learning from the and moral philosophy are taught at leading ... - communication ethics · 2019. 3....

12 Copyright 2009-1. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 6, No 1 2009 ARTICLE

Learning from theexperts: How ethicsand moral philosophyare taught at leadingEnglish-speakinginstitutionsMedia ethics expert Tom Cooper has justcompleted a detailed survey on the teaching of ethics and moral philosophy in highereducation institutions. Here are some of hismain findings – and they make for fascinatingreading

From April until December 2008, I conductedfield research to determine how ethics andmoral philosophy (EMP) were being taught in sixleading English-speaking universities and in fiveadditional leading departments or programmeselsewhere. Supported by a Page Legacy grant,by sabbatical support from Emerson College,and by guest scholar-in-residence status at theUniversity of Edinburgh and Union University, Ivisited and/or corresponded with scholars ateleven British and US campuses.

Forty participants were selected and inter-viewed to understand not only their pedagog-ical philosophy and methods, but also todetermine how they have evolved orenhanced classroom effectiveness over time.The interview also asked about the extent towhich ethics may be taught, about why theseprofessors teach ethics and moral philosophy(EMP), about creative teaching tools they haveinvented, about what problems they andstudents faced, about how they taught, aboutwhat constitutes outstanding ethics and moralphilosophy (EMP) teaching, about the role oftechnology in the classroom, about the rela-tive effectiveness of differing approaches to

improving teaching, and about what drawsforth the greatest learning, interest, andgrowth from students.

Summary of primary findingsWhile participants almost unanimously agreethat ethics and moral philosophy (EMP) shouldbe taught as a form of critical thinking andinternalised moral reasoning, they are evenlydivided about whether such instruction shouldaspire toward or may effect moral improve-ment or character development.

While the EMP (ethics and moral philosophy)instructor may initially focus primarily uponsubject matter as determined by others, shetypically later develops a twin focus upon: 1) subject matter increasingly informed also by

personal research and 2) students – their comprehension, capacity,

satisfaction, learning speed/threshold, appli-cation, needs, feedback, assessment,improvement, etc.

Participants are equally divided about whetherEMP professors should (appear to) be neutralreferees to avoid ‘bias’ or should reveal theirown positions and views to model conviction,courage, transparency, ‘taking a stand’, andother pro-social values.

Although some participants have used severaltools to enhance their pedagogical effective-ness and a few have used no tools, the major-ity utilised one tool – student feedback,whether formal, informal, solicited or/andunsolicited, as their primary learning gauge,rather than enrolling in teacher developmentcourses, introducing new technologies (someoppose ‘bells and whistles’), or working with amentor.

Participants have primarily learned to teachthrough trial and error, academic accultura-tion, student feedback, and observation. Onlyin a few cases have they also learned by peerobservation, formal training, recording theirclasses, and workshops.

Almost four fifths of all instructors have used alecture format; almost two thirds have alsoemployed seminar or/and tutorial formatsfeaturing discussion, while one third haveemphasised student-driven formats such asdebates, presentations, and student-led discus-sion. Of those who commented about classsize, all thought reduced class size enhancesthe effectiveness of all venues.

Tom Cooper

Articles.qxp 2/12/09 1:07 PM 2

Importance of teaching intellectual processesAlthough 10 per cent of those interviewedemphasised the importance of students know-ing class content, more than 70 per centstressed the greater importance of teachingintellectual processes and critical skills such asanalytic precision, (counter-) argument, iden-tification and assessment of moral issues andquestions, historical methods, questioningpresuppositions, or internalising moralreasoning.

In the aggregate, interviewed faculty felt thatthe greatest keys to outstanding teaching andstudent inspiration/growth pertain to:1) instructor’s support, love, or respect for

students (40 per cent);2) teacher’s engagement with, passion for, or

enthusiasm about the subject, issues, philo-sophical thinking, or ideas (35 per cent);

3) classroom communication skills such aslistening, eye contact, clarity, preparation, orpacing (35 per cent);

4) character traits such as honesty, generosityof spirit, humility, authenticity, compassion,and fairness (30 per cent);

or 5) ability to evoke sustained and genuinestudent interest and participation (28 percent).

Although 28 per cent have used universityteaching websites, 25 per cent have employedPowerPoint type technologies, and yet another23 per cent have sometimes used a form ofvisual (DVD/film, computer, or video clips)media, the majority emphasised the centralimportance of an undiluted, unmediatedstudent/teacher relationship, and the openingand refinement (not the filling and entertain-ing) of the human mind.

