Transcript Kohlberg and Piaget

PIAGET AND KOHLBERG
Maeve Hogan
JEAN PIAGET
 Born in Switzerland on August 9, 1896
 By the time he reached his teenage years his writing was being widely published
 Received his Ph. D. in natural sciences in 1918
 Studied under other famous psychologists such as Carl Jung and Paul Bleuler
 Married in 1923 and eventually had 3 children
 Worked under Alfred Binet in Paris, analyzing the intelligence levels of children
 Received the Erasmus prize in 1972 and the Balzan prize in 1978
 Died at the age of 84 on September 16, 1980
STAGE THEORY
 Periods of development
•
•
•
•
1. Sensorimotor Intelligence (birth-2 years)
2.Preoperational Thought (2-7 years)
3. Concrete Operations (7-11 years)
4. Formal Operations (11-adulthood)
 Invariant
 Qualitatively different periods
 General characteristics, or patterns of thought
 Hierarchic integrations
 Stages unfold in the same sequence in all cultures—culturally universal
CONSERVATION
 Conservation of Continuous Quantities (Liquids)
• Pre-operational level: two possible results
• Concrete Operations: able to conserve; three arguments
•
•
•
Identity
Compensation
Inversion
 Logical operations
 Spontaneous mastery and internal contradiction
 Also conducted experiments with conservation of number; arguments
for conservation remain the same
LAWRENCE KOHLBERG
 Born on October 25, 1927 in Bronxville, New York
 Joined the merchant marines at the end of WWII
 Graduated from the University of Chicago in 1948
 Influenced heavily by the work of Jean Piaget
 1958-1961 he served as an assistant professor of psychology at Yale University
 In 1968 he was names Professor of Education and Social Psychology at
Harvard University
 Died in 1987 from what was rumored to be a suicide after suffering from
depression for many years
STAGES OF MORAL
DEVELOPMENT
 Level 1: Pre-conventional Morality
• Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation
• Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange
 Conventional Morality
• Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships
• Stage 4: Maintaining the Social Order
 Post-Conventional Morality
• Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights
• Stage 6: Universal Principles
MY RESEARCH STUDY
 Purpose: to investigate whether the level of moral reasoning as determined by one of
Kohlberg’s dilemmas is indicative of the level of conservation achievement as determined by
performances on specified Piagetian conservation tasks. In particular, this research study seeks
to answer the following questions:
 (1) Do conserving children achieve a higher stage of moral reasoning than non-conserving
children as indicated on Kohlberg’s stage theory of moral development?
 (2) Do children who can conserve volume achieve a higher stage of moral reasoning than
children who can only conserve number as indicated on Kohlberg’s stage theory of moral
reasoning?
 (3) Are there patterns of difference among conserving boys and conserving girls with
respect to their stages of moral reasoning?
HYPOTHESES
 Hypothesis 1: Conserving children will achieve a higher stage of moral
reasoning than non-conserving children as indicated on Kohlberg’s stage
theory of moral development
 Hypothesis 2: Children who can conserve volume will achieve a
higher stage of moral reasoning than children who can only conserve
number as indicated on Kohlberg’s stage theory of moral reasoning
 Hypothesis 3: There will be patterns of difference among conserving
boys and conserving girls with respect to their stages of moral
reasoning
METHODOLOGY
 Participants: convenience sample of 8 children from Holy Family Elementary
school
• 4 children from 2nd grade (2 girls, 2 boys)
• 4 children from 8th grade (2 girls, 2 boys)
 Setting: Holy Family classroom
 Procedure:
• Look at groups of pennies lined up on a desk and then answer questions about
which group has more pennies.
• Look at water poured into different cups and then answer questions about
which of the cups has more water.
• Listen to a story and then answer questions explaining whether you think a
character in the story made the right or wrong choice – and why.
DILEMMA
 As presented in Kohlberg’s dissertation (p 361)
 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 that. But just before camp was going to start, his father changed his mind. Some
of his father’s 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. Should Joe give his father the money?
CONSERVATION OF
NUMBER
 The coin test
CONSERVATION OF LIQUID
ASSESSMENT
Stage
Characteristics
1 Obedience and Punishment
Orientation
Not much explanation; concerned with
authority
2 Individualism and Exchange
Mention of different perspective or how to
coordinate beneficial deals
3 Good Interpersonal Relationships
