kohlberg paper

Running head: KOHLBERG: THEORY & IMP 1

Lawrence Kohlberg:

Theory and Implications of Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development

Larkin Odell

The George Washington University

KOHLBERG: THEORY & IMP 2

Biographical Introduction

Jean Piaget, an illustrious epistemologist for his stages of cognitive development laid the

foundation for psychologist, Lawrence Kohlberg. An accomplished researcher in the Piagetian

tradition, Kohlberg expanded Piaget's initial thoughts on moral development, proposing a theory

of six stages of moral development, compared to Piaget's two-tiered premise.

Born in 1927, in Bronxville, New York, Kohlberg attended a private high school for

bright and unusually wealthy students. Kohlberg deferred going to college and went to Israel,

where he was made a Second Engineer on a freighter carrying refugees from parts of Europe to

Israel. After the war had ended, Kohlberg enrolled at the University of Chicago. He finished his

undergraduate degree within a year and stayed on as a graduate student of psychology, where he

discovered Piaget.

Piaget had developed a two-stage theory of moral development. Younger children Piaget

observed, regarded rules as fixed and absolute. However, by age 10 or 11, a significant shift

occurred in children's moral thinking. Kohlberg recognized the alteration but recognized that

intellectual development did not stop in our adolescence, and therefore believed moral

development must continue to mature as well (Crain, 2014, p. 118). In 1958, Kohlberg

completed his doctoral dissertation. Working with a group of 55-75 boys, ages 10, 13, and 16,

Kohlberg asked a series of questions about nine different moral dilemmas. Kohlberg discovered

the moral interpretations given by the young men could be classified into six different

touchstones, laying the developmental foundation of human morality (Power, Higgins, &

Kohlberg, 1989).

Theoretical Issues of Moral Development


Kohlberg, a close follower of Piaget believed his stages were not achieved merely

through maturation, nor were they a natural genetic make-up. The states expand from individual

thoughts about moral problems. Social experiences are merely a stimulant for thought. The more

dialogue and debate a person engages in, the more their personal views would be questioned and

challenged, instigating more profound and complex thoughts (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg,

1989). Piaget originally laid down five criteria that a true mental stage must meet. Kohlberg

addresses each criterion in relation to his study.

Stage Concept & Criteria

Qualitative Differences

Stages are qualitatively different; an individual cannot add characteristics from one level

to get to another.

Structured Wholes

Kohlberg emphasizes that the six stages are not individualized or isolated but are a

progression. The responses to the nine moral dilemmas were consistent illustrating a common

thought process from each subject (Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs, & Lieberman, 1983).

Invariant Sequence

Kohlberg believed that his stages remained in the same pattern; children did not skip

stages or move through them in mixed order. Although not all children may reach the higher

stages of morality, they proceed in order.

Hierarchic Integration

Although people move through the stages of development, they do not forget the insights

gained at earlier stages. Earlier reasoning builds to develop higher stages of understanding

(Crain, 2014).


Universal Sequence

The six stages of moral development, Kohlberg asserted, are universal. Although

different cultures foster different beliefs, Kohlberg's stages referred not to the beliefs themselves,

but the underlying reasoning. The specific belief may be different from location to location, but

the thought process follows the same sequence. Kohlberg and a number of other scientists

traveled the world delivering his moral dilemmas to children and adults in Mexico, Taiwan,

Turkey, Israel, Kenya and the India. Although most of the studies have been cross-sectional, they

have supported Kohlberg's sequence (Crain, 2014).

Kohlberg's Six Stages of Moral Development

Level I: Preconventional Level

At the first level children are responsive to cultural rules and labels, like good and bad or

right and wrong. Children understand these rules in the context of who is in power and the

potential consequences of an action, such as a punishment or reward (Porter, N., Porter, T., 1972,

p. 2).

Stage 1: Heteronomous Morality or Punishment-Obedience Orientation

A child's desire to follow the rules centers in the desire to avoid punishment. Children

are obedient for obedience sake, mainly because there is a superior authority. Kohlberg argues

stage one comes from an egocentric point of view, in which children do not consider others in

the decision making nor is there a recognition that there is more than one side to a story. Actions

are considered from a purely physical perspective (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989).

Stage 2: Individualism or Instrumental Relativist Orientation

"Right" is what is fair and satisfies one's needs. Children are aware that each person has their

interests, therefore, what is "right" is relative, exemplifying, "if you scratch my back, I'll scratch


yours." Children in stage 2 are still categorized in the preconventional level as their perspective

is still individualized and has not shifted to recognize the values of the greater community

(Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989).