Indeed, more than half of those interviewedhave implemented a combined inventory of 34creative individual teaching inventions andresources for classroom use rather than import-ing the technologies and programming ofothers. Several suspected that bowing to trends(e.g. PowerPoint, constant DVD immersion, etc.)contributed to student laziness and cloned think-ing and thus they prefer to model individualinnovative thinking or/and unique pedagogicalsystems. While over half emphasised academicskills such as logic-driven writing, systematicreflection, penetrating questioning and answer-ing, hermeneutics, deconstruction, and criticalreading as important classroom activity, onethird also emphasised that such skills should beapplied to moral decision-making in life itself.

Summarily, despite exceptions, a few technol-ogy advocates, and multiple perspectivesparticipants saw teacher development, tech-nologies, techniques, and trends as secondaryto the primacy of intellectual rigour, moralreasoning, the legacy of apex thinking, and thedirect student-teacher relationship.

The participants and their selectionFifty-eight potential participants were initiallyidentified from among those teaching ethicsand moral philosophy (EMP) within philosophydepartments and professional colleges at sixleading English-speaking universities. Thirty-three of these at Cambridge (6), Harvard (5),Oxford (7), Princeton (4), the University ofEdinburgh (6), and Yale (5) responded that theywere available to participate. In addition, sevenethicists proved available from New YorkUniversity (2), the University of Chicago (1), theUniversity of Illinois (1), the University ofMichigan (2) and Vanderbilt University (1).

Teaching ethics When asked what they had to say to those whofelt that ethics cannot be taught, 73 per centfelt that ethics and moral philosophy (EMP),when defined as moral reasoning, could defi-nitely be taught. However, 40 per cent did notbelieve that ethics, if defined as moral improve-ment or character development, could betaught, while 40 per cent felt that classroommoral philosophy could or does make at leastsome students better persons. In other wordsmost thought that ethics instruction can effectchanges in moral thinking, but participantswere divided about whether it is also the roleand nature of ethics instruction to motivatechanges in moral action. Some of the viewsexpressed were ‘you may not change theirbehaviour but you do give them correctivelenses’; ‘you can’t make someone a goodperson but increasing their moral insight ishelpful’; ‘classroom ethics may not make youmore virtuous, but it can make you more reflec-tive.’ Those voicing support for normative andcorrective ethics included appeals to Kant(‘since ethics is not inbred, it must be taught’);or to modeling (‘showing is better than tellingso ethics is taught by who you are in students’presence’); or to social necessity (‘given thestate of the world, moral improvement must betaught’).

Towards what end?When asked why they teach, over one third (35per cent) mentioned the enjoyment, ‘stimula-tion’, ‘fun’, and ‘theatre’ which make teaching

Copyright 2009-1. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 6, No 1 2009 13ARTICLE

Articles.qxp 2/12/09 1:07 PM Page 13


engaging. Others (25 per cent) noted thatteaching ethics and moral philosophy hasunique societal rewards since high qualitymoral decision-making is a ‘service to society’and ‘moral life fundamentally matters tohuman life’. Ten (25 per cent) who noted prac-ticality said they felt it was important to teachabout ‘issues of value’, or ‘of daily significance’.Other top reasons for teaching included: 1) ‘love for’ or ‘assistance to’ students (25 per

cent); 2) ‘it pays the bills’ (23 per cent);3) teaching ‘accompanies’ or ‘supports’ research

(18 per cent); ‘one learns’ from teaching andstudents (18 per cent); university life is ‘impor-tant’ or ‘fulfilling’ (18 per cent); it is a socialnetwork (10 per cent), and ‘teaching ethics isvaluable for its own sake’ (10 per cent).

Many teachers also teach (ethics) for the gratifi-cation of completing an effective or rewardingjob. When asked, ‘How do you know whenyou’ve done a good job teaching?’ over one third(35 per cent) talked about formal student posi-tive feedback, three tenths (30 per cent) notedinformal student feedback (such as spontaneousexcitement, pleasure, emails and office visits),while 25 per cent commented about more meas-urable changes such as improved examinationscores, grades, and other means of assessment.Closely connected with this outcome was thesatisfaction reported by ten (25 per cent) regard-ing student ‘evolution’ – better writing skills,deeper questions, substantiated answers, engag-ing discussion, independent thinking, greaterabstraction, persuasive argumentation, morepenetrating textual exegesis, and mastery ofmore difficult material.

