PSYCHOLOGY OF TEACHING AND LEARNING :: KOHLBERG's THEORY OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT.

   "An Educator's Journey Through Moral Development"

Moral values help in improving behaviour, instilling respect and enhancing relationships with others. Moral values help humans to make the right choices and determine the difference between what is right and what is wrong.

Moral values guide a person's moral compass by giving them a sense of right and wrong. Much of an individuals' life is driven by moral values and the ability to make choices based on what they know to be right or wrong. This is one of the main aspects of the importance of values. Morals are often instilled in a person as a child, when he or she is taught what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. This can include learning to be respectful of others or how to act in certain situations.

Moral values offer a guide to lead a noble life rather than one that is self-serving and full of selfish motives and interactions. Parents generally begin teaching their children good moral values early on in life as many children learn how to interact with others by watching their elders. Moral values not only help people to lead good, noble lives, but also offer motivation and a sense of satisfaction in life. Many avenues to success require good moral values or are more easily navigated with good morals. High moral values may help people to feel as though they are leading meaningful lives, make their interactions with others more meaningful and enjoyable, and can lead to success in personal and professional lives.

Many experts believe that the lives of those who practice good morals can demonstrate the importance of moral values. Good relationships, strong marriages, professional success, motivation to do better, being a respectful and well-liked person can all be attributed to practicing moral values. Values can determine how people interact with others, how they react to bad situations, the kinds of jobs they have and how they are seen by those close to them.

The importance of moral values doesn't just lie in the positives of having good morals, but also in the negatives of lacking moral values. When someone lacks moral values his or her life may be filled with selfishness, bad habits and tumultuous relationships. In some cases, lacking morals or acting in opposition to good morals can also leave a person feeling guilty or unproductive. Those without a strong moral compass may end up in bad situations personally and professionally, lacking good manners or worse. Often, the motive for teaching or practicing moral values is to avoid these negative consequences that living without moral values can bring.

Today with this blog of mine, I am going to help you understand the importance of moral development and how does that happen in an individual, by throwing light on the work of eminent personalities in the field of psychology.

Let's first begin with moral development. Moral Development is the process through which children develop proper attitudes and behaviours toward other people in society, based on social and cultural norms, rules, and laws.

Moral development is a concern for every parent. Teaching a child to distinguish right from wrong and to behave accordingly is a goal of parenting. 
Moral development is a complex issue that—since the beginning of human civilization—has been a topic of discussion among some of the world's most distinguished psychologists, theologians, and culture theorists. It was not studied scientifically until the late 1950s. 

Piaget's theory of moral reasoning

The Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget about whom we discussed in one of the past blogs explored how children developed moral reasoning. He rejected the idea that children learn and internalize the rules and morals of society by being given the rules and forced to adhere to them. Through his research on how children formed their judgments about moral behaviour, he recognized that children learn morality best by having to deal with others in groups. He reasoned that there was a process by which children conform to society's norms of what is right and wrong, and that the process was active rather than passive.

Piaget found two main differences in how children thought about moral behaviour. Very young children's thinking is based on how actions affected them or what the results of an action were. For example, young children will say that when trying to reach a forbidden cookie jar, breaking 10 cups is worse than breaking one. They also recognize the sanctity of rules. For example, they understand that they cannot make up new rules to a game; they have to play by what the rule book says or what is commonly known to be the rules. Piaget called this "moral realism with objective responsibility." It explains why young children are concerned with outcomes rather than intentions.

Older children look at motives behind actions rather than consequences of actions. They are also able to examine rules, determining whether they are fair or not, and apply these rules and their modifications to situations requiring negotiation, assuring that everyone affected by the rules is treated fairly. Piaget felt that the best moral learning came from these cooperative decision-making and problem-solving events. He also believed that children developed moral reasoning quickly and at an early age.

History of the Kohlberg’s Theory
The theory of moral development presents an exciting subject that stems from Piaget’s theory of moral reasoning. The theory has made people understand that morality commences from early childhood and has the ability to be affected by various factors. It can be developed either positively or negatively. This is dependent on how an individual executes a task presented to him or her on each stage of moral development. Kohlberg came up with the theory based on the ideas generated while he was researching children and adolescents. He found out that they tend to face different moral issues, and their judgment based on whether they will act negatively or positively is influenced by several factors. Various situations created by Kohlberg were not meant to prove whether his subjects were morally wrong or right. He wanted to find out why the children thought that it was morally right or wrong.

Precisely how do children attain morality? It is a question that has fascinated religious leaders, philosophers and parents for ages. It has also become a thorny issue in both education and psychology. Do societal or parental influences play a significant role towards moral development? Do all children develop in similar ways with regards to morality? These are among the questions that people tend to ask. Lawrence Kohlberg developed the theory to help answer such questions.

Kohlberg’s Theory

The theory asserts that moral reasoning encompasses six developmental stages. Each stage has more ability of responding to moral dilemmas than the identified predecessor. The stages involved are classified into three levels. The levels include conventional morality, pre-conventional morality and post-conventional morality. Kohlberg relied upon several dilemmas in order to see how people would justify their actions if they were presented in similar circumstances. He did not analyze the conclusion, but the moral reasoning displayed.

