By: Adrienne Gedeon Allison Gedeon 4/27/2009

1. Lawrence Kohlberg and Carol Gilligan: A Study on Moral Development By: Adrienne Gedeon Allison Gedeon 4/27/2009

2. Lawrence Kohlberg • Born in Bronxville, NY • Attended Andover Academy, renowned high school • At end of WWII, joined merchant marines and toured Europe • 1948-Enrolled at the University of Chicago • 1958-Received his doctorate from University of Chicago • 1958-Wrote his dissertation-Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development (October 25, 1927 – January 19, 1987)

3. Lawrence Kohlberg • 1959-1961 Associate professor of psychology at Yale University • 1962-Taught at University of Chicago in the committee of human development • 1968-Professor of education and social psychology at Harvard University • It was at Harvard that Kohlberg met Carol Gilligan • 1971-Contracted a tropical parasite in Belize • 1987-Committed suicide by drowning himself in the Boston Harbor (October 25, 1927 – January 19, 1987)

4. Piaget’s Influence on Kohlberg • Kohlberg was impressed with Piaget’s studies of moral development. • Paiget’s theory on moral development was that the ability to reason emerges spontaneously, and can be stimulated from the outside. • Younger children regard rules as fixed and absolute. They believe rules are handed down by adults or by God. It is permissible to change the rules if everyone agrees. Rules are not sacred and absolute but are devices that humans use to get along cooperatively. • Older children start to move away from basing their decisions on the consequences involved and begin to base their judgments on intentions. • For example– a child who breaks 15 cups while trying to help his mother versus the child who only breaks one cup while stealing a cookie. • Piaget found that these series of changes occur between the ages of 10 and 12 • According to Piaget, intellectual development does not stop here! This is just the beginning of formal operations, which will continue to develop until the age of sixteen. • Kohlberg did not believe that moral development stopped here, which is where his research begins…

5. Kohlberg’s Study • 1958—Kohlberg began a study that was comprised of 72 boys from both middle and lower-class families in the Chicago area. The ages of the boys involved were 10, 13, and 16. • He presented the boys with the following 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 pain $200 for the radium and charged $2000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he cold only get together about $1000 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 Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done that?” (Kohlberg, p. 19) • Kohlberg looked at the reasoning behind the boy’s yes and no answers. Looked for why they believed and thought that Heinz should or should not have stolen the drug.

6. LEVEL ONE—Preconventional Morality “Pre-moral stage” “No real differentiation of moral values and conformities from self-serving and conventional conformities. Value resides in need-relevant happenings rather than in persons or rules. No sense of an ideal self, or a self conforming to standards or guiding action. Self-esteem is not based on conforming to others or to standards.”

7. LEVEL ONE—Preconventional Morality Stage one: Type Zero—Heteronomous Type • Obedience and Punishment Orientation • Similar to Piaget’s first stage • Powerful authorities hand down a fixed set of rules which he or she must unquestioningly obey • may see answers like “should give the money to father,” or “it’s bad to steal” • The child does not speak as a member of society • See morality as something external to themselves—something they must do because an adult said so • Punishment proves that disobedience is wrong

8. LEVEL ONE—Preconventional Morality Stage 2: Type 1– Hedonistic Egoism • Individualism and Exchange • Children recognize that there is not just one right view • Different people will have different viewpoints • Everything is relative and each person is free to pursue his or her individual interests • In the Heinz dilemma may see answers like “Heinz might steal the drug if he wanted his wife to live, but that he doesn’t have to if he wants to marry someone younger and better looking” • There is a notion of fair exchange or fair deals • Speak as isolated individuals instead of members of a society • Punishment is simply a risk that one wants to avoid

9. LEVEL TWO—Conventional Morality “Generalized Conformity Level” “Value resides in good and bad roles, in maintaining the conventional order and the expectations of others. Self esteem is based on general conformity to the external social order”

10. LEVEL TWO—Conventional Morality Stage 3: Type 2—”Good Boy” Orientation • Good Interpersonal Relationships • See morality as more than a simple deal • People should live up to the expectations of the family and community and behave in “good” ways • Good behavior means having good motives and interpersonal feelings such as love, empathy, trust and concerns for others • In the Heinz dilemma may see answers like “He was a good man for wanting to save her” • If Heinz’s motives were good, the druggist’s were bad. Emphasis on being selfish.