Almost all answers revolved around some levelof increased dynamism: both the professor andthe student become ‘energised’ or ‘animated’in new ways. For several (35 per cent) thisdynamism has implications not only for theindividual mind but also for the off-campuscollective moral compass.

How to teach ethics?On the surface these EMP professors seemed touse standard teaching tools. For example,although 13 per cent opposed the use of finalexams, over half (53 per cent) gave finals, andalmost all (93 per cent) assigned and gradedlong (40 per cent) or short (30 per cent) papersor both (23 per cent). Other common forms ofgrading included mid-term exams (33 per cent),discussion/participation (20 per cent), groupprojects (13 per cent), and class presentations(13 per cent). Many used tools less typical of

other disciplines such as 1) case studies (40 percent) – half of which were historically based (20per cent), and half of which were imaginaryconundrums (20 per cent); 2) innovative, indi-vidually created tools (30 per cent) and 3)debates (20 per cent).

There was also an infusion of two types of newmaterial into EMF classrooms: 1) all participants frequently (50 per cent),

sometimes (25 per cent), or rarely (25 percent) used publications they have (co-)authored themselves and

2) most (86 per cent) use other new ideas andliterature in the field, whether frequently(35 per cent), occasionally ‘when relevant’(18 per cent), primarily in graduate courses(13 per cent), occasionally ‘in subtle ways’(10 per cent) or rarely (10 per cent).

This new material was usually (80 per cent)balanced with an emphasis upon traditional‘canon’ texts by seminal moral philosopherssuch as Aristotle, Kant and Mill, and sometimesincluded more modern thinkers (e.g. Rawls,Parfit, and Korsgaard) or/and multi-cultural(e.g. Confucius, Chief Seattle) and feminist (e.g.Gilligan, Noddings) voices. Since over one third(37 per cent) opposed the use of textbooks,anthologies and commentaries as primarytexts, they have found creative ways to insurethe reading of original (cf. traditional) philoso-pher texts. Such texts are emphasised by: 1) requiring reading them for major exams

(60 per cent); 2) finding penetrable yet potent excerpts

(15 per cent); 3) explaining canonical texts in relation to

issues or cases (15 per cent); 4) matching excerpts to specific (graduate,

upper level, entry level) classes according todifficulty (13 per cent); and

5) providing substantial historical, sociological orintellectual context for each text (10 per cent).

Attitudes toward incorporating newer tech-nologies in the classroom were mixed. Notquite half (45 per cent) have used universityteaching websites such as WebCT, Blackboard,and Whiteboard and many found them help-ful. Fewer (25 per cent) also employed aPowerPoint-type technology, although onethird of these later terminated such use due to‘technical difficulties’, ‘increased student lazi-ness and passivity’, ‘formulaic classroompredictability and monotony’, ‘redundancy ofword and image’, ‘overly structured presenta-tion’, and ‘reduction of complex philosophicalarguments into shopping lists’. Indeed, one


Copyright 2009-1. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 6, No 1 2009 15ARTICLE

third (33 per cent) spoke out against usingPowerPoint-type technologies despite thecurrent trend.

Although a few have experimented with blogs,podcasts, and other new formats (10 per cent),and almost one quarter (23 per cent) havesuccessfully incorporated visual (DVD, video,films, computer clips, etc), EMP faculties seemmore likely to safeguard mental disciplineagainst electronic shortcuts, entertainment, and‘bells and whistles’. Indeed, 25 per cent havenever used any medium other than print (i.e.publications and hand-outs). On the other hand,another quarter (25 per cent) have successfullyimported website materials into the classroomor onto reading lists. Some of these also recom-mended such teaching tools as the onlineStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and onlineacademic journals.

Participants employed a variety of strategieswhen preparing to teach EMP, the mostfrequent of which were: 1) rereading class reading assignments (35 per

cent): 2) reviewing notes (33 per cent); 3) thinking about and searching for new exam-

ples, questions, and topics (23 per cent); 4) writing a fresh outline or ‘map of topics’

(23 per cent); 5) reading widely from related texts and jour-

nals (23 per cent), writing the entire lectureafresh (15 per cent), editing and adaptingprevious notes (13 per cent), preparingstudent hand-outs (13 per cent), ‘workinghard in several preparatory modes’ simultane-ously (13 per cent), and ‘rehearsing bits’ ofthinking, examples, or arguments (10 percent). Other forms of preparation wereunique to individuals such as ‘prepare threetruly engaging questions’, ‘review the lastclass carefully and where that will lead’,‘prepare complete notes and outline and thendiscard both just prior to the lecture to thinkon my feet’, ‘send out questions via e-mail tostudents the night before class’, ‘formulatemy own position on each question’, ‘strive forliving thinking in class’, and ‘create an alter-native outline for other possibilities’.

