Objectives

College students wanting to learn about theories of moral development will be able to:

Outline the stage theories of Lawrence Kohlberg and Carol GilliganTell the difference between a justice orientation and a care orientationDescribe the study conducted by Stephanie Cain and Sylvia Tellez regarding Kohlberg and Gilligan’s theories.

Moral DevelopmentDoes gender make a difference?

Vs.

Lawrence Kohlberg

Carol Gilligan Online Biography

Online Biography

Lawrence Kohlberg

Born October 25, 1927 in Bronxville, NYObtained his bachelor’s degree after one year of study at the University of Chicago in 1948 Earned his doctoral degree in 1958 from the same university after writing a dissertation outlining stage theory of moral developmentTaught at the University of Chicago (beginning in 1962) and Harvard University (beginning in 1968)Performed cross-cultural studies of moral development in Israel and Belize

Kohlberg’s Stage Theory

Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation

Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange

Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships

Stage 4: Maintaining Social Order

Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights

Stage 6: Universal Principles

Preconventional {

{Conventional

{Postconventional

Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation

There is a strict set of rules that must always be followed

The ideas of punishment and permission are key

Preconventional thought expressed

Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange

Now there is not one right way of doing things; everything is relative

Fair exchange policy

The role of punishment weakens

Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships

“Good Boy/Nice Girl” Orientation

People should live up to the expectations of community

Characters’ traits and motives are examined

Stage 4: Maintaining the Social Order

There is an emphasis on obeying laws, respecting authority, and performing one’s duties so social order is maintained

Perspective changes to society as a whole

Not only does the child say a certain action is right or wrong, they explore the reasons why

Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights

An individual’s moral judgment is motivated by community respect, respecting social order, and respect for legally/determined laws

Thoughts consider the rights and values a society must uphold

Stage 6: Universal Principles

Involves universal principles of justice that apply to all peopleWe treat the particular dilemma through unbiased and impartial eyesWe can only reach this stage by looking at a situation through someone else’s eyes

Carol Gilligan

Born in 1936Student of Lawrence KohlbergObtained an B.A. in English Literature, a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology, and a Ph.D. in Social PsychologyHas taught at Harvard University, University of Cambridge, and New York University. She currently teaches at the University of Cambridge.Focused most of her studies on gender-related development

Gilligan’s View of KohlbergJustice orientation/perspective

“draws attention to problems of inequality and oppression and holds up an ideal of reciprocity and equal respect.”

Care orientation/perspective“draws attention to problems of detachment or abandonment and holds up an ideal of attention and response to need.”

Gilligan states that “Two moral injunctions – not to treat others unfairly and not to turn away from someone in need – capture these different concerns.”

Gilligan’s Stages of Development (relating to the Ethics of Care)

•Preconventional – Striving for individual survival

•Conventional – Good things come out of self-sacrifice

•Postconventional – Principle of nonviolence toward oneself and others

{Transition from selfishness to

responsibility to others

{Transition from goodness to truth

When given moral dilemmas, do both groups of children, male and female, follow

Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of development?

Is there a difference in orientation in moral decision making between the two genders

as Carol Gilligan suggests?

Are females more inclined to choose care over justice and males justice over care?

Our Problem:

Our Hypothesis:

We believe that girls

are more inclined to make moral

decisions based on ideas of care

and relationships,

whereas boys

will base their decisions on justice.

We selected three moral dilemmas often used in Kohlberg studies to present to 15 fifth grade

students (8 girls and 7 boys) at Holy Family of Nazareth school.

Before using the dilemmas, we made sure we felt both care and justice responses could be given to

each.

Each dilemma was presented to the children with a series of questions for them to answer.

Our Study

“The Heinz Dilemma”In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind

of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist

in the same town had recently discovered. the drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging

ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $400 for the radium and charged $4,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and

tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said,

"No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So, having tried every legal means,

Heinz gets desperate and considers breaking into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.

1.Should Heinz steal the drug? 1a. Why or why not?

2. Is it actually right or wrong for him to steal the drug?

2a. Why is it right or wrong?

3. Does Heinz have a duty or obligation to steal the drug?

3a. Why or why not?

“Heinz Dilemma”

“Dad Dilemma”

Joe is a fourteen-year-old boy who wanted to go to camp very much. His father promised him he could go if he saved up the money for it himself. So Joe

worked hard at his paper route and saved up the forty dollars it cost to go to camp, and a little more besides.

But just before camp was going to start, his father changed his mind. Some of his friends decided to go on a special fishing trip, and Joe's father was short of the money it would cost. So he told Joe to give him the money he had saved from the paper route. Joe didn't want to give up going to camp, so he thinks of

refusing to give his father the money.

1.Should Joe refuse to give his father the money?

1a. Why or why not?

2. Does the father have the right to tell Joe to give him the money? 2a. Why or why not?

3. Does giving the money have anything to do with being a good son? 3a. Why or why not?

“Dad Dilemma”

“Theft Dilemma”

Two young men, brothers, had got into serious trouble. They were 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 wasn't sick at all, and he had no intention of paying the man back. Although the old man didn't know Bob very well, he lent him the money. So Bob and Karl

skipped town, each with a thousand dollars.

Which brother was more wrong? Why would you say that?

What do you think is the worst thing about cheating the old man?

Why is that the worst thing?