11. LEVEL TWO—Conventional Morality Stage 4: Type 3 • Maintaining the Social Order • Works best in two-person relationships with family members or close friends • The child becomes concerned with society as a whole • The emphasis is on obeying laws, respecting authority, and performing one’s duties so that the social order is maintained • In the Heinz dilemma may see answers that say thinks like Heinz’s intentions were good but it is wrong to steal • Make moral decisions from the perspective of the society as a whole

12. LEVEL THREE—Postconventional Morality “Autonomous Level” “Value resides in the conformity of the self to some shared or shareable standards of judgment. Duties are defined by general rights of others.”

13. LEVEL THREE—Postconventional Morality Stage 5: Level four—Democratic Legalists • Social Contract and Individual Rights • Adolescents to adulthood • Where a person will begin to question what makes for a good society • They step back from their own society and begin to consider the rights and values of that a society ought to uphold • Adolescents in this stage believe that a good society is best conceived as a social contract into which people freely enter to work toward the benefit of all • They recognize that different social groups within a society will have different values, but they believe that all rational people would agree on two points • 1—they would all want certain basic rights (life, liberty) • 2—they would want some democratic procedures for changing unfair laws and for improving the society

14. LEVEL THREE—Postconventional Morality “Conscience of Principle Orientation” • Stage six—Universal Principles • An individual’s moral judgment is motivated by his or her own principles • A commitment to justice makes the rationale for civil disobedience stronger and broader • Later removed this stage because realized it cannot be reached

15. Carol Gilligan • bachelor of arts degree in English from Swarthmore College • masters in clinical psychology from Radcliffe College • Ph.D. in social psychology from Harvard University • 1967- Began teaching at Harvard • 1986- Given tenure at Harvard in the graduate school of education • 1992- Grawemeyer Award in education (November 28, 1936- Present)

16. Carol Gilligan • 1992-1994- Taught at Cambridge University as a Pitt Professor of American History and Institutions • 1996- Named by Time Magazine as one of the top 25 most influential Americans • 1997- Appointed to the Patricia Albjerg Graham chair in gender studies • 1998- 4th Heinz award in the human condition • 2002- Full professor at New York University with the school of education and school of law • Currently a visiting professor at the University of Cambridge (November 28, 1936- Present)

17. Kohlberg’s Influence on Gilligan • Starting in 1970, Carol Gilligan became Kohlberg’s research assistant • Gilligan began to criticize Kohlberg’s work. This was based on two issues: • First; Kohlberg only studied privileged, white men and boys • Secondly, in his stage theory of moral development, the male view of individual rights and rules was considered a higher stage than women's point of view of development in terms of its caring effect on human relationships • Her interest in the dilemmas grew as she interviewed young men thinking about enlisting in the Vietnam war and young women contemplating abortions (became her main focus later on). • Gilligan’s main focus came to be moral development in girls

18. Carol Gilligan continued • She helped to form a new psychology for women by listening to them and rethinking the meaning of self and selfishness. • Many feminists insisted that there are no differences between males and females. Gilligan asserted that women have differing moral and psychological tendencies than men. According to Gilligan, men think in terms of rules and justice and women are more inclined to think in terms of caring and relationships. • Gilligan produces her own theory of development. Like Kohlberg’s, it has preconventional, conventional, and post conventional. But for Gilligan, the transitions between the stages are fueled by changes in the sense of self rather than in changes in cognitive capability (based on a modified version of Freud’s ego development theory)

19. Gilligan’s Three Stages Of Moral of Development. • Preconventional – is egocentric and derives moral constructs from individual needs • Conventional – judgment is based on the shared norms and values that sustain relationships, groups, communities, and societies • Postconventional – judgment adopts a reflective perspective on societal values and constructs moral principles that are universal in application