Talk about living up to expectations or
underlying motives
4 Maintaining the Social Order
Focuses on respecting authority, must have
a reason behind it
5 Social Contract and Individual Rights
Emphasis on basic rights and ways to
benefit everyone
6 Universal Principles
Define principles by which agreements will
be most just
RESULTS
 Participant 1: Male, 2nd Grade
 Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money
 Reason: because it is what you are supposed to do, you are supposed
to say no to bad things and yes to good
 Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment
 Conservation of number: unable to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve
RESULTS
 Participant 2: Female, 2nd Grade
 Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money
 Reason: because he is just a kid and he shouldn’t have all the things he
wants to do
 Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment
 Conservation of number: unable to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve
RESULTS
 Participant 3: Female, 2nd Grade
 Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money
 Reason: it is a good decision because it is the right thing to do
 Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment
 Conservation of number: unable to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve
RESULTS
 Participant 4: Male, 2nd Grade
 Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money
 Reason: because his father is the boss of him and she shouldn’t tell his father no
 Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment
 Conservation of number: unable to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve at first but then shows confusion;
“the glass has more, wait actually no, because that one and that one were the same
at one time, its just a different container”
RESULTS
 Participant 5: Male, 8th grade
 Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money
 Reason: His father has given Joe much more than the amount of
money his dad wants
 Stage: 4. Maintaining Social Order
 Conservation of number: able to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: able to conserve
RESULTS
 Participant 6: Female, 8th grade
 Dilemma: No, Joe should not give his dad the money
 Reason: Because Joe worked hard for the money, he earned it, so
therefore it is his.
 Stage: 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights
 Conservation of number: able to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: able to conserve
RESULTS
 Participant 7: Female, 8th grade
 Dilemma: Yes, Joe should give his dad the money
 Reason: He should give him the money because his dad works hard to
pay bills and provide for the family
 Stage: 4. Maintaining the Social Order
 Conservation of number: able to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: able to conserve
RESULTS
 Participant 8: Male, 8th grade
 Dilemma: No, Joe should not give his dad the money
 Reason: Joe saved that money to go to camp
 Stage: 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights
 Conservation of number: able to conserve
 Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve*
CONCLUSIONS
 Hypothesis 1: Accepted!
•
In general, conserving children did achieve a higher stage of moral
reasoning than non-conserving children as indicated on Kohlberg’s stage
theory of moral development
 Hypothesis 2: Accepted!
• Children who could conserve volume generally achieved a higher stage of
moral reasoning. However, those could not conserve volume generally
could not conserve number either.
 Hypothesis 3: Rejected!
• There was no significant patterns of difference among conserving boys
and conserving girls with respect to their stages of moral reasoning
LIMITATIONS
 Convenience Sample
 Limited amount of children able to participate
 Children were distracted
 Previous exposure
 Not much explanation
NATURE VS. NURTURE
NATURE
NURTURE
Piaget
and
Kohlberg
WORKS CITED

Crain, William. “Piaget’s Cognitive-Developmental theory” Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. 4th
ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 2000

Crain, William. “Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development” Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. 4th
ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 2000

Kavathatzopoulos, Iordanis. "Kohlberg And Piaget: Differences And Similarities." Journal Of Moral
Education 20.1 (1991): 47-54. ERIC. Web. 24 Oct. 2014

Kohlberg, Lawrence (1958). "The Development of Modes of Thinking and Choices in Years 10 to 16". Ph.
D. Dissertation, University of Chicago.

http://www.biography.com/people/jean-piaget-9439915#early-life

http://totallyhistory.com/lawrence-kohlberg/

http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/affect/values.html