Slide 1

Slide 2

Megan Kanatzar and Katherine Wright

Slide 3

Moral Judgment of Piaget & Kohlbergs Stages of Moral Reasoning. Specifically, does a childs ability to conserve affect their score in Kohlbergs moral reasoning??

Slide 4

Born in Switzerland Age 10 studied albino sparrow Age 15 convictions lacked scientific foundation. Age 21 earned Doctorate natural sciences Age 23 came up with plan of action 1920 decided to study children in Paris Laboratory Interested in childrens wrong answers Mainly observed children 4-12(spontaneous activities) Methodology was greatly criticized 1960s great revival of his work!

Slide 5

Four stages Sensorimotor (6 subsets -Infancy) intelligence demonstrated thru motor activity without symbols Object permanence comes - 6mnths Pre-operational (2 subsets - toddler and early childhood) use of symbols, language matures, memory/imagination develop Egocentric thinking remains dominate Concrete operational thought (7 types of conservation - elementary and early adolescence) logical, systematic manipulation of symbols operational thinkingegocentric thought diminishes Formal operational thought (adolescence and adulthood) Logical use of symbols related to abstract concepts return to egocentric thought-early on 35% high school grads achieve Formal operations

Slide 6

About what ages do kids transition from preoperational to concrete operations? SENSORIMOTOR PERIOD Birth to 2 years PREOPERATIONAL PERIOD 2-7 years CONCRETE OPERATIONS 7-11 years FORMAL OPERATIONS 11 years-adulthood

Slide 7

Children are in considered in the Preoperational Stage if He or she is determined that one glass has more water than the other. Children are considered in a transitional sub-stage if He or she cant decide between the two glasses, or shows signs of beginning to grasp the concept, but does not yet get it. Children are considered in Concrete operational if He or she clearly knows that the glasses still have the same amount of water. The child can also use the 3 arguments of identity, compensation, inversion to justify their opinion.

Slide 8

Hometown: Bronxville, New York Attended the University of Chicago He became interested in Piagets work, specifically in his investigation of moral judgments in children. Kohlberg took Piagets brief work with moral development and expanded it extensively.

Slide 9

Kohlberg tested children by presenting the children with a moral dilemma, and asking them questions to ascertain their understanding of morality. The yes/ no responses were not the main criteria for placement in a particular stage of moral development. The explanation of why the child holds a certain opinion that reveals how advanced their moral judgments are.

Slide 10

Dilemma: Two young men, brothers, had got into serious trouble. They are secretly leaving town in a hurry and needed money. Karl, the older one, broke into a store and stole a thousand dollars. Bob, the younger one, went to a retired old man who was known to help people in town. He told the man that he was very sick and that he needed a thousand dollars to pay for an operation. Bob asked the old man to lend him the money and promised that he would pay him back when he recovered. Really Bob wasnt sick at all, and he had no intention of paying the man back. Although the old man didnt know Bob very well, he lent him the money. So Bob and Karl skipped town, each with a thousand dollars.

Slide 11

1) Which is worse, stealing like Karl or cheating like Bob? Why is that worse? 2) What do you think is the worst thing about cheating the old man? Why is that the worst thing? 3) In general, why should a promise be kept? 4) Is it important to keep a promise to someone you dont know well or will never see again? 5) Why shouldnt someone steal from a store? 6) What is the value or importance of property rights? 7) Should people do everything they can to obey the law? Why or why not?

Slide 12

In Kohlbergs dissertation, he provided example answers for each of the questions in this dilemma. He also compiled a list of common trends and key words to look for in the childrens answers.

