MORAL REASONING
CHAT | WEBCT | SCHEDULE | HOME
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

Psychosocial theories

Moral Reasoning theories

 

Moral Reasoning..

As summarized in Woolfolk (2001), Lawrence Kohlberg proposed that there are three levels of moral development:

(1) preconventional - judgments based on personal needs
(2) conventional - judgments based on external entities (law, family)
(3) postconventional - judgments based on socially determined norms and personal or abstract ethics

Perhaps the most important precept to Kholberg's theory is the notion that growth into higher levels of moral development is contingent upon the learner's ability to adopt perspectives beyond their own, to understand that the consequences of certain actions or decisions extend to other individuals.

Kholberg's theory has been criticized (p. 80) for not differentiating between social conventions (such as "Don't eat with your hands") and true moral issues (such as "good children don't steal").

Carol Gilligan has criticized Kholberg's theory for being heavily biased toward males. Her Ethic of Caring theory proposes that:

"individuals move from a focus on self interests, to moral reasoning based on commitment to specific individuals and relationships, and then to the highest level of morality based on the principles of responsibility and care for all people." (p.80)

Nel Noddings (1995) extended Gilligans theory to include instructional themes based on caring as a means to promote character education.

Theory into practice..

Cheating is a construct that has been extensively studied in many different educational contexts. Two factors have been consistently identified as contributing to the tendency for students to cheat: (1) external pressures for performance (parents, certification, promotion, rankings...) and (2) minimal chances of getting caught.

Emerging research in online plagiarism suggests that technology greatly exacerbates the second factor above. It is easier now than ever to buy a paper online (check out schoolsucks.com), or even a degree (diplomas.com). With a credit card and a few mouseclicks, a student can receive credit for work not their own.

Objective testing using online technologies is equally prone to academic dishonesty. The research that I have conducted suggests that students utilizing most testing systems, including the most popular course management systems WebCT and Blackboard, can easily steal test items by copying and pasting, emailing, can easily share answers by using email, chat and instant message, and can sometimes hack system code for correct answers.

Do the theories of Kholberg and Gilligan offer any insight to preventing or at least reducing technology assisted plagiarism and cheating? This will be the topic of our online discussion for this week. Please post to the forum (1) what you think Kholberg or Gilligan would give, and (2) what you think personally can be done to reduce cheating and plagiarizing online. Note that your personal reaction can include reduction strategies or resources that have been developed by others (such as Turnitin.com or WordcheckSystems.com, for example).

 

Coastal Carolina University
College of Education
Educational Technology Program
Copyright 2004