Kohlberg’s Theory of
Moral Reasoning
Erin Begle and Sarah Donovan
Meet Lawrence Kohlberg...
• Born in Bronxville, New York
on October 25, 1927.
• Enrolled at the University of
Chicago in 1948.
• Because of his interest in
Piaget began interviewing
children and adolescents on
moral issues which resulted in
his doctoral dissertation – the
first edition of his new stage
theory.
• He taught at both the
University of Chicago and
Harvard.
• At age 59, he committed
suicide.
Kohlberg’s Stages of Development
Level I Precoventional
•Stage 1 Heteronomous Morality
•Adherence to rules backed by punishment; obedience
for its own sake.
•Obedience and punishment orientation.
•Stage 2 Individualism, Instrumental Purpose
and Exchange
•Acting to meet one’s own interests and needs, and
letting others do the same.
•A recognition that other people also have needs. They
may try to satisfy the needs of others, only if their own
needs are also met.
•“You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.”
Level II Conventional
•Stage 3 Mutual Interpersonal Expectations,
Relationships and Interpersonal Conformity
•Living up to what others expect.
•Stage 4 Social System and Conscience
•Fulfilling the actual duties to which one has agreed.
•Upholding laws except in extreme cases when they
conflict with other fixed social duties.
•Contributing to a society, group of institution.
Level III Post Conventional or Principled
•Stage 5 A Social-Contract Orientation, Generally
with Legalistic and Utilitarian Overtones
•Being aware that people hold a variety of values and
opinions; these are often relative to the group that
holds them.
•Upholding rules in the interests of impartiality and
because they are the social contract.
•Non-relative values and rights, such as life and
liberty, must be upheld in any society, regardless of
majority opinion.
Level III Post Conventional or Principled
•Stage 6 Universal and Ethical Principles
•Following self-chosen universal principles of justice:
the equality of human rights and respect for dignity.
•Judging laws in relation to these principles.
•When laws violate principles, acting in accordance
with the principle.
Our Hypotheses
as students
mature
in age
and progress in
We believe that after
students
partake
in stimulating
grade level, discussion,
their moralthe
development
develop.
the
intellectual
majority ofwill
students
willThus,
change
eighthopinions/answers.
graders will score higher than the second graders.
their
The Process:
• After students have signed assent forms, worksheets
will be passed out.
• Researches will read Moral Dilemma I to the group
and then ask students to answer questions
independently.
• Once completed, researchers will collect worksheets.
• Researchers will lead a discussion using the aid of
the questions to stimulate dialogue.
• After the discussion, researchers will hand back
worksheets and ask the students to make any
necessary adjustments in RED ink.
Looking at a Moral Dilemma
Two standard issues are placed side by side.
Probing questions are designed to elicit information
on the subject’s conceptions of these two issues.
Moral Dilemma I
Joe is a fourteen-year-old boy who wants to go to camp
very much. His father has promised him that he can go if
he saves up the money for it himself. So Joe works hard
at his paper route and saves up the $40 it costs to go to
the camp and an additional $10. But, one week before
the start of camp, Joe’s father tells Joe that he has
changed his mind about camp. And, the father tells Joe
that some of his friends have decided to go on a special
fishing trip and that he is short of the money needed to
go on the trip. The father tells Joe to give him the camp
money he had saved from doing his paper route. Joe
does not want to give up going to camp so he thinks of
refusing to give his father the money.
Moral Dilemma Questions:
• 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?
• 4. Is the fact that Joe earned the money
himself important in this situation?
• 4a. Why or why not?
• 5. The father promised Joe he could go to
camp if he earned the money. Is the fact
that the father promised the most
important thing in the situation?
• 5a. Why or why not?
• 6. In general, why should a promise
kept?
• 7. Is it important to keep a promise to
someone you don't know well and
probably won't see again?
• 7a. Why or why not?
• 8. What do you think is the most
important thing a father should be
concerned about in his relationship to his
son?
