Running Head: MORAL REASONING
Moral Reasoning
Virginia Commonwealth University
Meagan K. Tenia
1
2
MORAL REASONING
Moral Reasoning
The public school system in America is put in place to benefit citizens with a free
education. Faculty and staff are employed to successfully educate students so they are a viable
part of society. While a school building is somewhere learning takes place, incidents not related
to education can take place in a school building as well. This paper explores such an incident
involving an administrator and student. The paper then goes on to explain the moral reasoning
of those involved in the scenario with an explanation of the school incident, a proposed solution,
moral rule and judgment, concluded with an ethical analysis based on Starratt’s ethical
frameworks of ethic of critique, ethic of justice, ethic of care, and ethic of profession.
Statement of Issue
Mr. Johnson, a middle school principal, is attending a three day conference out of state.
Before leaving for his conference, Mr. Johnson meets with his administrative team to review
duties during his absence. During the administrative meeting, Mr. Johnson asks that his duties as
principal be divided evenly among the rest of the administrative team. Mr. Johnson also asks
that all of the administration be on duty during lunches to help with cafeteria conduct. During
Mr. Johnson’s absence an altercation occurred during the 8th grade lunch in the cafeteria. The
scenario is described below.
Eight grade students are the first group of students to have lunch during the day. While
the students eat lunch at student tables, the majority of eighth grade teachers eat lunch in the
cafeteria at a table separate from the student tables. It is the administrations preference that
teachers eat in the cafeteria with students to help if a situation of student misconduct would arise.
As the eighth grade lunch was coming to an end Mrs. Tenia, an eighth grade teacher, began
cleaning up her lunch area to gather her students. As Mrs. Tenia gathered her students from
lunch she noticed an altercation occurring between a student, Frank, and one of the assistant
principals, Ms. Bell. Both Frank and Ms. Bell were being restrained by members of the faculty
while Ms. Bell repeatedly yelled at Frank, pushing and shoving the faculty member restraining
her in an attempt to get closer to Frank, the student. Ms. Bell’s actions were aggressive in
manner and were aimed at an eighth grade student. Mrs. Tenia, overwhelmed by what she saw,
sought out other members of the administration team during the next two days to discuss the
altercation and the rationale behind it. Both administrators Mrs. Tenia spoke to insisted that Ms.
Bell had no other options than to yell at Frank and move toward him as Frank had put his hands
on Ms. Bell. After speaking to the other assistant principals, Mrs. Tenia was dissatisfied with the
explanations received. She felt there was more to the situation than revealed and was still upset
over Ms. Bell’s behavior toward the student, Frank.
3
MORAL REASONING
Unsure of what steps to take next, Mrs. Tenia decided not to press the issue. She did not
approach any other faculty member regarding what happened in the cafeteria that day and
continued teaching her students under the supervision of Ms. Bell for the remainder of the year.
Based on the events that occurred in the cafeteria, should Mrs. Tenia move forward with her
concern within the building and district level?
Discovery Essay
In the above scenario I am Mrs. Tenia. The scenario is described just as it happened.
Since the incident, I have grappled with how I handled the situation. As a teacher, it is difficult
to question an administrator’s actions. Based on the values of respect, integrity, and fairness, I
contemplate how to deal with the situation in the cafeteria. Ms. Bell, the assistant principal in
question, did not show any of the values listed in her display towards Frank, the student. As a
teacher not part of the administrative team, it is important that I handle the incident in the
cafeteria carefully since it is my goal to climb the ranks of school leadership. What follows is a
proposal for action based on the events of the scenario followed by a moral judgment and moral
rule.
Because I am not a part of the administrative team I am unaware of the exact steps Mr.
Johnson, the principal, took, if any steps were taken, in reprimanding Ms. Bell for her actions;
nor do I know if Mr. Johnson is aware of the issue at hand. As a teacher in the scenario above, I
took the first step in speaking to the assistant principals regarding the display by Ms. Bell in the
cafeteria. The response by both administrators was not satisfactory to me in response to the
moral values of integrity, respect and fairness as I am unsure they approached Mr. Johnson, the
principal of the middle school, regarding the cafeteria incident. Because I am unsure if the
assistant principals approached Mr. Johnson regarding the cafeteria incident I am unsatisfied in
their response. Therefore I will take the following steps in regards to the cafeteria altercation.
