Exploring student moral development through the perspectives of Aristotle, Xenophon, Piaget, and Kohlberg.

摘要

Purpose: The purpose of this study was first to determine similarities and differences between the two ancient moral philosophies of Aristotle and Xenophon. This study also determined similarities and differences between the moral psychologists Piaget and Kohlberg. Finally, this study investigated similarities and differences between the two ancient philosophers and the two contemporary psychologists regarding student moral development. Curriculum planners may use the intersection of these four theories in order to develop plans for implementing moral education in classrooms.;Methods: In this study qualitative methodologies were used, specifically philosophical and historical approaches. For data analysis, interpretational and reflective analysis was used. A protocol with specific criteria was used to identify similarities and differences between philosophers and psychologists. This protocol had criteria based on five main issues, regarding the four theorists' perspectives of student moral development, including moral virtues and moral values, emotions, moral reasoning, habits and experiences, and social environment. For the purpose of this study the researcher analyzed, books, articles, scholarly journals, and online sources.;Findings: Unlike philosophers, for cognitive psychologists value considerations were used at the very start of development and learning. Unlike psychologists for both philosophers moral virtue meant goodness and moral actions. Aristotle and Xenophon shared and defined common virtues, despite their differences regarding the meaning of these virtues.;Cognitive psychologists emphasized the connection of emotion with thought while philosophers emphasized the connection of emotion with thought and action. Psychologists were against imposing obedience and punishments to the child in order to become morally autonomous while philosophers believed that imposing obedience and punishment was necessary and could make children better persons.;Psychologists were interested on moral reasoning as logical reasoning rather than moral action while philosophers were interested in the connection between reason, emotion and action. Habits and experiences for both psychologists and philosophers had a similar meaning as the internalization of moral thoughts and actions. The role of social environment is examined in relation of their specific circumstances, historical, political, sociological, and philosophical.;Implications: This study suggested that instructional designers could add in curriculum ways that could increase students' practical experiences regarding moral actions. Pedagogic stories and moral dilemmas could stimulate critical thinking about moral issues and could be included in curriculum subjects. In addition, the idea of mutual respect through cooperation, caring and understanding is significant for a positive school climate.