Level II: Conventional Level

The conventional level is characterized by loyalty and conformity. Children are aware of

expectations and develop a desire to conform to their micro-social circles, especially concerning

family.

Stage 3: Mutual Interpersonal Expectations

The notion of "being good" is important. Concern for others and a desire to be

trustworthy and loyal begin t o develop. There is an inclination to want to live up to others

expectations and fulfill your societal role as son, daughter, brother, sister, etc. There is a greater

sense of shared feelings and an extension of perspective beyond the self, putting yourself in the

other's shoes (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989).

Stage 4: Social System & Conscience

Admission that laws should be upheld except in extreme cases. The notion of what is

"right" has shifted toward contributing to society and a greater community. Stage four is fused

with stage three regarding belief in rules and authority, but individuals who have reached stage

four consider the point of view from the system that defines the rules. Someone in stage four can

discriminate between their motives and beliefs and societal ideas (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg,

1989).

Level III: Post-Conventional or Principled Level


Level III features a distinct "effort to define moral values and principles… apart from the

authority of the groups or person… and apart from the individual's identification with these

groups" (Porter, & Taylor, 1972, p. 3).

Stage 5: Social Contract & Individual Rights

Stage 5 highlights the notion of the "greatest good for the greatest number." Children

understand values and opinions are relative to different groups. The rules established should be

upheld, unless they inflict upon rights such as life and liberty; these must be upheld in any

society regardless of the majority rules. An individual who has reached stage 5 "considers moral

and legal points of view; recognizes that they sometimes conflict and finds it difficult to integrate

them" (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989).

Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles

Principles are universal in stage 6 with a great emphasis on virtue. Particular laws and

values are considered valid if they are based in ethical principles. If the law is in violation with

the principle, the individual will follow the principle and not the law. Principles include justice,

equality, and respect for the human person (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989).

Summary

Kohlberg's attempt to describe a patterned sequence of stages implies that the moral

development of humans is centered around an individual's response and logic to specific

situations. "As we grow up we reason in different ways, passing from one stage to the next, since

it gives us a more flexible way of handling moral issues" (Porter, N., Porter, T., 1972, p. 2). As

an individual journeys through the stages of moral reasoning, their focus turns increasingly away

from individualism and more toward justice and fairness for the greater whole. Kohlberg


believed a moral society was founded in the moral standards of individuals. Therefore, the way

to aid society is to aid individual progress in morality (Kohlberg, 1958).

Application in Education

Moshe Blatt, a student of Kohlberg's reasoned the only way to systematically promote

moral development was to expose individuals to others with moral reasoning one stage above

their own. He trusted individuals at the lower levels of reasoning would be stimulated by those

more advanced to mature toward the next level. Blatt developed a pilot project in a Jewish

Sunday School for a group of sixth-graders. Blatt individually tested for each students moral

stage and then brought the group together once a week for twelve weeks to discuss a moral

dilemma. At the end of the twelve week, Blatt retested the students and found 64% of the

students had developed one full stage further in their moral reasoning (Power, Higgins, &

Kohlberg, 1989).

Just Community: Cluster School. Although Kohlberg had written about education prior to

Blatt, the Sunday School findings brought a new found focus to Kohlberg's writings and

attention to education. In 1974 Kohlberg received two large grants to undertake the training of

high school teachers in developmental moral education. The grants required two programs: one

would train teachers in moral, discussion-based curricula, and another would create a just

community school-within-a-school. Kohlberg and a committee of parents and teachers developed

the Cluster School. The Cluster School would be governed by four principles: (1) Direct

democracy. All major issues would be discussed and voted on a weekly meeting, one vote per

student and faculty. (2) Standing committees comprised of parents, teachers and students. (3) A

contract would be drawn delineating the roles and rights of each member of the school. (4) Each

person in the school had exactly the same rights.


Cluster had no principle or director. The school went through a number of challenges the

first few years but was eventually able to self-regulate. The Cluster School doors were opened

for four years in total, but its model and culture extended into other classrooms and schools

(Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989).

