO WORKING WITH CHINESE INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS Huacong Liu, Matthew Day, and Janelle Papay The Pennsylvania State University

2. Moral Development Importance  Cheating, cooperative behavior, voting preferences, social activism, adhering to contracts, and helping those in need  Moral reasoning is related to differences in cultural background  Chinese students represent 25.4% of the total international student population in the U.S.  Chinese culture is characterized by Confucian Collectivism  American culture emphasizes individualism

3. Definition of Moral Development “Moral competence refers to the a ff ective orientation to perform altruistic behaviors towards others and the ability to judge moral issues logically, consistently, and at an advanced level of development” - Ma, 2011

4. Theoretical Framework Kohlberg’s Six-Stage Model of Principled Moral Reasoning Development Level 1: Pre-Conventional Morality Stage 1: Punishment- Obedience Orientation Stage 2: Instrumental Relativist Orientation Level 2: Conventional Morality Stage 3: Good Boy-Nice Girl Orientation Stage 4: Law and Order Orientation Level 3: Post-Conventional Morality Stage 5: Social Contract Orientation Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principle Orientation

5. Conceptual Framework

6. Inputs  Confucian Morality  Concept of Self  Rule of Law  Academic culture  Language Skills  Cognitive Motivation

7. Environment Didactic courses Direct instruction in philosophical methods Ethics enriched Diversity issues Curriculum lecturers, student organizations, programs, reflective service learning Co-curricular activities Faculty/ staff/ upperclass-student interactions Low-density friendship networks Interactions with those in higher stages Where exposure to new ways of thinking occur Curriculum +Didactic courses +Direct instruction in philosophical methods +Ethics enriched +Diversity issues Co-curricular activities +lecturers, student organizations, programs, reflective service learning Interactions with those in higher stages +Faculty/ staff/ upperclass- student interactions +Low-density friendship networks Where exposure to new ways of thinking occur

8. Outcomes DIT proved universality of Kohlberg’s 6-stage model (Hau and Lew,1989) Measures the degree to which students use principles to guide their decision-making when faced with a moral dilemma, and is determined based on “a series of ratings, rankings, and the resultant weighted algorithm” (Mayhew, Seifert & Pascarella, 2010) Defining Issues Test (DIT) & DIT 2 Develops capacity and ability for moral decision-making by providing an environment that encourages participation (Bar-Yam, M., Kohlberg, L. & Naame, A., 1980) Achievable outcome Relationship between Chinese students and U.S. American students is characterized by an imbalance of power (Chang, 1996) Differentiated Experience

9. Model Inputs Confucian culture Language ability Cognitive motivation Academic culture Environment Academic courses Co-curricular activities Residence halls Faculty & staff engagement Outputs Moral development (DIT 2 Test)

10. Globalization Social Justice Engagement Discussion

11. Globalization Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan Variations in pre-college traits among students from mainland China

12. Chinese students may not be given opportunities to have a “voice” in society’s moral decision-making Stereotypes Social Justice

13. Engagement  First-Year International Students were found to be more engaged than their U.S. American counterparts  With faculty & staff  Academic challenge  Technology use  Active and collaborative learning  Senior International Students  Academic work  Technology use  Diversity-related activities

14. Implications  Institutions Awareness of what affects Moral Reasoning Development in Chinese International Students  Curriculum  Co-curricular activities  Adaptation of environment  Quality Faculty & Staff  Application to other cultures that are characterized by collectivism

15. Questions?

16. References  Bar-Yam, M., Kohlberg, L. & Naame, A. (1980). Moral reasoning of students in different cultural, social, and educational settings. American Journal of Education, 88(3) 345-362.doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/443530  Bonawitz, M. (2002). Analysis and comparison of the moral development of students required to graduate with an ethics course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida Atlantic University.  Chang, K.A. (1996). Culture, power and the social construction of morality: Moral voices of Chinese students. Journal of Moral Education, 25(2). 141-157. doi:10.1080/0305724960250201  Cooper, M., & Schwartz, R. (2007). Moral judgment and student discipline: What are institutions teaching? What are students learning? Journal of College Student Development, 48(5) 595-607 doi: 10.1353/csd.2007.0049  Hau, K.T. & Lew, W.J.F. (1989). Moral development of Chinese students in Hong Kong. International Journal of Psychology. 24(1-5). 561-569. doi:10.1080/00207594.1989.10600066  Hurtado, S., Mayhew, M. J., & Engberg, M. E. (2003, November). Diversity in the classroom and students' moral reasoning. In annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Portland, OR.  Leask, B. (2006). Plagiarism, cultural diversity and metaphor—implications for academic staff development. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(2), 183–199. doi:10.1080/02602930500262486  Mayhew, M.J., Seifert, T.A., & Pascarella, E.T. (2010). A multi-institutional assessment of moral reasoning development among first-year students. The Review of Higher Education (33)3, 357–390. doi: 10.1353/rhe.0.0153