Slide 13

The child understands rules to be set and given by a higher authority. Their main concern is with the consequences, whether the person will be punished or not. Typically this stages is seen between the ages of 4 and 10. For example, a stealing is wrong because you can go to jail for a very long time. Plus you can get in serious trouble -4 th grade girl (age 9)

Slide 14

Punishment is no longer evidence that something is wrong. Instead, it is a risk that one naturally wants to avoid (Crain 160). The idea of right and wrong is slightly more flexible, and the first priority is doing what is most beneficial for themselves. For example, stealing is worse [than cheating] because you are more likely to get in trouble for stealing than cheating. -6 th grade girl (11)

Slide 15

Strong desire to win approval from peers and adults. Emphasis on avoiding disapproval. Kids tend to cite a persons intentions, or motives as proof of right & wrong. For example, cheating is wrong because youre always supposed to do the right thing. -4 th grade girl (age 9)

Slide 16

Child becomes more concerned with society as a whole, and how the rules are made for a purpose. people want to keep society functioning (Crain 162) Can focus on the effect an action has on society. For example, keeping promises is important because when you promise something, you follow through with it, and hold your end of the bargain. 6 th grade girl (age 12)

Slide 17

The person is generally entering adolescence at this stage, and they are able to consider the big picture or society as a whole. They have respect for the laws not because they are told to, but because it is detrimental to society if they disobey. For example, stealing is worse than cheating because you are doing something bad, the cops will chase you could hurt someone in the process 8 th grade boy (age 14)

Slide 18

The person considers how the characters in the dilemma can best achieve a just result. The person also examines the parameters of the situation to see if they are most likely to promote a good outcome. For example, when someone is given the Heinz dilemma, they might say that their should be laws forbidding price gauging in pharmacies.

Slide 19

The purpose of our study is to discover if Piagets and Kohlbergs theories of cognitive development complement each other. Do children who are able to conserve score higher or lower on Kohlbergs moral development stages than children who fail to conserve?

Slide 20

If a child demonstrates the ability to conservation, he or she will also demonstrate more advanced moral reasoning than the children who could not conserve.

Slide 21

Worksheets for the Kids Two identically sized cups One graduated cylinder Water Blue food coloring (optional) And children ranging from ages 9 -14

Slide 22

On the first side of the handout was their age, grade, and gender The questions regarding conservation which glass has more water in it? On the second side of the handout was One of Kohlbergs dilemma Questions that Kohlberg wrote himself for that particular dilemma.

Slide 23

Holy Family of Nazareth School We tested children in grades 4, 6, and 8. When Kohlberg performed his investigations, he tested kids at ages 10, 13, and 16.

Slide 24

1. Children sat together in a group. 2.Hand out the pencils, and evaluation sheets. 3. Then, we will fill up two plastic cups with equal amounts of water. 4.Next, we will pour the water from one cup into a different size cup, taking all the water from one to the other. 5. Now ask them whether there is more or less water in the second cup compared to the first one. Have them record what they think on the worksheet, 6.Then, we will read the dilemma to them (which will also be written on the worksheet). 7. Then the students will answer the questions about the dilemma on their worksheets.

Slide 25

Overall, we compared the moral development level of the children who could conserve to those who could not conserve. Each grades data was slightly different

Slide 26

4 th Graders who CAN conserve: Moral L E V E L Fourth Graders

Slide 27

4 th Graders who can NOT conserve: Moral L E V E L Fourth Graders

Slide 28

6 th Graders who CAN conserve: Moral L E V E L Sixth Graders

Slide 29

There was only 1 eighth grader, and he was able to conserve. His Moral Reasoning level was determined to be in level 5.

Slide 30

Drum roll, please

Slide 31

Those who CAN Conserve Those who Can NOT Conserve Average Moral Development Levels

Slide 32

AVG. L E V E L 4th Grade 6th Grade 8th Grade

Slide 33

AVG. L E V E L 4th Grade 6th Grade 8th Grade (None)

Slide 34

Overall, our hypothesis was confirmed. The average stage of moral reasoning of the children who could conserve was slightly higher than the children who could not conserve. However, given the limited amount of test subjects we were able to test, the results are not as adequate as we would have liked.

Slide 35

If we could do the project over again what would we change? Environment where the kids were tested was very loud and chaotic. Accuracy of results? If any errors were made, it is likely they were made in the grading of the childrens moral reasoning answers.

Slide 36

(Main Sources) Crain, William C. "Piaget's Cognitive-Developmental Theory." Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. Boston, MA: Prentice Hall, 2011. Kohlberg, Lawrence (1958). "The Development of Modes of Thinking and Choices in Years 10 to 16". Ph. D. dissertation, University of Chicago. Kohlberg, Lawrence. The Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981.

Slide 37