Practical Application & Early Childhood Development

Kohlberg's theory can be applied in the classroom and across school districts in a variety

of ways. Most notably curriculum can incorporate stimulating moral development with class

discussions, test problems, role-playing and lesson plans directed at application, analysis and

evaluation. Similarly to the Cluster School, teachers can provide students with an opportunity to

participate in defining classroom policies and rules. If a rule is broken, rather than detention or

suspension, offer the student a chance to work through and reflect upon his/her behavior.

Offering students a chance to help develop the rules or enhance the policies of the school is

another opportunity for children and adolescents to recognize and understand justice and right

from a different perspective. Service-learning programs are an excellent chance for students to

develop a deeper understanding of empathy and respect for others, a foundation, Kohlberg

(1958) argues, one must have to reach the higher levels of moral reasoning.

Developmentalists, such as Kohlberg view moral development as something we evolve

internally. Neither our parents nor teachers can foist certain beliefs upon us although there are

many examples of this in our current society and schools. The alternative is to engage children in

actively choosing and assessing certain behaviors. Although moral functioning cannot be given

to children, it can be fostered. Morality is not about merely teaching the do's and don'ts of society

but in addressing the reasoning behind the rules and laws and how they affect other individuals.


Ruth Wilson, Ph. D (2008) has focused a great deal of her research on early childhood

environmental education and identified six actions to bring into an early child classroom to

promote moral development.

• Help children understand the reason behind the rules.

• Match your response to conflict situations to the children's level of cognitive and social

development.

• Attend to the victim first when one child hurts another.

• Use children's literature to share examples of caring.

• Include animals in the classroom and involve children in the care of animals.

• Model, encourage and reward acts of caring.

The foundation of Kohlberg's stages and Blatt's successful research on the impact of

education-based moral development provides a strong framework to work from as early

childhood special education practitioners. There is an inherent responsibility among special

education practitioners to develop as many opportunities to expand understanding and skills of

morality and empathy within our students, as well as ourselves. We have a mission to educate the

whole person and empower students to engage the world from a framework of justice and

humanity.


References

Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., Lieberman, M., Fischer, K., & Saltzstein, H. D. (1983). A

longitudinal study of moral judgment. Monographs of the Society for Research in

Child Development, 48(1/2), 1-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1165935

Crain, W. (2014). Theories of development: Concepts and applications (6th ed.). London: Pear

son Education.

Higgins, A., Kohlberg, L., and Power, F.C. (1989). Lawrence Kohlberg’s Approach to

Moral Education. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kohlberg, L. (1958). The development of modes of moral thinking and choice in the

years 10 to 16. (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Chicago, 1958). Thesis

No. 4397.

Kohlberg, L. (1981). The meaning and measurement of moral development.

Worcester, MS: Clark University Press.

Letch, N., & Ricci, E. (2009). Chapter 16: AGE & CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY. In

Psychology in Action (2nd ed.). South Yarra, Vic.: Macmillan Education

Australia.

Porter, N., & Taylor, N. (1972). How to assess the moral reasoning of students; A teachers'

guide to the use of lawrence kohlberg's stage-developmental method. Toronto:

Ontario: Institute for Studies in Education.

Wilson, R. (2008). Fostering Goodness & Caring: Promoting Moral Development of

Young Children. Retrieved September 23, 2014 from

http://www.earlychildhoodnews. com/earlychildhood/article_view.aspx?

ArticleID=565

http://www.earlychildhoodnews/

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1165935


APPENDIX A

The Heinz Dilemma HandoutIn Europe, a woman was near death from cancer. One drug might save her, a form of

radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The druggist was charging $2,000, ten times what the drug cost him to make. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, “No.” The husband got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done that? Why?

PRECONVENTIONALStage 1: Punishment orientation. Obedience to authority is considered.Example: “He shouldn’t steal the drug because he might get caught and be punished” (avoiding punishment)

Stage 2: Pleasure -seeking orientation. Action is determined by one’s own needs. Example: “It won’t do him any good to steal the drug because his wife will be dead by

the time he gets out of jail,” (self-interest.)

CONVENTIONALStage 3: Good boy/good girl orientation.Action determined by the approval of their peer group. Example: “He shouldn’t steal the

drug because others will think he is a thief. His wife will not want to be saved by stealing” (avoiding disapproval.)

Stage 4: Authority orientation. Should uphold the law at all costs. Follow social rules. Example: “Although his wife needs the drug, he should not break the law to get it. His

wife’s condition doesn’t justify stealing” (traditional morality of authority.)