• 8a. Why is that the most important
thing?
• 9. In general, what should be the
authority of a father over his son?
• 9a. Why?
• 10. What do you think is the most
important thing a son should be
concerned about in his relationship to his
father?
• 10a. Why is that the most important
thing?
• 11. In thinking back over the dilemma,
what would you say is the most
responsible thing for Joe to do in this
situation?
• 11a. Why?
Terms
• Egocentrism- not necessarily one being selfish or conceited, but a state in which
one person can only perceive their own interests, feelings, and desires and may
project these onto people around them. For example a child in a classroom is
bored with reading and is excited for recess and though the rest of the class is
engaged the student tells the teacher that it is time for recess because he is ready.
• Moral Heteronomy- when a child determines what is right and wrong based on
the rule set forth by some sort of authority figure. The child does not think about
the rules any more deeply than the understanding that they are rules and obeying
the rules is good and disobeying the rules and getting punished is bad. For
example, in a game of cards, when children are still in this stage, the rules and
instructions must be followed exactly or the child will likely cry out, “He’s
cheating!” and may even declare what punishment cheating deserves such as
“time-out” or forfeiting the game.
• Moral Autonomy- when one reaches a state when they are capable of
considering right and wrong for themselves beyond what authority has declared
acceptable, perhaps even that the right thing is to break the rules. For example, a
teenager who knows their curfew is a rule set up by their parents to ensure the
teenager’s safety, but chooses to break their curfew to help a friend continue
studying for an exam. In this case, the teenager thinks beyond the rule, knows that
the purpose of the rule has still been fulfilled, and realizes that they can help
another person even if it means accepting the punishment from their parents for
missing their curfew.
Our Adaptation: Gave a “yes” or “no” answer. Did
not offer any clarification to their own reasoning.
Stage 1:
“Heteronomous Morality”
Adherence to rules backed by
punishment; obedience for its own sake.
For Example:
1
Our Adaptation: The answer was about themselves,
one sided, only when their needs were meant are they
willing to help others, emphasis on fair exchange
policy.
Stage 2:
“Individualism, Instrumental Purpose
and Exchange”
Acting to meet one’s own interests and needs,
and letting others do the same.
1.5
Our Adaptation: the child/individual is good in
order to be seen as being a good person by others.
Therefore, answers are related to the approval of
others.
Stage 3:
“Mutual Interpersonal Expectations,
Relationships and Interpersonal
Conformity”
Living up to what others expect.
2
Our Adaptation: The answer was concerned with
one’s duties.
Stage 4:
“Social System and Conscience”
Fulfilling the actual duties to which one has
agreed.
2.5
Our Adaptation: Answers went beyond the law,
demonstrated duality in their thinking.
“A Social-Contract Orientation,
Generally with Legalistic and Utilitarian
Overtones”
Non-relative values and rights, such as life and
liberty, must be upheld in any society, regardless
of majority opinion.
Stage 5:
3
Lens to Catholic Thinkers at Holy Family
When scoring we did not consider Stage 6 “Universal
and Ethical Principles” in our study, however we were
very impressed with some student answers. Sharing
responses such as:
•“The most important thing in life is love, because love makes
people happy.”
•“The most important thing is love, because a father should do
everything out of love.”
•“Life is about making scarifies.”
•Using terms such as “good morals” and “honor”.
Results:
7 Second Graders
19 Total Participants-
6 Fourth Graders
10
1.5
2
2
2
2.5
4
3
1
Accept
1
6 Eighth Graders
Number of Participants
1
12
10
3
7
8
6
4
2
0
0
0.5
1
2 14 1
1.5
2
2.5
Stage/Level of Moral Development
3
3.5
Try
Again
Changing
Opinion vs.
Enhancing
Intellection
Limitations:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Convenience sample
Ambiguities of the word ‘promise’
Misinterpretation of questions
Time
Student disposition
Lack of interest/distraction