“Theft Dilemma”

Kohlberg RubricDefined by Kohlberg Statements we expect to receive with regard to a

given dilemma

Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment

OrientationConcern on a fixed set of unchanging rulesWe worry about what authorities will permit and punishPunishment=wrong

“It’s bad/wrong to…”“You’ll get punished”/ “You won’t get punished”“It’s a sin to…”/ “It is against the Commandments…”

Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange Everything is now relative; punishments are now a risk

Individuals are seeking favorsFair exchange policy

“Just because one person thinks it’s right, someone else might not”“This person may think it’s good/right for him”“It was unfair”/ “The fair way would have been…”

Stage 3: Interpersonal Relationships “Good Boy/Nice Girl” Orientation

Now there is a look at motives of each party involvedThe children now see the multi-dimensional aspect to a problemCharacter traits are described

“ This person had the right idea”“His intentions were good, but…”This person was “greedy, selfish” or “caring and loving”

Stage 4: Maintaining a Social Order Emphasis on obeying laws, respecting authority, and

performing one’s duties so social order is maintainedNot only do we say it’s wrong, but we explore the reasons why it is so

“Stealing or breaking the law is never right, even though it is understandable why the person did it”“What would happen if we all did that”“It’s against the law to…because…”

Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual

RightsStress on basic rights and democratic procedures to change unfair lawsStrong language is used; the idea of right to life

“The person has a right to live”“Laws are social contracts that everyone agrees to uphold”

Stage 6: Universal Principles Look at problems through all eyes- clear concept of

universal principlesWe decided no child would reach this stage at age 10 or 11

Kohlberg Overall ResultsName Gender

Alex F Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Becky F Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional

Chichi F Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Jackie F Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 3 Conventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional

Katherine F Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional

Kelsey F Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional

Nallelie F Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Rebekah F Stage 3 Conventional Stage 3 Conventional Stage 3 Conventional Stage 3 Conventional

Chris M Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Craig M Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Joseph M Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Keith M Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional

Kevin M Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 3 Conventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional

Montana M Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Sergio M Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 2 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional Stage 1 Preconventional

Dad DilemmaHeinz Dilemma Theft Dilemma Overall Kohlberg Stage

Stage 1 (Preconventional)

“No. Because stealing is bad.” (female)

“Yes. Because he is his dad and you should obey his dad.” (male)

“Yes. So he could not get grounded.” (male)

Stage 2 (Preconventional)

“Yes. So his wife could live a longer life.” (female)

“No. Cause his father could give it to him with more” (female)

“NO. IT’S HIS MONEY.” (female)

Stage 3 (Conventional)

“No. Because he’s your father. Think of all the things he has done for you.” (male)

“Yes. Because Joe was counting on his father and looking forward to the camping trip.” (female)

“His wife is dying and the guy’s a jerk.” (female)

Stage 5 (Postconventional)

“Yes. It dose not mater who it is all that maters is it is a life of a person.” (female)

Gilligan Rubric

  Concept Language

Preconventional

Actions are done with intent of helping

themselves survive or feel better.

Reference to the feelings/well-being of

the person making the decision in a dilemma.

ConventionalWilling to give of

themselves for the goodness of others.

Words such as "help" and reference to the feelings/well-being of people other than the

person making the decision

Postconventional

Want to prevent harm to themselves and

others; everyone is a person.

Weighing the safety and well-being of

everyone involved in the dilemma

Preconventional Responses

“It is wrong because you might save your wife but the gilt for stealing would haunt you forever.” (male)

“Both of them are wrong. Karl brock one of the comaments ther forth he will go to Hell. Bob soled and ther forth braking two comamemnts. I think Bob is worst.” (female)

“Yes. Because he wants to go to camp.” (male)

Conventional Responses

“Yes. Because he is helping his wife.” (female)

“No. Because he’s your father. Think of all the things he has done for you.” (male)

“Yes. Because if he gives him the money then he would do a good thing.” (female)

Postconventional Responses

“It is right because it is to save a life.” (female)

“Yes. It dose not mater who it is all that maters is that it is a life of a person.” (female)

Kohlberg and Gilligan Compared

Name Gender Overall Gilligan Stage Kohlberg or Gilligan?

AlexF

Stage 1 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

BeckyF

Stage 2 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

ChichiF

Stage 1 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

JackieF

Stage 2 PreconventionalPreconventional/

ConventionalEqual

KatherineF

Stage 2 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

KelseyF

Stage 2 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

NallelieF

Stage 1 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

Rebekah F Stage 3 Conventional Conventional Equal

Chris M Stage 1 PreconventionalPreconventional/

ConventionalGilligan

Craig M Stage 1 PreconventionalPreconventional/

ConventionalGilligan

Joseph M Stage 1 PreconventionalPreconventional/

ConventionalGilligan

Keith M Stage 2 Preconventional Conventional Gilligan

Kevin M Stage 2 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

Montana M Stage 1 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

Sergio M Stage 1 Preconventional Preconventional Equal

Overall Kohlberg Stage

Our hypothesis ended up being incorrect. Through our study, we

found that boys and girls rated almost equally on both Kohlberg’s and Gilligan’s scales. If anything,

(though even this was questionable) the boys slightly favored the care orientation – not the girls, as we

predicted.

Conclusion

Possible reasons for our incorrect judgment:

Males and females may differ in orientation at different points in their life. At this point, they just happen to be the same.

Most of the studies we read about Gilligan involved women in college, not children.

If moral development is related to cognitive development, 5th grade students may be mostly equal in levels of cognition.

Limitations

Written responses rather than verbal

Difficulty interpreting data

Only using one age group of children

Questions we have after our study:

Do males and females differ in orientation at different ages?Does cognitive development make a difference in care or justice orientation?How does the differing role of females in society today versus during Kohlberg’s studies affect moral development?

Or does the cultural role of women affect development at all?

Would the children have answered differently if they had been shown an image such as the clip art on our PowerPoint?

NATURE NURTURE

Rousseau LockeVygotsky

Piaget

GilliganKohlberg

Erikson

Where would Kohlberg and Gilligan fall on the Nature vs. Nurture line?