Why teach ethics?Those who felt that ethics instruction mayenhance character development or moralimprovement stated that their courses arecontributing not only to the usual goals ofeducation and philosophy, but also to makingthe world more civil, to reversing or opposing adownward spiral of human (and in some cases

animal and environmental) abuse, and tocorrecting unfairness, injustice, inequality, andother ‘unethical’ practices. However, those whosee ethics as primarily cerebral / reflectivevoiced other intentions for teaching ethics.When asked about what students should beable to do after taking their EMP classes whichthey could not do before, participantsresponded: look at social issues and moralproblems differently or more seriously (25 percent); think more rigorously, make sharperdistinctions, morally reason, or engage beyondopinion (25 per cent); develop more philosoph-ical, theoretical, abstract, or transcendentperspective (20 per cent); analyse and poseincreasingly important questions (15 per cent),advance, deconstruct, counter, and articulatelogical arguments (15 per cent), learn impor-tant historical figures, contexts, and influence(15 per cent), write more philosophically andaccurately (10 per cent), read difficult thinkingwith greater understanding (10 per cent),change one’s mind in light of compelling argu-ments (10 per cent) and, in general, experienceintellectual growth (10 per cent).

One of the most important goals expressed bymost (80 per cent) of those interviewed was toteach students to question suppositions, opin-ions, and hidden contexts. Such questioningextended to just about everything from‘anything unproven or presupposed’ (30 percent), ‘pat answers and ordinary beliefs’ (20 per cent), ‘predictability and the statusquo’ (15 per cent) to more specific mindsetssuch as dogmatism (20 per cent), relativism (10 per cent), political correctness or any ‘ism’du jour (10 per cent), and ‘any form of author-ity including the professor’ (10 per cent).

However, such thorough skepticism did notmean that participants wished to deflate allstudent beliefs and goals. When asked whatthey wished to teach their students to believe,half stated one or more of these objectives:‘believe what is true, real, or factual’ (15 percent), ‘believe on the basis of good evidenceand rational thought’ (15 per cent), believethat ethics is ‘important’, has ‘moral authority’,and is ‘essential’ to the examined life (15 percent), believe that ‘life is serious and mustinclude awareness of the impact we have uponothers’ (10 per cent), and believe that ‘truth isnon-negotiable’ (8 per cent). One third saidthey did not intend to impart any beliefs, or didnot answer.

A few (10 per cent) stated that they had ‘nospecific goals’ for student learning. However,



the vast majority used ethics and moral philos-ophy as a premiere intellectual fitness centre, ifnot to a lesser degree as a civic improvementlab or humanitarian training ground.

Recommendations: What professors can doWhile some EMF faculty seem to be ‘naturalborn’ teachers and others have worked hard atincreasing effectiveness, almost all feel thatthere is room for improvement. Many alreadyhave either a systematic or intuitive process inplace to upgrade their teaching skills andcourses. For those who do not and who may beseeking improvement, there are a range ofmethods to consistently inspect and refineteaching. These include:1) using a dedicated portion of each sabbatical,

summer break, or course preparation periodto evaluate and upgrade teaching;

2) reading articles or texts by those who havewon national teaching awards and receivedconsistently (near) perfect student evalua-tions (for excellence, not for popularity);

3) taking ‘master classes’;

4) spending more time seriously evaluating orsoliciting student, if not peer, feedback;

5) reviewing selected literature from schools ofeducation about pedagogical effectiveness;

6) examining student assignments and examswith an eye for determining depth, improve-ment, validity, comprehension, independentthought and thus teacher effectiveness.

Most importantly, faculty may realise that,whatever the approach, enhancing effective-ness takes deliberate work and serves the inter-ests of students, faculty, institutions, and ethics.One might even argue that it is ethically impor-tant to deliberately strive for improvement tofulfil the written and unwritten contracts thatteachers make with employers, students, theirprofession and society.

Note on ContributorTom Cooper is the founder and current co-publisher of Media

Ethics. He is a professor in the Department of Visual and Media Arts

at Emerson College, Boston. He is also an expert witness, communi-

cation coach to CEOs and managers, author, playwright and

composer. Email: [email protected]


learning from the and moral philosophy are taught at leading ... - communication ethics · 2019. 3....

Documents