20. In a Different Voice • 1982 – Carol Gilligan writes In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development • In concepts of self and morality Gilligan introduces the abortion study • From her careful interviews, Gilligan concluded that these women were thinking more about the caring thing to do rather than what the rules allow • An ethic of care, rather than an ethic of justice • Betty: age 16, had had one previous abortion and was recommended for Gilligan’s study after attempting to get a second one. • During the first interview Betty was very egocentric, very concerned with herself and how the baby would affect her life

21. In a Different Voice Continued • in the second interview, one year later, the language of egocentric concern had disappeared, and the language of relationship and care that was evident initially in Betty’s talk about herself and the child now extends to describe her life • The shift from concern with survival to concern with goodness, marks the transition from selfishness to responsibility • Instead of being concerned with survival she is now concerned with the importance of relationship

22. OUR STUDY • What we wanted to look at… • Do males and females base their moral decisions on different foundations? Do females have a care-based morality, while males have a judgment based morality? • According to Gilligan and Kohlberg as age increases, the differences in decision making will also increase. Is there a greater difference in moral reasoning between the ages of children? OUR HYPOTHESES • As age increases the level of moral reasoning will also increase. • The girls tested versus the boys tested will be at a lower stage of moral development.

23. The Experiment • The Settings: • Holy Family School—4th Grade classroom • St. Joseph’s Catholic School—7th Grade classroom • The children were given the option of participating. They were first asked the following: • “Will you please help us with a school project? We need to gather some data for our psychology class. There are no right or wrong answers we just want to see how seventh graders will respond to a certain dilemma.”

24. The Experiment • If they said yes, the papers were passed out and the following “Dad Dilemma” was read out loud while they read along: • “Joe is a ten-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 on 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.”

25. The Experiment • The following questions were then asked: • Should Joe refuse to give his father the money? • Why or why not? • 2) Does the father have the right to tell Joe to give him the money? • Why or why not? • 3) Does giving up the money have anything to do with being a good son? • Why or why not?

33. Kohlberg—4th Grade Class

34. Gilligan-4th Grade Class

37. Results for Kohlberg Kohlberg-4th Boys Kohlberg-4th Boys Kohlberg-4th Boys Kohlberg-7th Girls Kohlberg-7th Boys Kohlberg-4th Girls Kohlberg-4th Girls

38. Results for Gilligan Gilligan-4th Boys Gilligan-4th Girls Gilligan-7th Girls Gilligan-7th Boys

39. Kohlberg vs Gilligan—4th Grade Kohlberg-4th Boys Kohlberg-4th Girls Gilligan-4th Girls Gilligan-4th Boys

40. Kohlberg vs Gilligan—7th Grade Kohlberg-4th Boys Kohlberg-4th Girls Gilligan-7th Girls Gilligan-7th Boys

41. Conclusions • In Conclusion, we found that we were correct in the first half of our hypothesis. The children in the seventh grade had more developed moral reasoning than those in the fourth grade • We also found that in the second half of our hypothesis, that the girls would be at a lower stage of moral development, we found that it was only according to Kohlberg and only in the fourth grade, that the boys were more morally developed than the girls. But in all other aspects the girls in our study had more developed moral reasoning.

42. Nature vs. Nurture • Follows Piaget (nature) • Piaget believes the ability to reason through emerges spontaneously. Can be stimulated from the outside • Kohlberg is closer to half way between Piaget and mid point, while Gilligan is closer to the nurture side of the line even though she is rooted in Kohlberg’s theories Nature Nurture

43. Works Cited • Crain, William. Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.> New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Pg. 147-169. • Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982. pg. 1-23, 64-105. • Kohlberg, Lawrence. The Development of Modes of Moral Thinking and Choice in the Years 10-16. Chicago, University of Chicago, 1958. • http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/d/d_09/d_09_s/d_09_s_dev/d_09_s_dev_1a.jpg • http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2003/loveanddiane/i/sf_gilligan.jpg • http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wiki/images/9/9b/Piaget.jpg