MORAL REASONING
4
First, based on my values of integrity, respect and fairness, I will approach Mr. Johnson,
the principal of the school, and describe the situation that occurred in the cafeteria. During this
meeting I would hope Mr. Johnson would allow me to write an incident statement citing all
faculty and staff members in the cafeteria at the time of the altercation between Ms. Bell and the
student, Frank. Once I finish writing the incident report I would alert human resources about the
situation in the cafeteria. It would be easy, as a teacher, to stop reporting the cafeteria incident
once I alerted the principal of the school; however, because the assistant principals did not follow
through with the initial report, it is clear how close the administrative team is at the middle
school. As a teacher, the farthest step I am able to take is to report the incident to human
resources. Once that is done, the incident is out of my hands and in the hands of both human
resources and administration.
In the above solution, I am assuming my concerns are great enough to establish a case
between human resources and Ms. Bell, the administrator involved in the incident. My cause for
concern is large because the incident involved a student and authority figure in a public arena
witnessed by several faculty members. While I am assuming human resources will step in to
handle the situation, I am also assuming that Mr. Johnson, the principal, will follow through on
our conversation. First, I would hope that Mr. Johnson will collect statements from others who
were involved in the incident including the student, Frank. Secondly, I assume Mr. Johnson will
take all of the collected information to human resources. Having more than one report of an
incident should help human resources understand the situation better as well move forward with
how to handle the incident. My solution and assumptions explained may have a negative effect
on my time as a teacher as well as my future within the school district.
MORAL REASONING
5
As a teacher my prescribed role is to follow protocol set by the school district and
administration while I teach students prescribed curriculum in order for students to apply their
learned curriculum to situations posed on a standardized test. My duties do not stop there. I
must also ensure the safety and well-being of students while they are in the school building. Not
only is this a teacher duty, it is the duty of administration as well. The actions of Ms. Bell, the
assistant principal, do not justify the role of ensuring safety and well-being of all students. As a
teacher, it is my duty to report incidents that go against an administrator’s or teacher’s role
including the values of integrity, respect, and fairness. While reporting the incident to Mr.
Johnson and human resources is within my teacher duties it will not go without consequences.
Reporting an administrator for wrong-doing can cause waves within a school building. If human
resources act on the incident Ms. Bell could be taken out of the building and put on
administrative leave while the investigation is active. This would leave the school without one
of the administrative team members causing strife among faculty and staff. As part of a school
team, the implications mentioned are not unknown. This is the risk I would take when reporting
another faculty member. What follows is a moral judgment and rule based on the incident
involving Frank and Ms. Bell.
Moral Judgment: Ms. Bell should never act in an aggressive manner towards students.
Moral Rule: Ms. Bell should act in a professional manner towards all stakeholders of the
educational institution to include students, staff, faculty, and parents.
6
MORAL REASONING
Summary

Moral Dilemma: Should Mrs. Tenia report the cafeteria incident to the building principal
and county officials knowing what implications would be tied to reporting the wrongdoing of a building administrator?

1. Fairness: In order to be fair both Frank and Ms. Bell deserve the right to due process.
2. Integrity: It is important Mrs. Tenia act on her impulse to make others aware of the
situation. No other witness to the situation felt it necessary to report Ms. Bell. In order
for Mrs. Tenia to act with integrity she needs to report the incident through the chain of
command starting with the principal.
3. Respect: In order for Mrs. Tenia, along with the rest of the school community, to
continue to respect Ms. Bell in an administrative role the incident must be cleared by
human resources.

Moral Judgment: Ms. Bell should never act in an aggressive manner towards students.

Moral Rule: Ms. Bell should act in a professional manner towards all stakeholders of the
educational institution to include students, staff, faculty, and parents.
7
MORAL REASONING
Justification Essay
When faced with an ethical dilemma one must employ values and ethics to solve the
problem. According to Starratt (1994), in order to create an ethical professional environment,
ethical frameworks should be utilized to problem solve. Starratt’s (1994) ethical frameworks
include ethic of critique, ethic of justice, ethic of care, and ethic of profession (Starratt, 1994).
