PIAGET AND KOHLBERG Maeve Hogan JEAN PIAGET v

PIAGET AND KOHLBERG Maeve Hogan

JEAN PIAGET v Born in Switzerland on August 9, 1896 v By the time he reached his teenage years his writing was being widely published v Received his Ph. D. in natural sciences in 1918 v Studied under other famous psychologists such as Carl Jung and Paul Bleuler v Married in 1923 and eventually had 3 children v Worked under Alfred Binet in Paris, analyzing the intelligence levels of children v Received the Erasmus prize in 1972 and the Balzan prize in 1978 v Died at the age of 84 on September 16, 1980

STAGE THEORY v 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) v Invariant v Qualitatively different periods v General characteristics, or patterns of thought v Hierarchic integrations v Stages unfold in the same sequence in all cultures—culturally universal

CONSERVATION v Conservation of Continuous Quantities (Liquids) • Pre-operational level: two possible results • Concrete Operations: able to conserve; three arguments • Identity • Compensation • Inversion v Logical operations v Spontaneous mastery and internal contradiction v Also conducted experiments with conservation of number; arguments for conservation remain the same

LAWRENCE KOHLBERG v Born on October 25, 1927 in Bronxville, New York v Joined the merchant marines at the end of WWII v Graduated from the University of Chicago in 1948 v Influenced heavily by the work of Jean Piaget v 1958 -1961 he served as an assistant professor of psychology at Yale University v In 1968 he was names Professor of Education and Social Psychology at Harvard University v Died in 1987 from what was rumored to be a suicide after suffering from depression for many years

STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT v Level 1: Pre-conventional Morality • Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation • Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange v Conventional Morality • Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships • Stage 4: Maintaining the Social Order v Post-Conventional Morality • Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights • Stage 6: Universal Principles

MY RESEARCH STUDY v 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: v (1) Do conserving children achieve a higher stage of moral reasoning than nonconserving children as indicated on Kohlberg’s stage theory of moral development? v (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? v (3) Are there patterns of difference among conserving boys and conserving girls with respect to their stages of moral reasoning?

HYPOTHESES v 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 v 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 v Hypothesis 3: There will be patterns of difference among conserving boys and conserving girls with respect to their stages of moral reasoning

METHODOLOGY v Participants: convenience sample of 8 children from Holy Family Elementary school • 4 children from 2 nd grade (2 girls, 2 boys) • 4 children from 8 th grade (2 girls, 2 boys) v Setting: Holy Family classroom v 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 v As presented in Kohlberg’s dissertation (p 361) v 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 v 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 v Participant 1: Male, 2 nd Grade v Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money v Reason: because it is what you are supposed to do, you are supposed to say no to bad things and yes to good v Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment v Conservation of number: unable to conserve v Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve

RESULTS v Participant 2: Female, 2 nd Grade v Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money v Reason: because he is just a kid and he shouldn’t have all the things he wants to do v Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment v Conservation of number: unable to conserve v Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve

RESULTS v Participant 3: Female, 2 nd Grade v Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money v Reason: it is a good decision because it is the right thing to do v Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment v Conservation of number: unable to conserve v Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve

RESULTS v Participant 4: Male, 2 nd Grade v Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money v Reason: because his father is the boss of him and she shouldn’t tell his father no v Stage: 1. Obedience and Punishment v Conservation of number: unable to conserve v 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 v Participant 5: Male, 8 th grade v Dilemma: Yes Joe should give his dad the money v Reason: His father has given Joe much more than the amount of money his dad wants v Stage: 4. Maintaining Social Order v Conservation of number: able to conserve v Conservation of liquid: able to conserve

RESULTS v Participant 6: Female, 8 th grade v Dilemma: No, Joe should not give his dad the money v Reason: Because Joe worked hard for the money, he earned it, so therefore it is his. v Stage: 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights v Conservation of number: able to conserve v Conservation of liquid: able to conserve

RESULTS v Participant 7: Female, 8 th grade v Dilemma: Yes, Joe should give his dad the money v Reason: He should give him the money because his dad works hard to pay bills and provide for the family v Stage: 4. Maintaining the Social Order v Conservation of number: able to conserve v Conservation of liquid: able to conserve

RESULTS v Participant 8: Male, 8 th grade v Dilemma: No, Joe should not give his dad the money v Reason: Joe saved that money to go to camp v Stage: 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights v Conservation of number: able to conserve v Conservation of liquid: unable to conserve*

CONCLUSIONS v 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 v 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. v 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 v Convenience Sample v Limited amount of children able to participate v Children were distracted v Previous exposure v Not much explanation

NATURE VS. NURTURE NATURE NURTURE Piaget and Kohlberg

WORKS CITED v Crain, William. “Piaget’s Cognitive-Developmental theory” Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. 4 th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 2000 v Crain, William. “Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development” Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. 4 th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 2000 v Kavathatzopoulos, Iordanis. "Kohlberg And Piaget: Differences And Similarities. " Journal Of Moral Education 20. 1 (1991): 47 -54. ERIC. Web. 24 Oct. 2014 v Kohlberg, Lawrence (1958). "The Development of Modes of Thinking and Choices in Years 10 to 16". Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Chicago. v http: //www. biography. com/people/jean-piaget-9439915#early-life v http: //totallyhistory. com/lawrence-kohlberg/ v http: //www. edpsycinteractive. org/topics/affect/values. html