Level 1: Pre-conventional Morality

This level of reasoning is more prevalent to children; 9 years and below though not entirely. Here, they do not have a personal code of reasoning with regards to morality. Their morals are shaped by the standards set by the adults around them. On other occasions, they are determined by the consequences likely to accrue as a result of behaving in a certain way. Children at this level are yet to internalize and adopt the society’s convention about what is wrong or right. This makes them focus on the external consequences likely to accrue if they behave in a certain way. This level encompasses the first two stages of moral development.

Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Orientation

Here, the reasoning that children have is that they will only be punished if they do the wrong thing. This means that they will always strive to do the right thing at all times. No one likes being punished so acting in the right way is not an option here, but a must. The child will always recall that the last time they did so and so, they got punished. That will mean that the action was not morally right. As a result, the child involved will take utmost care not to repeat that action due to the expected consequences. Children do have to be punished directly to view the action as being morally wrong, but a punishment handed to their colleagues will also trigger them to refrain from the act in future. This case also applies to adults to a certain extent. They tend to follow the law so that they do not find themselves in jail.

Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange

In this stage, people tend to judge morality based on how it helps satisfy their needs. As a result, different people tend to have different viewpoints. This stage tries to showcase a limited interest for other people’s interests. As a result, the concern for others is not rooted in intrinsic respect or loyalty. It is more of “you scratch my back, I scratch yours in return” kind of mentality. This is where children tend to ask “what is in it for me” if I act in a certain way? Children tend to believe that these actions are morally right due to severe need of the people that execute them.

Level 2: Conventional Morality

At this level, people start to internalize moral standards of the adult role models that they value. On most occasions, the authority is internalized but it is not questioned. Reasoning with regards to morality is mostly determined by the norms of the group that people belong to. This level is typical of both adults and adolescents. Morality is judged based on the society’s expectations and views. People just accept what the society has termed as either right or wrong. An individual is expected to obey the rules set forward regardless of whether there is going to be consequences or not. The level entails stage 3 and 4 of the moral development theory.

Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships

At this stage, people are good in order to be perceived as good individuals by others. Children strive to be “good kids” in order to live to the society’s expectations. They tend to understand that being regarded as good plays to the advantage of oneself. “Good kids” tend to get favours now and then. On most occasions they have their way on the things that they want. Children feel that the idea of not being naughty would help them be in favourable terms with people in the society. This usually helps even in times when such children have undertaken undesirable acts that people are not quite sure who did them. It is certain that the kids used to behaving in a certain way will get the benefit of doubt compared to their counterparts. A good example how children try to show morality is by giving food to street peasants. This is because they think that doing so makes them ‘nice’.

Stage 4: Maintaining Social order

Stage four goes beyond the need for people being approved like in stage 3. People tend to understand the need for obeying dictums, social conventions and laws due to the significance that they have towards enhancing a functioning society. Here, children/individuals become aware of the rules governing the society. There are central ideals that dictate what is wrong or right. It is everyone’s duty or obligation to ensure that these ideals have been upheld at all times regardless of the circumstances. People are considered to be morally wrong when they violate the law. In this stage, culpability is the main factor that separates the good and bad deeds. Most people in the society tend to remain at this stage, where morality is usually determined by outside forces. A good example is how policemen refuse bribes handed to them by individuals breaking the law in one way or another. They owe a duty of care and protection to the society so they must ensure that law and order is maintained at all time.

Level 3: Post-conventional Morality

This level is actualized by an inherent realization that people are separate entities from the society. This means that their perspectives have the ability to take precedence over the society’s views. Here, people have the ability to disobey rules that contravene their principles. It is usually a small percentage of people in the society that are able to operate at this level. Kohlberg asserts that around 10-15% enhance this form of abstract thinking. This is to mean that most people develop their morality based on external forces and their ethical principles. Post-conventional moralists tend to live by their own principles. This includes ethical principles such as the right of liberty, life, and justice. The level encompasses stage 5 and 6 of the moral development theory.

Stage 5: Individual Rights and Social Contract

Stage 5 asserts that people should consider values and opinions of others before deciding on the morality of other people’s actions. In the society, people hold different rights, values and opinions. These perspectives ought to be respected as they are unique to each community or individual. People understand that while rules are meant for the good of the public, there are occasions when they might go against the interests of some people. The laws that do not promulgate the welfare of the general public should be altered when necessary.   Some of the issues are not clear-cut. A good example is the act of saving someone’s life can be considered to be more important compared to the act of stealing; which is against the law.

Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles

At this stage, people tend to develop their own moral guidelines. These guidelines may or may not fit within the context of the law. These are guidelines such as human rights and equality. People envisaged in this stage are usually prepared to defend what they believe in regardless of the perceived outcomes. They are not afraid to go against the entire society or to face the consequences of being disapproved or imprisoned while pursuing their principles. Kohlberg postulates that very few people have the ability of actualizing this stage.