The ethic of critique requires a professional to question status quo. Questioning allows
inequities to be discovered and changed (Starratt, 1994). The ethic of justice is employed when
responding to an ethical dilemma. It allows both the good of all and the individual to be served
when making an ethical decision. The ethic of care allows decisions to be made based on equity
of the individual rather than the good of the group (Starratt, 1994). The ethic of profession is
when a professional employs ethical reasoning when making decisions. Consequently, the ethic
of profession occurs when one combines the ethics of critique, justice, and care when making a
decision (Starratt, 1991). What follows is an in-depth analysis of the four ethical frameworks
discussed in relation to the moral judgment posed in the discovery essay.
The ethic of critique questions the very core of an ethical dilemma. When the ethic of
critique is used to help solve an ethical dilemma one questions the norm of an organization or
situation (Starratt, 1991). Within the context of the scenario, the ethical dilemma occurs within a
school building. A school building is comprised of students, teachers, administrators, and other
faculty. Of the described school building make-up, students are the largest population of the
school. It is an educational institute’s duty to make sure the students in the building are
receiving sound instruction while provided with a safe environment for student learning to take
place. While it is the staff’s duty to make sure students are learning in a safe environment, it is
the duty of the administrators to “provide an ethical school environment in which education can
MORAL REASONING
8
take place ethically” (Starratt, 1991, p. 187). Therefore, it is the administrator’s purpose to
employ the ethic of critique along with the remainder of the ethical frameworks when handling
school situations.
While the ethic of critique calls for questioning of status quo it does not offer a plan for
decision making (Starratt, 1991). The ethic of justice offers the plan for decision making. It
occurs when decisions are made with awareness to both the individual and the organization
(Starratt, 1994). In the described scenario, it is the principal’s role to employ the ethic of critique
when making a decision regarding the administrator’s actions. According to Starratt (1991), “the
ethic of justice demands that the claims of the institution serve both the common good and the
rights of the individuals in the school” (p. 194). It is clear that an administrator within a school
building must employ both the ethic of justice and the ethic of critique in order to make sound,
ethical decisions (Starratt, 1991).
The ethic of justice allows a path for decision making when facing a moral dilemma;
however, it lacks the ability for one to determine possible conflict (Starratt, 1991). The ethic of
care allows one to fulfill justice while employing care (Starratt, 1991). The ethic of care allows
one to focus on humanistic approaches to relationships instead of institutional relationships when
solving moral dilemmas. Therefore, the ethic of care employs the thought for individual’s
feelings of dignity when making a decision (Starratt, 1991). Within a school building an
administrator can use the ethic of care to establish “a deep attention to the unique human beings
involved in the exchange and to issues of self-esteem, personal confidence, and ego anxieties”
(Starratt, p. 196, 1991). A sound decision cannot be made simply using the ethic of care;
however, when a school administrator uses the ethic of care in tandem with both the ethic of
critique and the ethic of justice, a sound, ethical decision can be made.
MORAL REASONING
9
When combining the ethics of critique, justice, and care within a school building, one
must also employ the ethic of profession. The ethic of profession occurs when one focuses on
ethical practices within the context of the purpose of an organization. The purpose of a school is
stated in the school’s mission (Elmore, 2000). The mission is the guiding force when making
ethical decisions if faced with a moral dilemma. Many schools involve school stakeholders
when building their mission (Elmore, 2000). Therefore, when school employees focus on the
school’s mission when making ethical decisions while using the ethics of critique, justice, and
care the ethic of profession is utilized.
A school employee should never act in an aggressive manner towards others, including
students, within the school building. According to the ethics of critique, justice, care, and
profession it is the school employees’ duty to act in a caring manner towards both the individual
and institution while questioning status quo in order to make just and ethically sound decisions.
The scenario stated in this paper does not utilize the ethic of care, justice, or profession. The
ethic of critique is employed by a teacher in the scenario; however, the remaining ethical
frameworks are not utilized within the thus a solution is never formed. The proposed solution
demands the principal of the school, Mr. Johnson, to employ the four ethical frameworks to solve
the ethical dilemma stated. Therefore, the school building where the scenario takes place would
be an ethically sound environment if the four ethical frameworks were employed in order to
come to a solution for the ethical dilemma.
10
MORAL REASONING
References
Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a New Structure for School Leadership. The Albert Schanker
Institute. American Federation of Teachers, 49-53.
Starratt, R. J. (1991). Building an ethical school: A theory for practice in educational leadership.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 185-202.
Starratt, R. J. (1994). Building an ethical school: A practical response to the moral crisis in
schools. Washington D.C.: Falmer Press.