POSTCONVENTIONAL

Stage 5: Social-contract orientation. Rules are open to question but are upheld for the good of the community. Example: “He should not steal the drug. The druggist response is unfair but mutual

respect for the rights of others must be maintained,” (social contract.)

Stage 6: Morality of individual principlesHigh value is placed on justice, dignity, and equality.


Example: “He should steal the drug but alert authorities he has done it. He will have to face a penalty, but he will save a human life.” (self-chosen ethical principles)

KOHLBERG: THEORY & IMP 14Kohlberg’s Six Stages of Moral Judgment

Level & Stage What is right Reasons for doing right Social Perspective of Stage

Level I. Pre-conventional Stage 1: heteronomous morality

Avoiding breaking rules backed by punish-ment; obedience for its own sake; to avoid physical damage to persons and property.

Avoidance of punishment, and the superior power of authorities.

Egocentric point of view. Doesn’t consider the interests of others or recognize that they differ from the actor’s; doesn’t relate two points view. Actions are considered physi-cally rather than in terms of psychological in-terests of others. Confusion of authority’s perspective with one’s own.

Stage 2: Individualism, instrumental; purpose, and exchange

Following rules only when it is to some-one’s immediate interest; acting to meet your own interests and needs and letting others do the same. Right is also what’s fair, an equal exchange, a deal, an agree-ment.

To serve your own needs or interests in a world where you have to recognize that other people have their interests too.

Concrete individualistic perspective. Aware that everybody has his own interest to pur-sue and these conflict, so that right is rela-tive (in concrete individualist sense).

Level II. Conventional Stage 3: Mutual Interper-sonal expectations, rela-tionships, and interper-sonal conformity

Living up to what is expected by people close to you or what people generally ex-pect of people in your role as son, brother, friend, etc. “Being good” is important and means having good motives, showing con-cern about others. It also means keeping mutual relationships, such as trust, loyalty, respect, and gratitude.

The need to be a good person in your own eyes and those of others. Your caring for others. Desire to maintain rules and authority, which support stereotypically good behavior.

Perspective of the individual in relationships with other individuals. Aware of shared feel-ings, agreements, and expectations, which take primacy over individual interests. Re-lates point of view through the concrete Golden Rule, putting you in the other guy’s shoes. Does not yet consider generalized system perspective.

Stage 4: Social system and conscience

Fulfilling the actual duties to which you have agreed. Laws are upheld except in ex-treme cases where they conflict with other fixed social duties. Right is also contribut-ing to society, the group, or institution.

To keep the institution going as a whole, to avoid the breakdown in the system “if every-one did it,” or the imperative of conscience to meet your defined obligations (easily confused with stage 3 belief in rules and authority).

Differentiation of societal points of view from interpersonal agreement or motives. Take the point of view of the system that de-fines roles and rules. Considers individual relations in terms of place in the system.

Level III. Post-conven-tional or principled Stage 5: Social contract or utility and individual rights

Being aware that people hold a variety of values and opinions, that most values and rules are relative to your group. These rela-tive rules should usually be upheld how-ever, in the interest of impartiality and be-cause they are the social contract. Some non -elative values and rights like life and liberty, however, must be upheld in any so-ciety and regardless of majority opinion.

A sense of obligation to law because of your social contract to make and abide by laws for the welfare of all and for the protection of all people’s rights. A feeling of contractual com-mitment, freely entered upon, to family, friendship, trust, and work obligation. Concern that laws and duties be based on rational calcu-lation of overall utility, “the greatest good for the greatest number.”

Prior-to-society perspective. Perspective of a rational individual aware of values and rights prior to social attachments and con-tracts. Integrates perspectives by formal mechanisms of agreements, contract, objec-tive impartiality, and due process. Considers moral and legal points of view; recognizes that they sometimes conflict and finds it dif-ficult to integrate them.

KOHLBERG: THEORY & IMP 15Stage 6: Universal ethical principles

Following self-chosen ethical principles. Particular laws or social agreements are usually valid because they rest on such principles. When laws violate these princi-ples, one acts in accordance with the princi-ple. Principles are universal principles of justice; the equality of human rights and re-spect for the dignity of human beings as in-dividual persons/

The belief as a rational person in the validity of universal moral principles, and a sense of personal commitment to them.

Perspective of moral point of view from which social arrangements derive. Perspec-tive is that of nay rational individual recog-nizing the nature of morality or the fact that persons are ends in themselves and must be treated as such.

kohlberg paper

Documents